Australian Politics Forum
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl
General Discussion >> Federal Politics >> Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1324270974

Message started by juliar on Dec 19th, 2011 at 3:02pm

Title: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Dec 19th, 2011 at 3:02pm
Bob Brown windy farms a bit like the Labor party - a lot of noise but not much useful output.


Noisy wind farms breach environmental laws, according to submission to NSW Planning
AAP December 19, 2011 12:33PM


WIND farms are breaching NSW environmental laws with excessive noise causing sleep loss, stress and other health problems, it is claimed.


The claims are made in a submission to NSW Planning by a group opposed to plans for a wind farm in Flyers Creek, near Orange in the state's central west.

"There is a pattern of systematic non-compliance by wind farms with audible and inaudible noise going beyond agreed allowable limits," the report's author, rural GP and farmer Dr Alan Watts said.

"That has real impacts on the health of people living near turbines, such as sleep deprivation and stress."

Cabinet is meeting this week to consider guidelines that will determine the future of wind power in NSW.

About 20 applications for new farms have been put on hold while the government decides how to balance competing interests.

Lindsay Soutar, a campaigner for community group 100% Renewable, said the issue was a test of the government's credibility.

"It would be completely out of step with community opinion if Barry O'Farrell and his cabinet turn their back on wind power in NSW," she said.

"Decisions are being made right now that will affect the potential for thousands of new jobs and billions of dollars worth of investment in NSW."

But Dr Watts, a campaigner for the Flyers Creek Wind Turbine Awareness Group, said the government had a duty of care to people.

The group tested noise levels at the Capital Wind Farm near Lake George in NSW and found significant noise impacts above that predicted for the wind farm.

A report surmised the Flyers Creek wind farm would generate offensive noise, have a significant impact on residents and breach the NSW Protection of the Environment Operation Act.

"It is scandalous that it took the community to put in place and pay for the noise monitoring that has uncovered this systematic non-compliance by the wind industry," Dr Watts said.

"Wind farms should be strictly monitored.

"If they are unable to comply by producing excessive noise then they should be shut down and removed."

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sydney-nsw/noisy-wind-farms-breach-environmental-laws-according-to-submission-to-nsw-planning/story-e6freuzi-1226225712234

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Gist on Dec 19th, 2011 at 3:38pm

juliar wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 3:02pm:
Bob Brown windy farms a bit like the Labor party - a lot of noise but not much useful output.


Noisy wind farms breach environmental laws, according to submission to NSW Planning
AAP December 19, 2011 12:33PM


WIND farms are breaching NSW environmental laws with excessive noise causing sleep loss, stress and other health problems, it is claimed.


The claims are made in a submission to NSW Planning by a group opposed to plans for a wind farm in Flyers Creek, near Orange in the state's central west.

"There is a pattern of systematic non-compliance by wind farms with audible and inaudible noise going beyond agreed allowable limits," the report's author, rural GP and farmer Dr Alan Watts said.

"That has real impacts on the health of people living near turbines, such as sleep deprivation and stress."

Cabinet is meeting this week to consider guidelines that will determine the future of wind power in NSW.

About 20 applications for new farms have been put on hold while the government decides how to balance competing interests.

Lindsay Soutar, a campaigner for community group 100% Renewable, said the issue was a test of the government's credibility.

"It would be completely out of step with community opinion if Barry O'Farrell and his cabinet turn their back on wind power in NSW," she said.

"Decisions are being made right now that will affect the potential for thousands of new jobs and billions of dollars worth of investment in NSW."

But Dr Watts, a campaigner for the Flyers Creek Wind Turbine Awareness Group, said the government had a duty of care to people.

The group tested noise levels at the Capital Wind Farm near Lake George in NSW and found significant noise impacts above that predicted for the wind farm.

A report surmised the Flyers Creek wind farm would generate offensive noise, have a significant impact on residents and breach the NSW Protection of the Environment Operation Act.

"It is scandalous that it took the community to put in place and pay for the noise monitoring that has uncovered this systematic non-compliance by the wind industry," Dr Watts said.

"Wind farms should be strictly monitored.

"If they are unable to comply by producing excessive noise then they should be shut down and removed."

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sydney-nsw/noisy-wind-farms-breach-environmental-laws-according-to-submission-to-nsw-planning/story-e6freuzi-1226225712234


If they'd stopped their incessant whining when they were doing those tests the results would likely have shown no noise at all.

What kind of fool would publish information from a pressure group as gospel? What kind of fool would believe such rubbish?

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by pansi1951 on Dec 19th, 2011 at 4:14pm
<<What kind of fool would publish information from a pressure group as gospel? What kind of fool would believe such rubbish? >>
........................................................

A fool called Juliar.

The wind farms only make the people who don't have them on their farms sick.

