.
—Calvin Luther Martin, PhD

If Wind Turbine Syndrome (WTS) had a poster child, surely it would be 2-year-old Baily Therrien (Vermont).

A quick review.  For several years (three? four?) Baily’s mom & dad have been pleading with the State of Vermont to put a stop to the industrial wind turbines that are tormenting them and their two children with WTS.

Vermont, of course, in its corporate-spun cocoon, turned a deaf ear—and continues to.  The news media gave the Therriens some slap and tickle notice, and then went on to more pressing, titillating news.

Four years of pleading accomplished exactly zero results; the Therriens were being “hung out to twist in the wind,” as the morbid saying goes.

Till readers of this website rode to the rescue!

Within a week, people pledged $6,000 to help the Therriens find a new home!  Yes, $6,000!  Initially we thought it was $5,000, but pledges kept pouring in, totaling $6,000.  (Update 10/26/13:  Since publishing this article yesterday, pledges have climbed to $6,200.  Wow!)

Better yet, the Therriens now have all that money in hand.  To say that Luann & Steve Therrien are “over the moon” with appreciation would be an understatement.

The story gets better.  Earlier this week, the Executive Director of Vermonters for a Clean Environment, Annette Smith, launched an additional fund-raiser, and so far it’s approaching $1,000, I am told.

Back to our poster child.  The other day, Luann filed this report with the Vermont public agency responsible for logging (and immediately ignoring) complaints about WTS.  (These would be the same “non-complaints” referred to by the American Wind Energy Association when contacted by an ABC News correspondent last week.)

The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), which represents the industry, said that wind power was “an inexhaustible resource,” which did not harm the environment and provided a “direct health benefit by reducing air pollution and related health impacts, including asthma.”

Spokeswoman Lindsay North, who did not comment on the Falmouth cases, said health complaints were “rare.”

“Rare” huh, Lindsay?   How about “denied” and the whole issue buried under platitude and “clean energy” bullshit.

(Bullshit, except it wounds people like Baily Therrien—and that of course makes it far worse than bullshit.)

Luann wrote her AWEA-certified “rare” complaint at 3:30 am on October 21, 2013.  She filed it as Public Comment Docket # 7156.  Here’s what it said.

Here I am up at 3:30 a.m.

Why?  You really don’t need to ask that question, do you?  No, you do not!

That’s right, we’re getting “Whoosh Whoosh Whoosh”!

Have been awake for awhile, and repeatedly, by my baby girl Baily, who will be 2 in January.

My sweet little petunia wakes up, cries and tells me she is tired.  That’s right, wakes up to tell me she is tired!  

Does this seem odd to anyone other than me?

Note to Luann:  Vermont won’t reply.  You know that.  This is corporate and government-sponsored abuse, including child abuse.

The good news, Luann, is that readers of this site responded.  An international response, as you discovered when all those checks arrived in the mail this week.

People of conscience and people who are still human beings apologize to you and your family.

Luann, we’re happy—really happy!—that Baily and Seager won’t be terrorized by these damn turbines any longer.  Nor will you and Steve.  We’re sorry you must abandon your beloved home in the woods.

Let us all pray, “Dear God, may Baily forget—may she never carry the emotional scars, the PTSD—of her experience with ‘clean, green, renewable’ wind energy.”



.
“Life-Saving Skeletons Dance from NASA Closets”

by Helen Schwiesow Parker, Ph.D.
Licensed Clinical Psychologist
Chilmark, MA

Dismissing or denying the serious health impacts of industrial-scale wind turbines, wishful thinking akin to presuming tobacco harmless because we like it, has met its match in skeletons dancing from NASA closets.

Graham Lloyd, Environmental Editor for The Australian, on 7-8-13 published the first of recent reports revealing that “health impacts caused by low-frequency noise from wind turbines have been known to US researchers and the renewable energy industry for more than 25 years.”

The Windpower ’87 Conference heard from Neil Kelley, principal scientist (atmospheric physics) at the NREL’s Wind Technology Centre 1980-2011.  Kelley’s research, following earlier NASA research and prepared for the US Dept. of Energy (DOE), found that under laboratory conditions people do indeed react to low-frequency noise; the disturbance from the turbines is often worse indoors than outside; and “far from becoming inured to the disturbance, people become increasingly sensitive to it over time.”

US acoustics expert, Rick James, notes, “the ‘Kelly paper‘ is just one of many studies published in the 1980’s by acousticians and other researchers working under grants from the DOE, NASA, and others.  The acoustical conferences, at least in the US, all had presentations on wind turbine noise; it was one of the ‘hot’ topics in the field.”

The industry response? Ignore or deny the science.  Indeed, its standard has been specifically to exclude measuring the lower frequency “infrasonic” noise known to cause problems, to measure outside, not inside dwellings, to claim neighbors “will get used to it,” and to deny that the victims’ suffering has any basis in reality, let alone science.

The wind industry’s campaign to silence well-known truths has been highly successful.  They’re masters at minimization-speak.  Replace “suffering” with “annoyance” and “strobing” with “flicker” and problems recede or vanish.

For thousands around the world, turbine health impacts include headaches, pressure and ringing in the ears, increased blood pressure, anxiety, nausea, difficulty with memory and concentration, depression, and panic attacks arising when awake or asleep, along with sleep deprivation (unhealthy in itself).

As with sea-sickness, not everyone is similarly affected.  Most vulnerable are the young, the old, and those especially sensitive to stimuli (the autistic, PTSD sufferers, many who have retreated to more rural areas).

