Expert Panel Finds No Ill Effects From Wind Turbines

Staff ReportsiBerkshires
04:45PM / Tuesday, January 17, 2012Print Story | Email Story

BOSTON — An independent panel of health experts convened by the Department of Environmental Protection has dismissed health effects from so-called "Wind Turbine Syndrome."

The 164-page report was released on Tuesday and was made available to the public because of "the high level of interest in the panel's findings," according to statement from the MassDEP. Three public meetings on the report will be held in February as part of a 60-day comment period.

The report's findings are of considerable interest to residents of Western Massachusetts, which the state has identified as having prime sites for wind turbines. Gov. Deval Patrick as part of his energy plans has set a goal of generating 2,000 megawatts of electricty through wind power by 2020.

Three public meetings are scheduled, only one in the Berkshires

Tuesday, Feb. 28, from 5 to 8 p.m.
Lee High School Auditorium
300 Greylock St.
Snow date: Feb. 29

However, a wind siting reform bill died for lack of support in the Senate after several versions passed the House in 2010.

The panel, charged with researching the effect in collaboration with the state Department of Public Health, included "physicians and scientists with broad expertise in areas including acoustical noise/infrasound, public health, sleep disturbance, mechanical engineering, epidemiology, and neuroscience."

According to MassDEP, among the findings:

► Claims that infrasound from wind turbines directly impacts the vestibular system have not been demonstrated scientifically. Available evidence shows that the infrasound levels near wind turbines cannot impact the vestibular system.

► The weight of the evidence suggests no association between noise from wind turbines and measures of psychological distress or mental health problems.

► There is limited evidence from epidemiologic studies suggesting an association between noise from wind turbines and sleep disruption. In other words, it is possible that noise from some wind turbines can cause sleep disruption. Whether annoyance from wind turbines leads to sleep issues or stress has not been sufficiently quantified. While not based on evidence from wind turbines, there is evidence that sleep disruption can adversely affect mood, cognitive functioning, and overall sense of health and well-being.

► Scientific evidence suggests that shadow flicker does not pose a risk for eliciting seizures as a result of photic stimulation. There is limited scientific evidence of an association between annoyance from prolonged shadow flicker (exceeding 30 minutes per day) and potential transitory cognitive and physical health effects.

The entire report is available below. For more information can be found on the MassDEP website.

Massachusetts Turbine Impact Study
Tags: MassDEP, wind power, wind turbine,

iBerkshires.com Text Ads

rk MILES Blding Materials

Are You Ready to Update Your Home? Start With rk MILES. 4 Locations (800)670-7433

www.rkmiles.com

Breathing Room

0% APY for 12 months balance transfer offer. Apply today! Click to learn more. Insured by NCUA.

www.greylock.org

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Your Comments

iBerkshires.com welcomes critical, respectful dialogue. Name-calling, personal attacks, libel, slander or foul language is not allowed. All comments are reviewed before posting and will be deleted or edited as necessary.

Do these results surprise any sane person?
from: Huh	on: 01-17-2012 05:44PM I Agree (13) - I Disagree (0)

I'm not for or against turbines because i don't know that much about them.The thing i worry about is when they say a 'panel of experts' studied the effects.Seems like you can find a 'panel of experts' to come to any conclusion you want.
from: gene413	on: 01-18-2012 08:34AM I Agree (4) - I Disagree (3)

Why don't they just put more of these turbines on the tops of buildings? I have seen the horizontal ones and the vertical ones on buildings and on the street in cities. I know the open space is good for a bunch of them, but isn't the top of a building also windy?
from: ?	on: 01-18-2012 10:39AM I Agree (1) - I Disagree (0)
Editor: We've wondered if the vertical ones are as efficient - no blades, no flicker, no dead birds. And you can stick them on buildings. Any experts out there?
I Agree (2) - I Disagree (0)

I'm not an expert by any means but I have studied wind turbines quite a bit. Vertical Axis Wind Turbines (VAWT) are not as efficient as the traditional 3 bladed horizontal model (work = force x distance). However, they do work better in a more turbulent environment because they can accept wind from any direction and they can generally start generating electricity at lower wind speeds. Wind that interacts with buildings is very turbulent and the full mass of the air is not always traveling in the same direction at the same time. The VAWT can use this less efficient air stream better than a traditional, but the overall value of energy is significantly less. I believe the generally accepted minimum height for efficient turbine use is about 100 feet. Lower level turbines, whether VAWT or traditional, can still help to offset power usage at lower levels but a through evaluation of the cost to produce the energy vs what will be captured (EROEI) needs to be considered. Useless you just like watching them like me.
from: Huh	on: 01-18-2012 11:14AM I Agree (1) - I Disagree (0)

Now that the subject of birds has come up in the editors' comment, it's time to bring up the audubon society estimate that cats kill 1 billion birds a year in the US. The average cat who is not kept indoors kills more birds than the average windmill.
from: Audubon Member	on: 01-18-2012 11:46AM I Agree (3) - I Disagree (0)
Editor: Not my cats. They're afraid of birds. And bags, and dogs, and loud noises, ... pretty much everything.
I Agree (1) - I Disagree (1)