The people who have them don't get the ill effects for some strange reason.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by longweekend58 on Dec 19th, 2011 at 4:14pm

Gist wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 3:38pm:

juliar wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 3:02pm:
Bob Brown windy farms a bit like the Labor party - a lot of noise but not much useful output.


Noisy wind farms breach environmental laws, according to submission to NSW Planning
AAP December 19, 2011 12:33PM


WIND farms are breaching NSW environmental laws with excessive noise causing sleep loss, stress and other health problems, it is claimed.


The claims are made in a submission to NSW Planning by a group opposed to plans for a wind farm in Flyers Creek, near Orange in the state's central west.

"There is a pattern of systematic non-compliance by wind farms with audible and inaudible noise going beyond agreed allowable limits," the report's author, rural GP and farmer Dr Alan Watts said.

"That has real impacts on the health of people living near turbines, such as sleep deprivation and stress."

Cabinet is meeting this week to consider guidelines that will determine the future of wind power in NSW.

About 20 applications for new farms have been put on hold while the government decides how to balance competing interests.

Lindsay Soutar, a campaigner for community group 100% Renewable, said the issue was a test of the government's credibility.

"It would be completely out of step with community opinion if Barry O'Farrell and his cabinet turn their back on wind power in NSW," she said.

"Decisions are being made right now that will affect the potential for thousands of new jobs and billions of dollars worth of investment in NSW."

But Dr Watts, a campaigner for the Flyers Creek Wind Turbine Awareness Group, said the government had a duty of care to people.

The group tested noise levels at the Capital Wind Farm near Lake George in NSW and found significant noise impacts above that predicted for the wind farm.

A report surmised the Flyers Creek wind farm would generate offensive noise, have a significant impact on residents and breach the NSW Protection of the Environment Operation Act.

"It is scandalous that it took the community to put in place and pay for the noise monitoring that has uncovered this systematic non-compliance by the wind industry," Dr Watts said.

"Wind farms should be strictly monitored.

"If they are unable to comply by producing excessive noise then they should be shut down and removed."

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sydney-nsw/noisy-wind-farms-breach-environmental-laws-according-to-submission-to-nsw-planning/story-e6freuzi-1226225712234


If they'd stopped their incessant whining when they were doing those tests the results would likely have shown no noise at all.

What kind of fool would publish information from a pressure group as gospel? What kind of fool would believe such rubbish?


and what kind of fool automatically dismisses it just because it comes from a lobby group?

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Dec 19th, 2011 at 4:32pm

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 4:14pm:
   what kind of fool automatically dismisses it just because it comes from a lobby group?






It depends on who is financing them


Example ...


buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 16th, 2011 at 4:19pm:
We have small contingent of 'ELSIE DEININGERS' here in Victoria
Under the name - LANDSCAPE GUARDIANS - they travel Victoria and South Australia disrupting public meetings, information seminars, AGM's and first 'sod turnings'


That's a few of them in the last photo at the Hepburn Wind site
This is a small, close-knit community - so it's a good thing there were no locals among them


In their spare time they run an ongoing letter writing campaign to anyone that will publish them - much like 'our Elsie'

Also, like Elsie, they have NO qualifications or evidence to back their string of claims


Australian Landscape Guardians was started by - and bankrolled by Peter Mitchell, a founding chairman of the Moonie Oil Company and now chairman of Lowell Pty Ltd, which runs an investment fund focused on oil, gas and minerals.

It's ALWAYS gets interesting when you follow the paper trail




Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Dec 19th, 2011 at 4:36pm
It was not so long ago that all and sundry were trumpeting the advantages of CSG as the answer to a green frog's dream.

It is a different story now as the rather nasty truth starts to emerge as real actual experience is gained from actual CSG installations.

The windy farm situation is starting to resemble the CSG experience as actual experience is gained from real operating windy farms.

In both cases in the early days the deniers of any possible problem were easy to find. Now the reality is that the deniers numbers are starting to dwindle.

Perhaps if the sweet bodies, who find that they suffer from distressing nervous tension when they are exposed to cold hard truth, were to lie on their stomachs on the floor and hit the floor with both of their fists they would feel much better.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Gist on Dec 19th, 2011 at 4:45pm

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 4:14pm:
and what kind of fool automatically dismisses it just because it comes from a lobby group?


The kind of fool who would immediately assume that a lobby group has a barrow to push. The kind of fool who wouldn't believe the claims of the tobacco companies, for instance. The kind of fool who would want unbiased information before bleating loudly. In other words, the kind of fool who has a modicum of common sense and a healthy dose of scepticism when it comes to lobby groups.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Dec 19th, 2011 at 4:51pm
[quote author=6B746D686073010 link=1324270974/5#5 date=1324276614]

It is a different story now as the rather nasty truth starts to emerge as real actual experience is gained from actual CSG installations.