It’s disturbing to hear trusted “scientists” or physicians undermine legitimate physical and mental health suffering with perhaps well-intended “skepticism.”  Or breezy reassurances that, for instance, “shadow flicker is only present at less than 1400 meters from the turbine” (1400 meters = .86992 mile), or “any issue pertaining to flicker is easily remedied,” a position (at-best) poorly thought-out and in any case dead wrong.

Worst are the bold-faced lies, like the wind developer’s brushing aside a question about “flicker” at a public forum, characterizing it as “occurring mostly before 7am.”  Wait!  What!?

“Shadow flicker results from rotating blades passing between the sun and the observer.”  Blades of 40-story-high turbines spin between the sun and “observer/victim” long after sunrise, and again, long before sunset.  And that’s only part of the story.  Expansive “flicker” ricochets when the blade’s shadow strikes anywhere within viewshed—strobing rock-face across the valley or trees across the park.

And “independent experts”?  Beware!  Summarizing his 25-page critique of the infamous MA Dept. of Environ. Protection (DEP) Turbine Health Impact Study, Dr. Ray Hartman, Professor of Economics (degrees from Princeton/MIT) cautions:  “The Panel comes to some very strong conclusions which are simply contradicted by the research they cite as reliable.  They are certainly contradicted by the research they improperly dismiss.”  He goes on:

If the results of this Wind Turbine Health Impact Study were not given such widespread credence, these assertions would be comical, given the evidentiary record.  Unfortunately, public policy affecting peoples’ lives is being determined based upon these conclusions.”

Responsible stewardship demands critical thinking, common sense and grade-school science, not just following a Pied Piper with good intentions.

Maine turbine neighbor Kaz Pease doesn’t need an M.D. or Ph.D. to tell us: “The MA study needs to be trashed.  Shredded.  Thrown on the burn pile.  That common-sense people could take such a biased and poorly-researched report as authoritative is ludicrous.”

He said-She said?  No, common sense, and facts a-plenty.  From “The Cutting Edge” in The Toronto Star, June ‘05: “Military weaponry uses low-frequency sound to . . . control crowd behavior.  Low-frequency noise at high intensities creates discrepancies in the brain, producing disorientation in the body:  ‘The knees buckle, the brain aches, the stomach turns.  And suddenly, nobody feels like protesting anymore.  The latest weapon in the Israeli army’s high-tech tool kit. . . . It has no adverse effects, unless someone is exposed to the sound for hours and hours.’”

For humanity’s sake, we must move out of denial and stop the turbine torture now.

Helen Parker, PhD

In 2011, a doctor at Harvard Medical School [Steven D. Rauch, MD, Director of the Clinical Balance & Vestibular Center] diagnosed Hobart with wind turbine syndrome, which is not recognized by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

.
—by Susan Donaldson James, via Good Morning America, ABC News (10/21/13)

Sue Hobart, a bridal florist from Massachusetts, couldn’t understand why she suddenly developed headaches, ringing in her ears, insomnia and dizziness to the point of falling “flat on my face” in the driveway.

“I thought I was just getting older and tired,” said the 57-year-old from Falmouth.

Months earlier, in the summer of 2010, three wind turbines had been erected in her town, one of which runs around the clock, 1,600 feet from her home.

“I didn’t put anything to the turbines — we heard it and didn’t like the thump, thump, thump and didn’t like seeing them, but we didn’t put it together,” she told ABCNews.com.

Hobart said her headaches only got worse, but at Christmas, when she went to San Diego, they disappeared. And she said the same thing happened on an overnight trip to Keene, N.H.

“Sometimes at night, especially in the winter, I wake up with a fluttering in the chest and think, ‘What the hell is that,’ and the only place it happens is at my house,” she said. “That’s how you know. When you go away, it doesn’t happen.”

Medical mystery: 19 teens develop Tourette’s syndrome-like symptoms.

Hobart and dozens of others in this small Cape Cod town have filed lawsuits, claiming that three 400 feet tall, 1.63 megawatt turbines (two owned by the town and one owned by Notus Clean Energy) were responsible for an array of symptoms. A fourth, much smaller turbine, is owned by Woods Hole Research Center, but it receives fewer complaints.

The wind turbines have blown up a political storm in Falmouth that has resonated throughout the wind energy industry. Are these plaintiffs just “whiners,” or do they have a legitimate illness?

“It goes all day and night. My initial take was that she was being a hypochondriac, but I went to their house two years ago with a little skepticism and within 10 minutes of being in the house, I could feel it and hear it.” — Brian Mannal, lawyer for Sue Hobart

In 2011, a doctor at Harvard Medical School diagnosed Hobart with wind turbine syndrome, which is not recognized by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The name was coined by Nina Pierpont, a John Hopkins University-trained pediatrician, whose husband is an anti-wind activist, criticizing the economics and physics of wind power. Pierpont, who lives in upstate New York, calls wind turbine syndrome the green energy industry’s “dirty little secret.” She self-published “Wind Turbine Syndrome” in 2009, including case studies of people who lived within 1.25 miles of these “spinning giants” who reportedly got sick. . . . Click here for the remainder of the article.  

.
“Wind Turbine Noise, Sleep Quality, and Symptoms of Inner Ear Problems” (10/17/13)

—poster presentation by Claire Paller, Phil Bigelow, Shannon Majowicz, Jane Law, and Tanya Christidis (School of Public Health & Health Systems, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada)
.

