From December 16: 2009, THE FIGHT FOR NEW ENERGY AND WHY WIND WINS IT

Update 12-31: The post below sums up the year and the MORE NEWS stories that follow expand on the summary. There is only 1 thing to add:

This is surely one of the best cartoons of the year. (click to enlarge)


Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects; An Expert Panel Review
December 2009 (American Wind Energy Association and Canadian Wind Energy Association)
and
The Impact of Wind Power Projects on Residential Property Values in the United States: A Multi-Site Hedonic Analysis
December 2009 (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory)

SUMMARY
2009 will be remembered as the year the New Energy industries fully joined the rising grassroots movement that is now really beginning to stand back the Old Energies.

The new administration came in this year with a rush and with a New Energy-boosting Recovery Act that is still having reverberations and driving growth in revenues and jobs.

In Chicago, in the spring, WindPower 2009 was the biggest New Energy conclave ever. The wind industry hosted a coterie of Midwestern governors who stumbled over themselves prevailing on wind to build in their states. And the industry brought oil & gas billionaire-turned-wind developer T. Boone Pickens to the convention as a keynote speaker to show the fossil fuels they are yesterday’s party.

At Solar Power International 2009, in Anaheim in the fall, solar association President Rhone Resch unveiled a Solar Bill of Rights and declared the coal industry an “opponent” and keynote speaker/environmental hero Robert Kennedy, Jr., described America’s New Energy industries as the cutting edge in a 21st century arms race.

click thru for more info

The geothermal, hydrokinetic and algae biofuel associations fought harder than ever in 2009 for recognition on the national stage, joined the solar and wind associations in the struggle against recalcitrants in the U.S. Congress and helped push a groundbreaking energy and climate bill through the House of Representatives.

But by far the biggest story of 2009 was that the No-New-Coal movement, born of grassroots activists in 2005, defeated its 100th proposed coal plant and took on unprecedented momentum. The "there’s no such thing as clean coal” media campaign found spokesmen in Jon Stewart, Steven Colbert and other late night comedians and it won adherents from YouTube audiences around the world.

The floundering economy has slowed New Energy’s progress. And the Old Energies won’t roll over without a brutal struggle, as evidenced by the vulgar tactics of the blowhard American Coalition for Clean Coal Energy (ACCCE). But what the events of 2009 demonstrated is that even the staunchest of fossil fools can’t hold back history.

click to enlarge

The triumph of the U.S. wind industry – the U.S. has built more wind power to date than any other country in the world – is a tribute to a particular way of fighting for New Energy. It is a 2-part approach.

The first part is to keep building, no matter what. The wind industry has developed unimpeded by any criticism and has slowed only when the federal government pulled the carpet out from underneath it.

The second part is to look directly at criticism with a cold hard scrutiny. If there is truth in it, what is there to learn? If there is not, how can the real truth be effectively told?

2009 is exemplary of the first part. The wind industry saw the economy unraveling and the capital for project finance disappearing and went into action. Along with the solar industry, it led New Energy’s fight for revised federal benefits and, as a result, is coming out of the recession still building.

Wind intends to keep on building until it is supplying 20% of U.S. power in 2030. (click to enlarge)

December has seen the release of 2 highly substantial studies exemplifying the second part of wind's victory plan, a frank response to criticism. Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects; An Expert Panel Review is a panel of experts’ highly researched negation of unsubstantiated claims, circulated for years and reiterated in a recent, poorly documented book, that the noise of wind turbines causes health impacts and something called “wind turbine syndrome.”

The panel of experts negates the unsubstantiated claims with old-fashioned facts demonstrating there is no basis for such a syndrome or any other harm to human health from properly sited wind turbines.

The doctors and other health professionals on the panel concluded:
(1) The sounds and vibrations emitted by wind turbines have no unique endangering quality.
(2) Knowledge about sound and health is substantial.
(3) That substantial accumulated knowledge offers no evidence the audible or subaudible sounds from wind turbines have “any direct adverse physiological effects.”

The Impact of Wind Power Projects on Residential Property Values in the United States: A Multi-Site Hedonic Analysis is a thoroughly documented paper from researchers at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) that negates long-muttered suggestions by wind’s enemies that nearby projects somehow diminish home values with thoroughly calculated statistics showing there is absolutely no such harm to real estate prices.

The researchers identified 3 ways a nearby wind project could impact home values:
(1) Area Stigma is a concern that the general area surrounding a wind energy facility will appear more developed;
(2) Scenic Vista Stigma is a concern that a home’s otherwise scenic vista might be compromised by the view of a wind energy facility;
(3) Nuisance Stigma is a concern there could be factors like sound and shadow flicker that close proximity to wind turbines could impose.