The windy farm situation is starting to resemble the CSG experience as actual experience is gained from real operating windy farms.

In both cases in the early days the deniers of any possible problem were easy to find. Now the reality is that the deniers numbers are starting to dwindle.

quote]








Wind power provided 18.9% of electricity production and 24.1% of generation capacity in Denmark in 2008

Denmark was a pioneer in developing commercial wind power during the 1970s, and today almost half of the wind turbines around the world are produced by Danish manufacturers such as Vestas and Siemens Wind Power along with many component suppliers





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_Denmark












Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Dec 19th, 2011 at 4:54pm
I hate to do this but how about the claims from the asbestos lobby - those of whom are still alive ?

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Gist on Dec 19th, 2011 at 5:03pm

juliar wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 4:54pm:
I hate to do this but how about the claims from the asbestos lobby - those of whom are still alive ?


There is plenty of unbiased evidence supporting the harmful effects of asbestos. Where is the equivalent for windfarm noise?

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Dec 19th, 2011 at 5:05pm

juliar wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 4:54pm:
I hate to do this but how about the claims from the asbestos lobby - those of whom are still alive ?




Tony Abbott is the authority on asbestos victims ...



Health Minister Tony Abbott has refused to back away from his criticism of terminally-ill asbestos campaigner Bernie Banton's petition as a "stunt", despite apologising to him this morning.

Mr Banton, the face of asbestos-disease sufferers, said yesterday he was "infuriated'' when the Health Minister was not in his Sydney office to accept a petition pushing for a mesothelioma drug to be placed on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS).

Mr Abbott, visiting a Melbourne medical clinic today with Prime Minister John Howard and Treasurer Peter Costello, refused to back away from his criticism of Mr Banton.

He told reporters in Blackburn that both he and Mr Banton "were both a bit hot under the collar yesterday and both regretted it".

Earlier, he told SkyNews: "He (Banton) is a sick man and obviously he has the moral high ground."

Mr Abbott had accused Mr Banton of not being "pure of heart" when he spoke of his anger at the Health Minister's no-show.

Yesterday, Mr Abbott was quick to dismiss the petition. "It was a stunt," he had told the Nine Network.

"Let's be upfront about this. I know Bernie is very sick, but just because a person is sick doesn't necessarily mean that he is pure of heart in all things."


http://www.theage.com.au/news/federalelection2007news/abbott-sorry-for-banton-slur/2007/10/31/1193618926085.html




( ... and I wasn't aware that asbestos inhaled - and harnessing the power of wind - had all that much in common ?)





Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by pansi1951 on Dec 19th, 2011 at 5:06pm

juliar wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 4:54pm:
I hate to do this but how about the claims from the asbestos lobby - those of whom are still alive ?



They had some substance behind them to back their claims.

Was Tony Abbott a CSR (asbestos) supporter? You'd think so by the way he treated Bernie Banton.

There's not much substance to wind, except some wind bags.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by gizmo_2655 on Dec 19th, 2011 at 5:24pm

Gist wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 3:38pm:

juliar wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 3:02pm:
Bob Brown windy farms a bit like the Labor party - a lot of noise but not much useful output.


Noisy wind farms breach environmental laws, according to submission to NSW Planning
AAP December 19, 2011 12:33PM


WIND farms are breaching NSW environmental laws with excessive noise causing sleep loss, stress and other health problems, it is claimed.


The claims are made in a submission to NSW Planning by a group opposed to plans for a wind farm in Flyers Creek, near Orange in the state's central west.

"There is a pattern of systematic non-compliance by wind farms with audible and inaudible noise going beyond agreed allowable limits," the report's author, rural GP and farmer Dr Alan Watts said.

"That has real impacts on the health of people living near turbines, such as sleep deprivation and stress."

Cabinet is meeting this week to consider guidelines that will determine the future of wind power in NSW.

About 20 applications for new farms have been put on hold while the government decides how to balance competing interests.

Lindsay Soutar, a campaigner for community group 100% Renewable, said the issue was a test of the government's credibility.

"It would be completely out of step with community opinion if Barry O'Farrell and his cabinet turn their back on wind power in NSW," she said.

"Decisions are being made right now that will affect the potential for thousands of new jobs and billions of dollars worth of investment in NSW."

But Dr Watts, a campaigner for the Flyers Creek Wind Turbine Awareness Group, said the government had a duty of care to people.

The group tested noise levels at the Capital Wind Farm near Lake George in NSW and found significant noise impacts above that predicted for the wind farm.

A report surmised the Flyers Creek wind farm would generate offensive noise, have a significant impact on residents and breach the NSW Protection of the Environment Operation Act.

"It is scandalous that it took the community to put in place and pay for the noise monitoring that has uncovered this systematic non-compliance by the wind industry," Dr Watts said.