Editor’s note:  The following text was provided by Carmen Krogh, a Canadian researcher into the health problems caused by wind turbines.  

Click here for a high quality PDF of the poster presentation by Paller et al.  (With thanks to Ms. Paller for furnishing us with the poster.)

At a recent symposium in Toronto facilitated by former Toronto Mayor David Miller titled Symposia of the Ontario Research Chairs in Public Policy, a poster entitled ‘Wind Turbine Noise, Sleep Quality, and Symptoms of Inner Ear Problems’ was displayed by Claire Paller, Phil Bigelow, Shannon Majowicz, Jane Law, and Tanya Christidis.

The research indicates statistically significant results for sleep, vertigo and tinnitus (excerpt):

“All relationships were found to be positive and statistically significant.”

The University of Waterloo-Ontario Ministry of Environment funded industrial wind turbine (IWT) health study was publicly displayed during the symposium on sustainability held at York University, Toronto on October 17, 2013.

It is reported that 396 surveys were included in the analysis (excerpts include):

“In total there were 412 surveys returned; 16 of these survey respondents did not provide their home address. Therefore, 396 surveys were included in the analysis.”

Of note is the acknowledgement that as the distance from the IWT increases, sleep improves:

“The relationship between ln(distance) (as a continuous variable) and mean Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) was found to be statistically significant (P=0.0096) when controlling for age, gender and county. This relationship shows that as the distance increases (move further away from a wind turbine), PSQI decreases (i.e. sleep improves) in a logarithmic relationship. Multivariate analysis involved assessing distance to the nearest wind turbine as both distance and ln(distance). In all cases, ln(distance) resulted in improved model fit.”

In addition the authors state that the relationship between vertigo and tinnitus worsened for those living closer to IWTs:

“The relationship between vertigo and ln(distance) was statistically significant (P<0.001) when controlling for age, gender, and county. The relationship between tinnitus and ln(distance) approached statistical significance (P=0.0755). Both vertigo and tinnitus were worse among participants living closer to wind turbines.”

The conclusion states:

“In conclusion, relationships were found between ln(distance) and PSQI, ln(distance) and self-reported vertigo and ln(distance) and self-reported tinnitus. Study findings suggest that future research should focus on the effects of wind turbine noise on sleep disturbance and symptoms of inner ear problems.”

Counties and projects in the study include:

* Bruce (Enbridge project)

* Chatham-Kent (Raleigh)

* Dufferin (Melancthon)

* Elgin (Erie Shores)

* Essex (Comber)

* Frontenac (Wolfe Island)

* Huron (Kingsbridge)

* Norfolk (Frogmore/Cultus/ClearCreek)

Based on this evidence, it is not clear what the next steps will be for the Ministry of Environment. However, based on these results, evidence gathered by other researchers in Ontario and elsewhere supports these statistically significant findings.

Click here for the entire petition with signatures

.
—Curt Devlin, Guest Editor

Barry Funfar wants to live an ordinary life in a small Garden of Eden he created in his backyard in Falmouth, MA.  He earned this respite in ways few of us can imagine.

Barry spent nineteen months in the hell on earth called the Vietnam War.  He won’t tell you this, at least not easily.   Perhaps he needs to leave this part of his life behind; but one look into the haunted blue eyes of this tall, soft-spoken soldier tells you that his past follows him like a scent.  Nineteen months as an avionics technician in the Marine Air Wing of the United States Marine Corps—right off the farm in North Dakota.

A teenager used to baling hay, suddenly on the other side of the earth in a firefight.

Posted to a base under relentless rocket and mortar attack and feeling like a proverbial sitting duck, Funfar started looking for a way to hit back. He began volunteering as a door gunner.

Remember the scene in the Civil War movie, “Dances with Wolves,” where Lieutenant Dunbar leaps on the back of a horse and—to his comrades’ horror—rides it back and forth in front of the enemy lines—the enemy troops who are furiously trying to gun down this seeming madman?  The Union general, surveying the scene through his field telescope, remarks to his incredulous aide:  “Looks like a suicide!”

Funfar did a “Dunbar”—standing in the open doorway of a hovering Huey, behind an M60 machine gun.  Funfar volunteered for 127 missions like this—preferable, he thought, to suffering through day after night of deafening, terrifying enemy barrages.

“Looks like a suicide mission”—though he survived. Many others didn’t.  Their names are included among the 58,000 other names on the Wall.

He survived, but didn’t come home unscathed. Sgt. Funfar was gravely wounded in ways invisible to the untrained eye. For decades he struggled with sleeplessness and mood swings, sudden fits of anger followed by deep depression, despair, and sporadic bouts with alcohol—the festering wound now called PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder).

Much has been learned about how to diagnose and treat this illness because of Vietnam, but help was slow in coming for many victims like Barry.

He was not properly diagnosed until 2003, more than thirty years after the war ended. Like rehabilitation for a serious physical injury, the healing process for PTSD is slow, requiring tremendous effort and determination by everyone involved. Setbacks are common and, often, the residual effects must be managed for a lifetime. In Barry’s case, one of the most vital elements of his therapy was his gardening; it was medicine for the soul.

Perhaps, the seasonal rhythms of gardening in New England helped him reestablish a healthy rhythm in his own life. The hard work and hope of spring renewal, the joys of summer flourishing, the riot of fall color ending in the quiet solace and closure of winter snow. Or, maybe gardening was just a healthy distraction that kept a man’s mind and body preoccupied with the task at hand, rather than drifting into the troubling corners of the past—the hell’s mouth of a helicopter gunship.