They concluded that there is no evidence that any of the 3 stigmas having “any consistent, measurable, and statistically significant effect” on home values.

WindPower (click to enlarge)

COMMENTARY
The study of the health impacts of wind turbines was conducted by a multidisciplinary scientific advisory panel made up of medical doctors, audiologists, and acoustical professionals from the U.S., Canada, Denmark, and the UK that was established by the American and Canadian Wind Energy Associations (AWEA and CanWEA) to create a definitive reference for legislators, regulators and anybody else seeking to resolve the conflicting information about wind turbine sound and health.

The panel analyzed the extensive body of peer-reviewed literature on sound and health effects in general, and on wind turbine sound in particular. The conclusions on which there was consensus were:
(1) “There is no evidence that the audible or sub-audible sounds emitted by wind turbines have any direct adverse physiological effects.”
(2) “The ground-borne vibrations from wind turbines are too weak to be detected by, or to affect, humans.”
(3)”The sounds emitted by wind turbines are not unique. There is no reason to believe, based on the levels and frequencies of the sounds and the panel’s experience with sound exposures in occupational settings, that the sounds from wind turbines could plausibly have direct adverse health consequences.”

Wind Turbine Syndrome, as chronicled anecdotally by UK physician Nina Pierpont, is, according to the scientific panel, based on 2 assumptions: (1) that low levels of sound from wind turbines, 1-to-2 Hz, impacts the human vestibular system; and, (2) that low level turbine sound, 4-to-8 Hz, enters human lungs through the open mouth and vibrates the diaphragm, which vibrates the internal organs.

Thanks to the miracle of YouTube, readers can draw their own conclusions. From videomarkHD129 via YouTube

According Dr. Pierpont, the combined effect of these sound frequencies confuses the body’s position and motion detectors and leads to the range of symptoms associated with the “syndrome.”

While Dr. Pierpont’s study offers little authoritative documentation for her explanations of clinical incidences, the panel members’ multiple specialties (audiology, acoustics, otolaryngology, occupational and environmental medicine, and public health) allowed an authoritative and well-informed review of a wide expanse of practical, laboratory and clinical documentation.

The 3 key points of agreement by the panel: (1) (1) Wind turbine sounds and vibrations have no unique or harmful qualities; (2) There is ample knowledge about how sound impacts health; and (3) Nothing indicates the audible or subaudible sounds from wind turbines have “any direct adverse physiological effects.”

The panel noted there is great complexity in human reactions to sound, especially the incessant swish of wind turbine. It pointed out that the sound levels are comparable to ambient noise in urban environments. This sound is annoying to a small minority of people exposed to turbines, as urban noise is annoying to some. There are some physical and psychological variables that could cause or enhance such adverse reactions.

The panel concluded that “wind turbine syndrome” is a misinterpretation of physiologic data. It is, the doctors found, a subset of annoyance reactions.

click to enlarge
click to enlarge

Vibroacoustic disease (tissue inflammation and fibrosis associated with sound exposure) is, according to the doctors, highly unlikely at the levels of sound produced by wind turbines.

The implication is that Dr. Pierpont’s book fails to meet the level of epidemiologic evidence necessary to prove the existence of the syndrome she claims to describe. Case reports and uncontrolled observations need to be confirmed through controlled studies. For wind turbine health effects, no case-control or cohort studies have been done so allegations of harmful effects remain unproven and there are not nearly enough case reports of adverse health effects to even advocate for funding further studies.

The paper’s conclusions:
(1) "Sound from wind turbines does not pose a risk of hearing loss or any other adverse health effect in humans."
(2) "Subaudible, low frequency sound and infrasound from wind turbines do not present a risk to human health."
(3) "Some people may be annoyed at the presence of sound from wind turbines. Annoyance is not a pathological entity."
(4) "A major cause of concern about wind turbine sound is its fluctuating nature. Some may find this sound annoying, a reaction that depends primarily on personal characteristics as opposed to the intensity of the sound level."

In the paper on home values, the researchers identified 3 ways a nearby wind project could impact home values:
(1) Area Stigma is a concern that the general area surrounding a wind energy facility will appear more developed;
(2) Scenic Vista Stigma is a concern that a home’s otherwise scenic vista might be compromised by the view of a wind energy facility;
(3) Nuisance Stigma is a concern there could be factors like sound and shadow flicker that close proximity to wind turbines could impose.

click to enlarge

The LBNL researchers studied Area Stigma by evaluating whether the sales prices of homes anywhere beyond a mile and within 5 miles of a wind project were different from the sales prices of homes beyond the 5 mile perimeter. They found no statistically significant differences in sales prices.