I sometimes wonder about the sanity of the Human Race, especially in my hometown of Williamstown. No question that you need to study issues during planning because we have all seen what the rush into things with ï¿½technologyï¿½ sometimes holds for us: The ï¿½side effects or unforeseen consequencesï¿½ that were not initially evident (pesticides that actually tweak bugs resistance as are antibiotics that cause bacteria to transform through evolution. The good and bad nature of our inventions are readily seen now in hindsight). I understand the need for real discussion, but also see self-indulgence behind the smoke and mirrors. We all know that we must do something about greenhouse emissions, and we don't have the luxury of time on our side. When people stonewall issues such as Wind Turbine energy, often times it is for some selfish reason and not really about the cover issue. It bothers me that people waste everyone's time with this nonsense. Cats, birds, dogs, flying pigs, noise... what a smoke screen. I live in Williamstown and see these antics time after time. We only need to look at the stall tactics that have been used against efforts on Bee Hill to add housing. We need housing, yet oppose it at every turn. We needed an expanded water and sewage line for MGRH, yet a similar, if not the same, vocal group scared the hell out of townspeople on that issue - and we now have a school that has water that is unhealthy. We moan that the College and the Clark don't chip in, but when they do as they proposed on the water line - we shut them down. We used a water line to ï¿½zoneï¿½ and thus opposed growth ï¿½ ridicules! I for one am as guilty as the rest I suppose. I opposed where Herb Allen was going to put the Performing Arts Center originally, and now have to look at the '62 monstrosity that he put on Main Street (I now try to think a little further down the road). Still, my head hurts when I think of all the really stupid decisions we've made as a community - but I do think that Wind Turbine noise argument almost tops the list. We really need to get together as a community and avoid when possible the nonsensical intellectual grandstanding that we oft do in this town! It really is just grandstanding. Being a member of a democracy doesn't give one the right to be a jackass all of the time (I am speaking collectively as well as pointing a finger at myself). Williamstown has a lot of things that need to get done and we ought to get them done in short order with less time and money wasting rhetoric and self interest. To do that though, I assume it would take some effort in looking inward, growing with wisdom, and a loss of intellectual grandstanding ï¿½ which to me is not much more valuable then 5 minutes of fame on a reality show.
from: Poor Richard	on: 01-19-2012 07:37AM I Agree (2) - I Disagree (1)
Editor: OK, but what does this have to do with the health effects of wind turbines?
I Agree (0) - I Disagree (0)

Uh... there are no health effects and that argument is nonsensical and is a cover for NIMBYism. Whether it's that argument, or fear arguments for the water line expansion... call their arguments what you will... NIMBYism is the root of the issue with most of these scurrilous and inaccurate arguments. That said, people in South Williamstown seem to be expert at it. I would be happy if they just came out and said, "We don't want anything!" It's high art in Williamstown - just look at the Cell Tower nonsense. I did not think I was being obtuse and my apologies for that if I succeeded.
from: Poor Richard	on: 01-20-2012 02:48PM I Agree (2) - I Disagree (0)

Lanesborough Hopes for Continued Talks on Mall Sale

By Breanna SteeleiBerkshires Staff
06:41PM / Wednesday, November 11, 2026

LANESBOROUGH, Mass. — The Select Board is optimistic that talks for the Berkshire Mall sale will continue.

Chair Deborah Maynard and Vice Chair Juli Baker were to meet with mall owner JMJ Holdings, the Baker Hill Road District, and proposed buyer Cypress Equities on Tuesday to discuss next steps. As of Wednesday, iBerkshires had received a "we are optimistic" from Maynard on the talks. The Berkshire Eagle reported a response from a Cypress representative saying talks will continue.

Baker had updated the Select Board on Monday about the status of the sale and the efforts being undertaken by the renamed Baker Hill Economic District.

Cypress Equities pulled out of a purchase-and sale-agreement with mall owner JMJ last week for the following reasons.

Not enough water service/pressure to the property to support redevelopment without constructing costly water tanks.
The current septic system and former treatment facility is not acceptable for a project of the scale and magnitude proposed.
There is existing asbestos and bad soil from the treatment system that needs to be remediated off site.
And the current structure and tax assessment of the Baker Hill Road District.

Baker has been working with what is now being called the Baker Hill Economic District and said she and the district members are happy that Cypress has decided to leave the door open to more discussions and that they have been working hard to try and address the company's needs.

Last month, the town had asked state Sen. Paul Mark and state Rep. John Barrett III to support the state Department of Transportation taking over the Connector Road, funding for a mall connection to Pittsfield's wastewater treatment plant and a connection to the town's water main.

Baker said an amendment has been drafted to cap the district's taxes to not grow more than 2.5 percent a year. She noted that, historically, taxes have not grown by more than one percent per year, so it won't be difficult to meet that cap.

View Full Story