Whatever his garden was for him, he needed it like a diabetic needs insulin. He was getting better. He was enjoying life again.  His family was enjoying him again.

All this came to an abrupt end when two huge wind turbines were erected nearby—right in town.  The sound that the turbines emit by day makes being outdoors unbearable for him now. It drove Barry from his beloved secret garden, which soon fell into neglect, standing as a painful reminder of how good life could be.

His mental and physical health have spiraled downward since the turbines started spinning. His chest vibrates constantly when they’re running. His cardiologist says he has developed coronary artery disease. As the weeds creep back into the garden, the tendrils of gloom, depression, and thoughts of suicide creep back into life.

To fight the demons of war, he and Diane take long trips to escape the prison—of their home.

Recently, I sat in the audience and listened while Barry and Diane pressed their “private nuisance” complaint to the Falmouth Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA). They described the relentless onslaught of mind-numbing noise that deprives them of the peaceful enjoyment of their home, their property value, and their precious family life.

Barry supplied the ZBA with thirty-two pounds of documentation, an accumulation of correspondence with other officials, records documenting his declining health, and detailing the impact he has suffered in the past four years. Even so, his complaint seemed doomed before he spoke a word. If the ZBA were to recognize Barry’s complaint as valid, the only reasonable solution would be to shut the turbines down during the day—but the town Select Board has already decided to shut them down only at night.

In military terms, it’s a SNAFU.

When the Town Attorney, Frank Duffy, rose to speak on behalf of the town, he delivered the psychic coup de grace. Duffy argued that the board must reject Barry’s complaint on the grounds that the town bylaw defines a nuisance as something that would bother an ordinary person—and Mr. Funfar clearly was not an ordinary person. His honesty and his PTSD were being used against him.

Sgt. Barry Funfar, US Marine Corps

Having put his life on the line for his country, having quietly suffered the debilitating consequences for decades without treatment, having lived in Falmouth as a good citizen and good neighbor for over 34 years—the town was now depriving this extraordinary man of the simple consideration and justice due to any ordinary man.

The English literary scholar and Oxford don, C.S. Lewis, reflecting on the recently ended World War, coined the phrase “men without chests.”  Meaning, men lacking the honor, courage, and moral backbone necessary to recognize these same virtues in others.  Soulless men who lack the organ of humanity necessary to accord the proper esteem and consideration that people like Barry Funfar rightfully deserve.

Understand, this is not justice or the rule of law being applied to this man.  This is lesser men using cunning legal technicalities to exert a tyranny of the majority over a few good men to justify their own selfish greed for money, power, and status. This twisted reasoning is a moral obscenity and grotesque injustice, masquerading as democratic process. Its ilk is not limited to Falmouth, MA.

Lewis went on to warn that “the power of man to make himself what he pleases, means, as we have seen, the power of some men to make other men what they please.”  Though such men don’t regard their power as such, it is nothing less than the malignant seed of fascism taking root in America—the triumph of the spiritually bankrupt over a few extraordinary men with chests, polished by valor.

.

.
—Calvin Luther Martin, PhD

Sometimes we are required to “walk on water”—that is, do something we don’t know how to do.

So, we do it—then worry about how to do it, later.

It’s called a “miracle.”  (“Did I really do that?”)

This is such a miracle.  This past week, 20 people together pledged $5,000 to move this family—the Therriens—out of their home.  A home that is no longer a “home,” but an acoustically toxic nightmare that is swallowing them, whole.

Nina & I have been doing this “wind energy” bullshit for 9 years.  “Bullshit” because it shouldn’t have lasted 9 years.  Wind energy was already discredited, at least from the human health standpoint—in the 1980s!

It turns out that “reason” and “empirical evidence” and “common sense” and “justice” have nothing to do with wind energy.  Instead, one quickly discovers that wind energy is an ideological zombie; it refuses to die.  Its human casualty list is long.  Very long, and global.

All in all, it’s a really depressing story, with no clear end in sight.  Sometimes, however, there’s a bit of good news.  Truly good news!  Like this:  Readers of this site managed to dig deep and send serious money to a drowning family.

When I spoke to Luann last week, I raised the specter of suicide.  (Don’t raise your eyebrows.  It’s happened in Ontario and elsewhere.  And will happen, again.)  After all, the Therriens’ world has been pulverized and they are penniless.  (I had this corroborated by a third party source who knows them well.)

Instead, today there is rejoicing.

To all of you generous, kind-hearted, humane people who are helping us move out of our toxic home:

Honestly, I am stunned!  Flabbergasted!  And grateful—to know there are such honorable people who will give of themselves to someone they have never met.

My family’s heart has been touched in a way I never believed possible.

A simple Thank You just doesn’t seem enough to express how we feel right now!

Nevertheless, ‘Thank you so much!’

—Luann, Steve, Seager & Baily Therrien (Sheffield, Vermont)

Sometime during the course of the week, as I sent Luann daily updates, she wrote back to the effect:  “I can’t believe you people are doing this!”

I liked that!  I liked her incredulity!

But, people were doing it!  By God, they were!  And—they did!

I answered Luann’s amazement with words I, frankly, never thought I would once again say in my life.  “My dear, evidently the message of ‘Peace, goodwill to men & women’ is not dead!”

Luann & Baily

.
Note to those of you who pledged:  I will be contacting you, individually, tomorrow (Monday, Oct 14th) with the Therriens’ mailing address.  