Scenic Vista Stigma was studied by assessing whether homes near wind projects with minor, moderate, substantial, or extreme views of wind turbines had different sales prices from other homes with such views. They found no statistically significant differences.

For Nuisance Stigma, they examined whether the sales prices of homes within a mile of the nearest wind energy project had measurably different prices from homes beyond the 5 mile perimeter. They found no statistical evidence of an impact on sales prices from proximity to the wind project.

click to enlarge

Previous studies that suggested the proximity of wind projects detrimentally affects property values were found by the LBNL researchers to be flawed in several ways:
(1) They relied on surveys of homeowners or real estate professionals instead of doing real market data quantifications;
(2) They relied on simple and limited statistical techniques too easily affected by small numbers of transactions or survey respondents;
(3) They used small datasets and/or only a single wind project, making their wide applicability questionable;
(4) They failed to report the statistical significance of their findings, compromising their meaningfulness;
(5) They focused on Area Stigma, and ignored the Scenic Vista and/or Nuisance Stigmas;
(6) They neglected field visits when doing Scenic Vista Stigma; and
(7) There are only 2 peer-reviewed studies published in academic journals.

click to enlarge

The researchers used the hedonic pricing model, one of the most well-known, well-accepted and reliable methods for quantifying residential property value facts. They calculated a base hedonic model and 7 alternative hedonic models for each of the 3 Stigmas. Some limitation is unavoidable but the LBNL hedonic pricing model produced what they describe as “the most comprehensive and data-rich analysis to date” of wind project impacts on proximal property values.

Previous studies collected a large quantity of residential transaction data from communities surrounding a wide variety of wind power facilities, spread across multiple parts of the U.S. This study visited each residence on which it did evaluations to obtain visual and other essential data. Area, Scenic Vista, and Nuisance Stigmas were studied.

The results were strongly consistent. None of the models showed conclusive evidence of any of the 3 property value stigmas.

click to enlarge

Bottom line: There is no evidence that home prices for residences near wind facilities are “consistently, measurably, and significantly” affected by (1) the view of wind facilities, (2) the nearness of wind facilities or (3) the affects of being near wind facilities.

Where further work is needed:
(1) More data is necessary on homes closest to wind facilities;
(2) More transactions should be evaluated, especially for homes particularly close to wind facilities;
(3) The cumulative impact in communities where there have been multiple developments should be studied;
(4) More needs to be known about sales volume impacts;
(5) The impact of wind projects on the length of time homes are on the market before they sell is not clear;
(6) A study should made of homeowners living close to wind projects, especially those who buy and sell after construction to understand their decision-making process.

click to enlarge

QUOTES
- From the study on health and wind: “People have been harnessing the power of the wind for more than 5,000 years. Initially used widely for farm irrigation and millworks, today’s modern wind turbines produce electricity in more than 70 countries. As of the end of 2008, there were approximately 120,800 megawatts of wind energy capacity installed around the world…Wind energy enjoys considerable public support, but it also has its detractors, who have publicized their concerns that the sounds emitted from wind turbines cause adverse health consequences…In response to those concerns, the American and Canadian Wind Energy Associations (AWEA and CanWEA) established a scientific advisory panel in early 2009 to conduct a review of current literature available on the issue of perceived health effects of wind turbines. This multidisciplinary panel is comprised of medical doctors, audiologists, and acoustical professionals from the United States, Canada, Denmark, and the United Kingdom. The objective of the panel was to provide an authoritative reference document for legislators, regulators, and anyone who wants to make sense of the conflicting information about wind turbine sound.”

click to enlarge

- From the study on health and wind: “The mission of the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) is to promote the growth of wind power through advocacy, communication, and education. Similarly, the mission of the Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA) is to promote the responsible and sustainable growth of wind power in Canada. Both organizations wish to take a proactive role in ensuring that wind energy projects are good neighbors to the communities that have embraced wind energy.
Together AWEA and CanWEA proposed to a number of independent groups that they
examine the scientific validity of recent reports on the adverse health effects of wind turbine proximity. Such reports have raised public concern about wind turbine exposure. In the absence of declared commitment to such an effort from independent groups, the wind industry decided to be proactive and address the issue itself.”

click to enlarge

- From the study of the impacts of wind projects on property value: “Wind power development in the United States has expanded dramatically in recent years. If that growth is to continue it will require an ever-increasing number of wind power projects to be sited, permitted, and constructed. Most permitting processes in the U.S. require some form of environmental impact assessment as well as public involvement in the siting process. Though public opinion surveys generally show that acceptance towards wind energy is high, a variety of concerns with wind power development are often expressed on the local level during the siting and permitting process. One such concern is the potential impact of wind energy projects on the property values of nearby residences.”