"Wind farms should be strictly monitored.

"If they are unable to comply by producing excessive noise then they should be shut down and removed."

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sydney-nsw/noisy-wind-farms-breach-environmental-laws-according-to-submission-to-nsw-planning/story-e6freuzi-1226225712234


If they'd stopped their incessant whining when they were doing those tests the results would likely have shown no noise at all.

What kind of fool would publish information from a pressure group as gospel? What kind of fool would believe such rubbish?


I think the easy answer is use the wind turbines that don't make noise...someone posted about them a few weeks back...instead of 3 blades, it has a mesh system and turns to face the wind direction... (could be a CSIRO design???)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Dec 19th, 2011 at 5:28pm
I found an information page for you, juliar

Using the wind to create electricity has been around for a long time - you've probably seen windmills on farms. When the wind turns the blades of a windmill, it spins a turbine inside a small generator to produce electricity, just like a big coal power plant.

A windmill on a farm can make only a small amount of electricity - enough to power a few farm machines. To make enough electricity to serve lots of people, power companies build "wind farms" with dozens of huge wind turbines.

Wind farms are built in flat, open areas where the wind blows at least 14 miles per hour. Iowa currently has more than 600 wind turbines, producing enough electricity to power 140,000 homes. Minnesota and Wisconsin are also home to wind farms - and the number is growing every day.

Some schools in the Midwest have their own wind farms! In Spirit Lake, Iowa, the school playground is right underneath two wind turbines.


http://www.alliantenergykids.com/EnergyandTheEnvironment/RenewableEnergy/022397



( ... I HOPE it's not TOO "high tech. ?)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by longweekend58 on Dec 19th, 2011 at 7:26pm

buzzanddidj wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 5:28pm:
I found an information page for you, juliar

Using the wind to create electricity has been around for a long time - you've probably seen windmills on farms. When the wind turns the blades of a windmill, it spins a turbine inside a small generator to produce electricity, just like a big coal power plant.

A windmill on a farm can make only a small amount of electricity - enough to power a few farm machines. To make enough electricity to serve lots of people, power companies build "wind farms" with dozens of huge wind turbines.

Wind farms are built in flat, open areas where the wind blows at least 14 miles per hour. Iowa currently has more than 600 wind turbines, producing enough electricity to power 140,000 homes. Minnesota and Wisconsin are also home to wind farms - and the number is growing every day.

Some schools in the Midwest have their own wind farms! In Spirit Lake, Iowa, the school playground is right underneath two wind turbines.


http://www.alliantenergykids.com/EnergyandTheEnvironment/RenewableEnergy/022397

a correction tho. the windmills on farms are predominantly water pumps from underground acquifers. and look at the source of your info... you really think you are going to get a unbiased view on wind farms from a wind farm company???


( ... I HOPE it's not TOO "high tech. ?)


Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Dec 19th, 2011 at 7:31pm

juliar wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 4:36pm:
It was not so long ago that all and sundry were trumpeting the advantages of CSG as the answer to a green frog's dream.

It is a different story now as the rather nasty truth starts to emerge as real actual experience is gained from actual CSG installations.

The windy farm situation is starting to resemble the CSG experience as actual experience is gained from real operating windy farms.

In both cases in the early days the deniers of any possible problem were easy to find. Now the reality is that the deniers numbers are starting to dwindle.

Perhaps if the sweet bodies, who find that they suffer from distressing nervous tension when they are exposed to cold hard truth, were to lie on their stomachs on the floor and hit the floor with both of their fists they would feel much better.



Who were these 'all and sundry'?
Were they perhaps Vested Interests??
:)


Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Dec 19th, 2011 at 8:37pm
Governments in New South Wales and Victoria are showing their contempt for wind power. It’s flying in the face of all the big investment trends and seriously threatens a burgeoning industry.

New South Wales Premier Barry O’Farrell has expressed his disdain for wind energy saying he hopes the State does not give approval for any more wind farms. He says 19 wind farm applications were received before the election and none since. "I'm told no new applications have been lodged. ( ...there are actually 19 being delayed)
We haven't approved any applications and if I had my way we wouldn't," O'Farrell said.

So much for a renewable energy policy in Australia’s most populated state.

In Victoria, Premier Ted Baillieu has announced the strictest planning laws for wind farms in Australia that will give households power to veto wind turbines within two kilometres of their homes, ban turbines in the Macedon and McHarg ranges, in the Yarra Valley, on the Mornington and Bellarine peninsulas, and within five kilometres of the Great Ocean Road and the Bass Coast and prohibit them within five kilometres of 21 Victorian regional centres. This will cost Victoria billions of dollars and thousands of jobs. ( ... this investment dollar has now been embraced by the South Australian Government - negotiated by former Premier Rann)

More to the point, it’s easier now to build a coal mine in Victoria than it is to set up a wind farm.