Luann tells me she will be sending each one of you a “thank you” note via postal mail.

Baily

.
—Calvin Luther Martin, PhD

Here’s the deal.  Steve & Luann Therrien live off-grid in Vermont.  On 50 acres of mixed hardwood which they’ve turned into a wilderness haven, complete with cozy cabin, wood stove, and all the good stuff Henry David Thoreau and John Muir rhapsodized over.

I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived. I did not wish to live what was not life, living is so dear.

I wanted to live deep and suck out all the marrow of life, to live so sturdily and Spartan-like as to put to rout all that was not life, to cut a broad swath and shave close, to drive life into a corner, and reduce it to its lowest terms.”

—H.D. Thoreau, Walden: Or, Life in the Woods

In God’s wildness lies the hope of the world.

—John Muir (founder of the Sierra Club)

God’s wildness got shattered two years ago by the noise and vibration of newly built gigantic wind turbines within a mile of their home.

The Therriens, mind you, were not notified of the impending wind plant.  Nor did they oppose it when they noticed it being built, convincing themselves it would be a minor nuisance.  (After all, they had lived here within earshot of the Interstate for 17 years.)

By the end of 6 months they admitted to one another that they were horribly wrong.  That something weird and very wrong was happening to their health.  And whatever it was, it was getting worse.

No, they did not read Dr. Pierpont’s book, nor had they heard of her or “Wind Turbine Syndrome” (WTS).  (In fact, as I write this, they still have not read the book.)  They had no idea of the public uproar that has been raging, for over a decade, over people suffering bizarre health effects from badly placed turbines.

All they knew is that they were getting more and more nausea, vertigo, headaches, problems concentrating, feelings of pressure in the head, tinnitus, anxiety, little to no sleep, awakening in the night in a panic, etc.

They were “living” Pierpont’s book—without the slightest clue the book existed.

I just got off the phone with Luann.  I told her that they have “textbook” WTS.  Since they are flat broke at the moment—a point I will come back to—I said I would mail a copy of the book, gratis.  “You will be reading about yourselves, and will weep,” I warned.  “Read it anyhow, to understand what’s really going on.”

It’s not just Steve & Luann.  It’s Baily (2-year-old daughter) and Seager (4-year-old son).  Both children are suffering—except, with limited communication skills, their parents have difficulty pinpointing exactly how.  Clearly there is fear in both children (seeking refuge in their parents’ bed at night).  And at times pain.  Head pain?  Earache?  And Seager refuses to get on the swing he used to love.

Seager

I have said they have classic WTS.  Luann, who was a cook at the now shuttered King George School nearby, is having trouble remembering and following simple recipes.  (Right out of Pierpont’s book!)  Steve, a carpenter and master mechanic—the kind of man who can build and equip a sturdy cabin for his young family—had to quit his job at the wood-shop because he couldn’t follow directions and was in danger of hurting himself with the saws.  (Right out of Pierpont’s book!)

They have to move.  Flat broke, having spent what little money they had fighting this terrorism—the Therriens absolutely have to move.  (Yes, they put their 50 acres up for sale—but no takers.)  The wind energy company (First Wind), preoccupied by the lucrative business of saving the planet from global warming, refuses to acknowledge their illness and refuses to buy them out.  The governor’s office and state agencies are indifferent, having drunk the Kool-Aid that “wind energy can do no harm.”

They have to move, pronto!  This is northern Vermont; winter comes early to these boreal forests and mountains.  All those trees lose their leaves in winter, making turbine noise & vibration worse than in summer.  And in winter, the family is confined indoors much of the time, where the infrasound is demonstrably worse than outdoors.

Besides, they are discovering the horrific sequelae of WTS:  one becomes increasingly sensitized to it.  (Luann confirmed this on the phone a few minutes ago.)

This website has been at the forefront of fighting this scourge.  It’s one thing to argue with the likes of Simon “Nocebo-effect” Chapman and Geoff “If-you-can’t-hear it, it-won’t-hurt-you” Leventhall.  It’s another to provide emergency financial support for victims of WTS.

I’m asking for money.  Your money.  Sent directly to Luann Therrien.  By check.  Please.

It sucks asking for money.  To try and sweeten this embarrassing task, Nina & I propose the following:  We will contribute $500 to the Therriens if 20 other people each contribute $500—a matching funds proposition, with 20 other people.  (Please, no checks over $500!  I mean that.)  If you’re not in a position to contribute $500, then I propose that you find someone you can pair up with so that, between you, your combined gift is $500.

Twenty people, or twenty groups, each contributing $500.  No more than this.  So these people can buy a crappy old mobile home (I’ve seen photos of the one they’re considering) and move it onto land belonging to Steve’s mother, nearby, where they hope to start life anew.  (Unfortunately, they can’t just lock the door of the cabin and, traveling light, go live someplace else.  Luann explained that all the cabins in their forest are routinely broken into and robbed and vandalized.  Broken windows.  Kicked-in doors.  Trashed.  Yes, even when the cabins are left—unlocked.  No, they have to assume the cabin will be rendered uninhabitable in their absence.)

I don’t have $500 to give these people.  You don’t either.  But I’m doing it anyhow.  And I hope you join me.  Somewhere in this narrative, basic humanity kicks in, and we wind up doing things we’d prefer not to—because altruism is a primal human instinct.  And because you and I have not forgotten that key ingredient of the “immense journey” of our species.