The Hepburn Community Wind Farm, which two months ago won an annual Premier's Sustainability Award, would not have been built under Baillieu's more stringent regulations. The farm, operating at Leonard's Hill since June, is expected to generate more than enough power for the town's 2000 homes.

Wind power does have some problems. It’s highly variable in terms of supply, and output can vary by as much as 70 per cent. There are also issues of cost, finding the right location and commercial viability. But when combined with solar, geothermal and other renewable energies, it’s a powerful part of the mix. Wind energy is the future and governments who restrict it are out of touch with the times and the community.


http://www.gmagazine.com.au/blog/2724/wind-politics





Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Dec 19th, 2011 at 8:39pm

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 10th, 2011 at 3:56pm:

Verge wrote on Feb 10th, 2011 at 3:46pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 10th, 2011 at 12:12pm:
I have just received an email from Hepburn Wind ...



Quote:
Turbines almost here...

The cargo ship 'SE Panthea' left Singapore on Australia Day and is expected to dock in Albany today.

The ship will arrive in Melbourne in approximately two weeks, where the turbines will clear customs and undergo a series of checks before being transported up to Leonards Hill.

We poured the first foundation last Thursday, and the second is being poured as this newsletter is being sent. We're delighted that almost all the concrete came from the local batching plant in Daylesford - their busiest day ever.


http://www.hepburnwind.com.au/




SUCK IT UP, Baillieu !

You won't be shutting THIS project down





Special thanks to former Planning Minister, Justin Madden, who fast tracked the approvals for all of Victoria's outstanding renewable energy projects before the incoming government could cancel them



Good luck, South Australia, in taking on any new projects


Good for you that you have got your wind turbines, but Ballieu made no promises to shut down existing projects that already had approval.

So its a non event.




But he WILL be making things VERY difficult for NEW applications by renewable energy companies

They were very easily wooed by Premier Rann - as a result of new policy
South Australia is now their focus

Well, I guess we "stole" their Grand Prix


Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Dec 19th, 2011 at 9:35pm
... and ALL that investment dollar, NSW's and Victoria's for the taking ?




An Indian company is planning to develop one of the world's biggest wind farms on Yorke Peninsula in South Australia.

Suzlon Energy Australia says the $1.3 billion wind farm is to be built 20 kilometres south-west of Ardrossan.

It says up to 180 turbines will generate 600 megawatts of energy and deliver power to 225,000 homes in Adelaide via an undersea cable.

The project is expected to create 500 construction jobs and 50 ongoing jobs and be completed by the end of 2015.

Suzlon Energy Australia commercial director Chris Judd said the company was approached by local land owners last year.

"It's basically been a land owner-developed project and this has been a dream of theirs for over seven years now so the beauty of this project is that it does come with some seven years of homework and data etcetera behind it to help justify its economics," he said.


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-31/wind-farm-suzlon-energy/2863400





Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Verge on Dec 20th, 2011 at 8:54am
I know businesses that operate in residential areas are not allowed to produce noice 5 decibles above background noise at the residential premises.

So, as long as these wind farms arent being built too close to residential properties that exceed this, what is the problem?

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Dec 20th, 2011 at 9:50am
Windy farm noise as irritating as Miss Gillard's vile vocals - but you can't turn the windy whirlers off.

Wind turbine syndrome – genuine affliction or just a load of noise?


Wind turbines are often billed as one of the world’s best solutions to climate change. And why not? They are a mature and effective means of generating large amounts of electricity with next to zero carbon emissions. In fact, they are so effective that many more wind farms are planned to be installed…

Author  Senior Lecturer, School of Mechanical Engineering at University of Adelaide
Dr Con Doolan receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

We need quieter wind farms that don’t annoy the neighbours. AAP

Wind turbines are often billed as one of the world’s best solutions to climate change.

And why not?

They are a mature and effective means of generating large amounts of electricity with next to zero carbon emissions. In fact, they are so effective that many more wind farms are planned to be installed over the next 10-30 years.

But the wind energy story is not all rosy. As more wind farms have been installed, there have been an increasing number of complaints from those who live nearby.

Sleeplessness, headaches and high blood pressure are just a few of the symptoms, collectively known as “Wind Turbine Syndrome”, reported by residents who live within a few kilometres of the turbines.

Given the level of financial and political investment in wind energy, “Wind Turbine Syndrome” is a controversial and emotional issue.

It is fiercely denied by wind farm operators and wind energy industry groups. Those who claim their health has been compromised by wind turbines are equally passionate.

Regardless of this intense debate, we know that wind turbines do produce noise and this is limiting our ability to produce green energy. The challenge is to be clever enough to do something about it.

So what causes wind turbine noise?

Most wind turbine noise is generated via aerodynamic means and the dominant form of noise is what is technically known as “airfoil self noise” or the noise created by the rotor blades as they slice through the air.

Most of this type of noise is generated by a quirk of nature that makes the turbulent flow in the region close to the trailing edge (known as the boundary layer) radiate sound much more efficiently, thus making it loud enough to be heard considerable distances from the turbine.

By itself, airfoil noise is “broadband” or contains many frequencies and sounds similar to a hiss. But this type of noise is also very directional, so as the blade rotates, a listener on the ground will hear this hiss-like noise increase and decrease with time.

This is known as blade swish and is one of the reasons why wind turbine noise has been found to be so annoying.

Wind turbines can be made quieter but in order to do so we need to first understand the complicated physics behind the noise.

We need to study turbine aerodynamics and acoustics in more detail so we can create new computer models of wind turbine noise, and how it propagates in the atmosphere.

Such models can then be used to design new quiet wind turbine blades and possibly, whole wind farms.

It will allow engineers and scientists to model the noise created by wind farms and study how they interact, thus providing more detailed planning and operational guidelines than are presently used.

Currently, there are different planning guidelines in each state, with some governments requiring wind farms to be placed more two kilometres away from the nearest human residence.

In many cases, this makes a wind farm economically unviable, due to a lack of electrical transmission infrastructure in remote regions.

If we want to use wind power to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, we need to understand and control the noise from wind turbines better.

Relying on existing technology appears to be creating expensive health and litigation problems that will only get worse as the number of wind farms increase.

There is an incredible opportunity to invest in research and development in this area now, solve these important problems and create a new industry that provides quiet wind power solutions for the 21st century.

http://theconversation.edu.au/wind-turbine-syndrome-genuine-affliction-or-just-a-load-of-noise-1202

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Dec 20th, 2011 at 9:56am
I've BEEN there




From the Daylesford/Ballan Road ( ... HALF the distance from the nearest complaintent) any "noise" is inaudible

At 500 metres - when pointed out to me - I could "make it out"






Standing DIRECTLY UNDER the turbine, I would describe it as the sound of a truck or bus passing by ( ... minus the engine, or tyre to road sound) once every two seconds




Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Dec 20th, 2011 at 9:59am
Victoria officially recognizes Bob Brown windy farms sickness

Regulating wind farms out of Victoria

Wind farms, like much new technology, have generated both strong community support and vocal opposition. Victoria has recently amended its planning laws and regulations to restrict locations for wind farms. The amendments look set to entrench fossil fuel generation in the state, and make it harder for…


Authors
Lee Godden Director of the Centre for Resources, Energy and Environmental Law at University of Melbourne
Anne Kallies  PhD Scholar at University of Melbourne

Lee Gooden receives funding from the Australian Research Council Discovery Project DP0987850. She is affiliated with The Centre for Resources Energy and Environmental Law, Melbourne Law School.

Anne Kallies does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations.

The University of Melbourne is a Founding Partner of The Conversation.

Victorian planning amendments treat wind farms as a menace on the horizon.

Wind farms, like much new technology, have generated both strong community support and vocal opposition. Victoria has recently amended its planning laws and regulations to restrict locations for wind farms.

The amendments look set to entrench fossil fuel generation in the state, and make it harder for Victoria to move towards renewable energy.

Wind power: vital renewable, or health risk?

Wind power is a significant component of any effective response to climate change. Building more wind farms will help facilitate the structural change we’ll need to become a low-carbon economy.

Despite the global importance of wind farm development in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, in Victoria there has been ongoing debate about the adverse effects of wind farms.

Local communities have raised concerns about health and amenity impacts. A recent Federal Senate Inquiry recommended applying scientific measurements for sound and for shadow flicker to alleviate problems for wind farm neighbours. They said these may be preferable to prescribed distance setbacks as setbacks are arbitrary and may be too great or too small.

Moreover the Senate Committee found that there is no conclusive evidence that wind turbines have adverse effects on health.

Nonetheless, balancing the range of competing interests is complex, with many disputes around wind farms playing out in the legal system, including within major planning law frameworks.

How the laws manage competing interests

Planning decisions involve balancing different interests in, and uses of, land. The planning law system helps decision-makers undertake this balancing act by providing guidance, including long-term strategies.

Strategic planning lets development occur across the state in a coherent fashion. It enables development to conform with ideas of what we want our state to look like, how much electricity we want generated from renewable energy sources, where urban growth is to occur, where highways are to be built and so on.

In Victoria, the planning system is given effect under the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Under this Act, developers seeking to build wind farms must get a planning permit before proceeding with construction.
So what’s changed?

The first amendments by the Baillieu government in March 2011 returned the planning authority for all wind farm permits to the local government authorities. Formerly, wind farms with an installation size of more than 30MW were referred to the Minister for Planning for determination.