Do it this way, if you will:  Send me an email (rushtoncanoe@aol.com) pledging your $500 or portion thereof.  I will match up donors with others, so each chunk amounts to $500 in total.  With 20 “chunks” of $500 each.  When we’ve reached the $10,000 mark, I’ll contact Steve & Luann and tell them they are going to receive a bunch of checks.  I will then contact you with their mailing address—along with their profound appreciation.

Instead of donating to your favorite environmental organization this Christmas, make an early Christmas present to these victims of “environmentalism” run amok.

Nina & I thank you.

We who lived in concentration camps can remember the men who walked through the huts comforting others, giving away their last piece of bread.  They may have been few in number, but they offer sufficient proof that everything can be taken from a man but one thing:  the last of the human freedoms—to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way.

A thought transfixed me:  for the first time in my life I saw the truth as it is set into song by so many poets, proclaimed as the final wisdom by so many thinkers.  The truth—that love is the ultimate and the highest goal to which man can aspire.

Then I grasped the meaning of the greatest secret that human poetry and human thought and belief have to impart:  The salvation of man is through love and in love. I understood how a man who has nothing left in this world still may know bliss, be it only for a brief moment, in the contemplation of his beloved.

In a position of utter desolation, when man cannot express himself in positive action, when his only achievement may consist in enduring his sufferings in the right way—an honorable way—in such a position man can, through loving contemplation of the image he carries of his beloved, achieve fulfillment.”

—Viktor E. Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning (1988)

October 9, 2013 update:  Here is the note we got from Luann Therrien the other day:

Please please please help us. We are a family of 4, ages 52, 44, almost 4 & 2, having children so late is whole other heart-wrenching story.

We live in Sheffield, Vermont by 16 wind turbines. The closest is under 3/4 of a mile, 5 are under a mile, and all 16 are under 2 miles away.

We are suffering terribly, my husband and I have all the signs of Wind Turbine Syndrome- (1) Sleep disturbance. Not simply awakened, but awakening in a panic (“flight or fight” response). (2) Headache. (3) Tinnitus. (4) Ear pressure. (5) Dizziness. (6) Vertigo. (7) Nausea. (8) Visual blurring. (9) Tachycardia. (10) Irritability. (11) Problems with concentration and memory. (12) Panic episodes associated with sensations of internal pulsation or quivering, which arise while awake or asleep. (This latter involving other, non-vestibular organs of balance, motion, and position sense.)

Have also been put on anti-depressants + sleeping pills + motion sickness medication, and as per our Dr. have been told to not even try to work.

The children are too small to articulate how they are being impacted. But when we get a lot of noise we see a definite change in their behavior and not for the better.

How long will we have to wait for officials to admit there is a problem associated with living in too close proximity to wind turbines? Needless to say they will not tell us if our still developing children will have long term damage. In the meantime we are getting more and more ill.

We desperately need to move. Wind Turbine Syndrome is no joke.

Our hope was to get into a reasonably decent home.  That was why we original posted in gofundme asking for $90,000.00. In the hopes of covering the cost of a home, moving expenses, and all the other expenses that would be necessary.

Winter is coming and we have to get out of here. The worst of the noise for us has begun. With the hopes for a home slipping away from us we realize an older mobile home is more realistic, but at this point nowhere near in sight.

We have gone through all of our savings and are flat broke. We have reduced our goal to $40,000.00.

We HAVE reached the point of desperation. We HAVE to move for the sake of our health and sanity.

Please if you or someone you know could help us, we are desperate.

Editor’s note:  Click here for a copy of this astonishing letter, dated (we are told) October 8, 2013.

We dedicate the letter to the UK’s Geoff “If-you-can’t-hear-it, it-won’t-hurt-you” Leventhall (physicist with zero clinical credentials), Australia’s Simon “Nocebo-Effect” Chapman (a sociologist, likewise zero clinical credentials), and America’s busy busy Robert McCunney, MD, winner of this site’s celebrated Rubber Duck Award.

Dear Chairman Weinard,

My name is Bill Mulvaney and I am the Superintendent of Schools for Armstrong Township High School and Armstrong-Ellis CUD #61. I also served on the wind panel that met to try and give direction to the county board on wind turbine ordinances. Our panel did not come up with any recommended changes, but I would like to share a few thoughts with you.

I have noticed that we have some children in our district that appear to be having some medical issues related to the wind turbines. Headaches, lack of sleep and jaw issues seem to be the most common. The students also complain about not being able to sleep or not getting a full night’s sleep due to sound issues.

We have also been advised that we will be losing a couple of families because the wind turbines were placed close to homes and the families can no longer handle the flicker and noise issues.

While these issues were brought up at our panel discussions, I was not fully aware of the impact that the wind turbines would have to my school districts. It is never a good thing when children have health issues or families have to leave their homes to get away from the turbines. The revenue generated by the turbines is a blessing to our schools, but the unintended consequences are real.

I hope this letter sheds some light on real issues that affect districts that house wind farms. I also hope that when ordinances are discussed in the future, that these issues are considered.

Sincerely,

William C. Mulvaney
Superintendent
Armstrong Schools

Editor’s note:  Read the passage, below, from a wind energy lease in Maine, USA.  In our experience, the shocking language is pretty typical.

It’s one thing for the property owner to blithely allow the wind developer to render his property acoustically toxic—but do property owners have the right (moral or legal) to inflict this acoustic terrorism on their neighbors?  (Hmm, does the offensive property owner even live there?)