Wind farm proponents also had to identify all dwellings within 2km of the proposed installation.

The amendments introduced the more stringent 2010 New Zealand Standard for Wind Farm Noise. This set a noise limit of 40 decibel for dwellings in the vicinity of the proposed turbine.

Significantly, decision making on wind farm developments now must have regard to the “economic and environmental benefits to the broader community of renewable energy while also considering the need to minimise the effects of a proposal on the local community and environment”.

The second set of recent amendments extends considerably the areas to be excluded from wind farm development in Victoria. In effect, it creates wind farm “no go zones”.

“Wind energy facilities” are to be excluded from such areas due to the landscape and environmental values pertaining in those regions.

Creating no-go zones for wind

Previously, wind farms were excluded from national and state parks, coastal parks and Ramsar wetlands (comprising 43% of the Victorian coastline and 32 % of all the land). But now extensive new zones of exclusion are to operate.

Excluded zones now include the Yarra Valley and Dandenong Ranges, Mt Macdedon and Mc Harg Ranges. These include some of the best non-coastal wind resources in Victoria.

Also excluded are the Bellarine and Mornington Peninsulas, and all land within 5km of high water mark on the Great Ocean Road and the Bass Coast.

At a localised level, proposed wind farm developments now need to obtain the written consent of any owner of a dwelling within 2km of any turbine.

The amendments do not affect existing wind farms per se, although the new planning framework applies to any amendments necessary for already granted permits as of 15 March 2012.

Putting local above global concerns

At a strategic planning level, the amendments represent a significant change in direction. They give greater capacity to localised decision-making based on community concerns about wind farms, as opposed to addressing more globally-focused issues about facilitating renewable energy facilitation.

While the Baillieu government has stressed that such amendments provide “certainty”, the amendments effectively create a presumption against wind farm development over a large part of Victoria. There will be negative consequences for investments in wind farm facilities.

These changes add to existing barriers facing renewable energy promotion. There is a national target of 20% renewable energy generation by 2020, and a similar Victorian target. But there are barriers within renewable energy transmission infrastructure planning that militate against achieving these goals.

Electricity market rules for transmission planning pose particular problems for wind farms seeking connection to the grid. Moreover, the existing planning laws for energy networks and infrastructure development are oriented to a grid developed around major fossil fuel generation.

Treating wind as more dangerous than coal

In the past in Victoria, substantial rezoning has accommodated the expansion of fossil fuel power generation (see, for example, Australian Conservation Foundation v Latrobe CC (2004) 140 LGERA 100).

Moreover, in terms of minimum “setback” requirements it is notable that a dual gas/coal plant approved by the Victorian EPA earlier this year would be within 2km of residential areas.

The recent amendments, by creating many “no go zones” for wind farm development in Victoria will re-entrench existing patterns for energy transmission and generation and impact Victoria’s commitment to cutting GHG emissions.

http://theconversation.edu.au/regulating-wind-farms-out-of-victoria-3125

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Dec 20th, 2011 at 10:10am
You can have your Bob Brown windy farm just so long as it is not near me !


NSW ministers incompetent on wind farms  Updated: 13:56, Monday December 19, 2011

Federal Liberal MP Alby Schultz says incompetent NSW government ministers who ignored his concerns about noisy wind farms have led him to campaign against his own party.

NSW cabinet is meeting this week to consider guidelines that will determine the future of wind power in the state.

About 20 applications for new farms have been put on hold while the government decides how to balance competing interests.


Mr Schultz, member for Hume in southern NSW, says he's gone against his own party because 'somebody has got to stand up for their constituents'.

'My constituents came to me earlier in the piece because of the concerns that they had,' Mr Schultz told reporters in Sydney on Monday.

'The more that I looked at this industry the more I was convinced that there was a serious issue.

'For eight months now I've tried to convince the premier and his ministers, some of whom are totally incompetent, that they should be looking at this issue.'

A group opposed to plans for a wind farm in Flyers Creek, near Orange in the state's central west, says the farms will be breaching the NSW government's environmental legislation.

In a submission presented to NSW Planning on Monday, the group said the farms will cause excessive noise causing sleep loss, stress and other health problems.

The Shooters and Fishers Party agree.

Shooters Party MP Robert Borsak says the government should halt the entire process.

'We'd like the state government to at least have a detailed and proper inquiry into these planning laws,' he told reporters in Sydney.

'The Shooters and Fishers Party is against wind farms. We just don't think they're appropriate in our agricultural setting.'

Asked if the party would use its balance of power in the upper house to campaign against wind farms, Mr Borsak said: 'If we get a chance, we will.'


But opposition environment spokesman Luke Foley wants the O'Farrell government to roll out the welcome mat for the wind industry.

'There's $3 billion of investment opportunity for this state, if we're open for business,' he told reporters in Sydney.