After all, does the “sound generated from the Wind Power Project” and the “audio, visual, light, vibration [infrasound], electromagnetic . . . hazard resulting from the Wind Power Project” and the “right to cast . . . shadow flicker . . . onto the Property”—do these injurious forces and events somehow magically stop at the property line?  As though a fictive property boundary effectively blocks and contains these noxious and dangerous by-products of “wind energy”?

Do wind turbine “hosts” have the right to inflict such injury on neighbors?  Or is this a theft of “commons” rights—a theft being slyly perpetrated and encouraged by wind developers?  (Consider, for a moment, what all this does to a rural community as the wind company salesman drives away with his signed lease.  Neighbor hating neighbor!  The soul of “community,” human habitat, sold for . . . thirty pieces of silver.)

“And Judas went out and hanged himself”  (Matthew 27:5).

Whereas, the Wind Power Project may emit sound at levels that may exceed current or future Maine Department of Environmental Protection quiet nighttime sound limits for the Property, and additionally may cast shadows onto or produce a shadow flicker effect on the Property;

Now, therefore, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Grantor hereby grants, with Quitclaim covenant, a perpetual easement to Grantee for: (a) the right to have sound generated from the Wind Power Project impact the Property and exceed otherwise applicable federal, state, local or other maximum sound level limits applicable to locations on the Property; (b) the right to have any audio, visual, light, vibration, electromagnetic, ice or weather hazard resulting from Wind Power Project operations or activities impact the property; and (c) the right to cast shadows or shadow flicker from the Wind Power Project onto the Property.

.
*What, if anything, is the difference between these two “Infrasonic Fear Generators”?.
.

Click here for website.  This thing is . . . real!  Read the text describing infrasound!  Yikes!  They got it . . . right!

The Infrasonic Fear Generator is the first commercial product of its kind. Simply put, the Fear Generator can cause a range of strange feelings, anxiety, sorrow, chills, unnerving feelings, heightened emotions, including visions and vibrations in the chest and other parts of the body, in a large percentage of people.

Infrasound refers to extreme bass waves or vibrations, with a frequency below the audibility range of the human ear. Even though these waves can’t be heard by us, they can be felt and sensed and have been shown to produce a range of effects in some people.

Based on previous studies, 20% to 60% of people have reported strange feelings when tests were performed at concerts, in pressure chambers, at home, and in test facilities. No tests were conducted in a scary environment. We believe the percentage of people affected in a haunted house setting will be even greater. Most people will feel vibrations in parts of their bodies (commonly the chest area) similar to audible bass but won’t know where it is coming from since they can not hear it. Vibrations in the chest are a common symptom of extreme terror.

Infrasound is very difficult, if not impossible, to recreate from a standard stereo system. Most subwoofers are only rated down to 40 Hz and the amplifiers, filters, and crossover systems can limit the low frequencies you need to hit even further. The Fear Generator is specially designed to produce a specific infrasound frequency that has been scientifically tested to produce these effects in people.

One of the best places to put the Fear Generator would be near your wait line, where anticipation and anxiety start to build naturally.

NOTE: A large pipe is required for the Fear Generator and is not included.

.
*With thanks to Eric Rosenbloom of National Wind Watch, who brought this monstrous device to our attention.

.
“The Performance of U.S. Wind and Solar Generating Units”*

.
—Richard Schmalensee, PhD, the Howard W. Johnson Professor of Management, Emeritus; Professor of Economics, Emeritus; and Dean Emeritus of  the Sloan School of Management, Mass. Institute of Technology (Boston, MA).  Written for the National Bureau of Economic Research.

Click here for a full copy of the paper.

Concluding Remarks (pp. 30-33)

This study has used a unique dataset to produce a large number of results on the performance of individual wind and solar generators across the US – some new results and some that confirm the prior literature.

In interpreting these results, it should be kept in mind that, as noted in the introduction, these data are incomplete on important dimensions. And they can shed no direct light on performance of wind and solar generators in regions that still lack organized wholesale electricity markets. But they do have some clear implications for the design of policies to support use of wind and solar energy.

Perhaps the most striking result regarding the value of generation from wind and solar energy was that in this sample in 2011, a kilowatt-hour produced by a solar facility was on average worth about 32% more than a kilowatt-hour from a wind plant. The average value of wind and solar output relative to baseload output may have declined during the sample period as more of both non-dispatchable technologies were deployed. Wind capacity factors were generally, but not always, above solar capacity factors, and in both cases regional differences accounted for most of the dramatic within-technology differences in capacity factors.

True to stereotype, wind plants tended to generate more at night than in the day and less in the summer that in other seasons, but there were exceptions to both generalizations, and the average differences were not dramatic. Solar plants all generated more on average during peak-price periods than at other times, while wind plants generally produced less. Outside ISONE, which alone barred negative bids, all of the plants in the sample faced negative spot prices during 2011, and 12 faced negative prices for more than 500 hours. Both wind and (during the day) solar plants generally produced positive outputs during hours with negative prices – they paid the market to take their electricity.

Two dimensions of the variability of output from wind and solar facilities were studied: hour-to-hour and day-to-day variation in generation and the incidence of low or zero output. Different measures of variability are generally highly correlated across plants and show substantial variation. On average, short-term trends or ramping events accounted for over a third of the hour-to-hour changes in wind plant output. Both wind and solar plants showed more day- to-day than hour-to-hour changes, and for wind plants differences among ISOs were considerably more important for day-to-day changes than for hour-to-hour changes. On the other hand the potential gain from geographic averaging seems greater for hour-to-hour variability, at least for wind plants.

Wind plants in this sample averaged 948 hours a year with zero generation, mainly in episodes of three or more hours. While hours with zero generation in all sample plants in an ISO were considerably rarer, such hours occurred much more frequently than if plant-level zeros were statistically independent. If generation was positive in the adjacent hours, solar plants rarely produced less than half the mean output of those hours, and instances of zero generation in such cases were very rare indeed.

All but one of the tables discussed above provide information on the cross-section variation of various dimensions of individual generating plant or ISO average performance, and half the tables provide information on variation between early and late periods. Figures 1 and 2 depict the cross-section variation in value and capacity factors, and Table 2 demonstrates that regional differences drive the striking variation in value factors. Variation on some other dimensions of performance is also substantial among plants in 2011, between early and late periods, and, in some cases, between ISOs.

Most wind plants generate less in the summer than other seasons, for instance, but not those in CAISO. Most wind value factors are less than those of constant-output baseload plants, but not those of the two coastal plants in ERCOT. For other technologies, historical averages may be good predictors of the performance of new facilities, but that is clearly not true for wind or solar generation. Site selection is important, regions differ, and performance varies over time.

Two of the patterns noted above that seem particularly robust have clear implications for public policy. First, when spot prices are negative and they can generate, wind and solar plants generally do so. One can debate whether it is desirable to subsidize renewable generation at all, since doing so is clearly more costly than taxing emissions of carbon dioxide as a means of slowing climate change and is a similarly inefficient approach to reducing local air pollution. But there can be no doubt that encouraging renewable generation when its marginal value to the electric grid is negative raises costs to society, but that is what both the federal production tax credit (for wind) and state RPS programs (for both wind and solar) do – along with most of the feed-in-tariff schemes in widespread use outside the US.⁵³

In regions with organized wholesale markets and nodal pricing, it would be more efficient to pay output subsidies only when the spot price is positive or even to make them proportional to the spot price. In regions that have not yet adopted this modern design, however, there is no obvious way to provide incentives for wind or solar generators to reduce their output when it has negative social value.

A second robust pattern is the huge regional differences in facility performance – most clearly the capacity factor differences presented in Table 2 and depicted in Figures 1 and 2. One important reason why plants are sometimes built on sites that will produce poor performance is that site choice is constrained by state RPS programs that limit the locations of facilities that can be used to satisfy utilities’ renewable energy requirements, often because of a desire to create in-state jobs. Since wind and solar generation are very capital-intensive technologies, it is not clear that these limits can ever in fact have much impact on any state’s employment. But it is clear that for the nation as a whole it would be more efficient to generate electricity from solar power in CAISO than in ISONE, and it would be more efficient to generate electricity from wind in SPP than in NYISO.

If there is a national interest in subsidizing the generation of electricity from wind and solar power, a national RPS program or feed-in-tariff would give a much higher return per dollar spent than a collection of state plans that restrict generator siting.

⁵³ See Schmalensee (2012) and the references there cited. It should also be noted that the efficiency of the production and investment tax credits are further reduced because firms without substantial taxable income must engage in tax equity financing in thin markets with high transactions costs (Bipartisan Policy Center, 2011). But, of course, tax expenditures don’t look like spending at first glance, and their costs are generally well hidden.

.
Professor Richard Schmalensee

* Editor’s note:  My appreciation to Dr. Carl V. Phillips for alerting me to this article.

The situation, instantly out of place, permanent and quickly unbearable, created a problem that went beyond the typical inconveniences of neighbours and constituted a violation of property rights.”

—Judge

.
“Couple win wind turbine ruling”

—The Connexion (10/2/13)

A windfarm has been ordered to demolish ten turbines and pay compensation and fines after it was successfully sued by a couple.

Speaking to Le Figaro newspaper, the couple’s lawyer, Philippe Bodereau, said: “This decision is very important because it demonstrates to all those who put up with windfarms with a feeling of powerlessness that the battle is not in vain, even against big groups, or authorities who deliver building permits, that legal options are available to everyone, that we have a right to live in peace and that people can do other things than suffer.”

The couple bought their 18th century listed property, the Château de Flers, in 1993.

A tribunal in Montpellier ruled that the couple had suffered due to the “degradation of the environment, resulting from a rupture of a bucolic landscape and countryside.”  It also agreed the couple had suffered from the noise of the turbines and from the flashing lights.

“The situation, instantly out of place, permanent and quickly unbearable, created a problem that went beyond the typical inconveniences of neighbours and constituted a violation of property rights,” ruled the judgement.

The value of the property had no bearing on the ruling.

The wind farm owners, Compagnie du Vent, have been given four months to take down the turbines, which were erected in 2007 on two sites next to the property in Nord-Pas-de-Calais. It has appealed the decision.

“Our projects are in the general interest, following the Grenelle de l’environnement and not in the interest of individuals,” said the president of Compagnie du Vent, Thierry Conil. “However, it’s right that democracy should allow people to take action.”

The two sites are a €20m investment and produce enough electricity for 22,000 people according to the company.

In 2010 it was ordered to demolish four turbines near Narbonne after it was taken to court by four farmers who were granted €430,000 in compensation. However after appealing it reached an out of court settlement.

Le Figaro said that lawyers associated with these cases said that they were often resolved amicably out of court. “I don’t know an example in France where a demolition was ordered and followed through,” one lawyer told the paper.