'We know that large scale wind is the cheapest possible form of renewable energy.

'There's no credible health research that says there is any risk to people's health from wind turbines near them.'

http://www.skynews.com.au/politics/article.aspx?id=698277&vId=

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Dec 20th, 2011 at 10:32am

buzzanddidj wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 9:56am:
I've BEEN there




From the Daylesford/Ballan Road ( ... HALF the distance from the nearest complaintent) any "noise" is inaudible

At 500 metres - when pointed out to me - I could "make it out"






Standing DIRECTLY UNDER the turbine, I would describe it as the sound of a truck or bus passing by ( ... minus the engine, or tyre to road sound) once every two seconds








Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Dec 20th, 2011 at 10:44am
You are not bad at spamming someone else's propaganda, juli/mellie.
When was the last time you were anywhere near a wind turbine?

I'm sure if you tried hard enough you could find one and starting from approx 1km away walk in with a little camera recording vision and sound as you go.

I'm sure that would be much more informative than just repeating the rubbish you do.

;)


Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Dec 20th, 2011 at 11:06am

Lobo wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 10:44am:
You are not bad at spamming someone else's propaganda, juli/mellie.
When was the last time you were anywhere near a wind turbine?

I'm sure if you tried hard enough you could find one and starting from approx 1km away walk in with a little camera recording vision and sound as you go.

I'm sure that would be much more informative than just repeating the rubbish you do.

;)






I HAVE access to the Hepburn Wind - Sailors Falls site
I have NO hesitation in extending an INSPECTION/INVITE to ANY climate change denier or anti-renewable advocate

 





Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Dec 20th, 2011 at 11:09am
You are really wasting your breath as the LAW now recognizes that Bob Brown Windy Farms do cause an irritating noise and as such must be kept away from existing residences. 

You have experience with apparently only one windy farm and as you are clearly biased you choose to hear nothing - it is a bit like the person playing a stereo too loud which annoys all the neighbors.

To express a viable opinion you would need to go and interview other affected people affected by other windy farms which may prove to be a lot noisier than yours. The audibility depends on the actual terrain, direction and the brand and size of the windy farm units. Also the individual's susceptibility comes into it - ie some people are susceptible to migraine headaches when exposed to certain conditions while others are unaffected.

Bear in mind that at night the whoosh whoosh whoosh noise of the windy farms can be far more annoying than during the day due to the ambient noise. At night in the country it is usually very quite except for the occasional bark of a fox or whoop whoop of a passing night bird and this is when people are trying to sleep. In summer when the nights are hot it is harder to fall asleep and this the time when the constant whoosh whoosh whoosh noise of the windy farms would become particularly annoying. The sensitivity of a person to windy farm noise will also depend on the acuity of the person's hearing - so someone who has spent years working with noisy machinery or someone who has had long term exposure to very loud music will be partially deaf and probably won't hear a thing.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Dec 20th, 2011 at 11:24am

Quote:
    You are really wasting your breath as the LAW now recognizes that Bob Brown Windy Farms do cause an irritating noise and as such must be kept away from existing residences.



http://onlineslangdictionary.com/meaning-of/drongo







Go on, go "RAD"
Give it a left "click"



http://onlineslangdictionary.com/meaning-of/drongo





Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Gist on Dec 20th, 2011 at 11:25am

juliar wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 11:09am:
You are really wasting your breath as the LAW now recognizes that Bob Brown Windy Farms do cause an irritating noise and as such must be kept away from existing residences. 

You have experience with apparently only one windy farm and as you are clearly biased you choose to hear nothing - it is a bit like the person playing a stereo too loud which annoys all the neighbors.

To express a viable opinion you would need to go and interview other affected people affected by other windy farms which may prove to be a lot noisier than yours. The audibility depends on the actual terrain, direction and the brand and size of the windy farm units. Also the individual's susceptibility comes into it - ie some people are susceptible to migraine headaches when exposed to certain conditions while others are unaffected.


All sorts of governments make all sorts of stupid legislation. All you've told us is that the Victorian government has added yet another one. Hardly surprising from a stupid government.

Where are the facts about wind farm noise? You know? Measurements. Statistics. Not that mindless drivel that you peddle. Facts. You've had 24 hours and all you've managed to do is continue your parrot squawking.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Dec 20th, 2011 at 11:32am

juliar wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 11:09am:
You are really wasting your breath as the LAW now recognizes that Bob Brown Windy Farms do cause an irritating noise and as such must be kept away from existing residences. 
iAm I the FIRST person to declare you "totally insane" ?i

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by philperth2010 on Dec 20th, 2011 at 11:46am
The harm to people's health from wind turbines should not be dismissed altogether.....Some people might very well suffer some ill effects from living to close to some turbines however the reasearch is not conclusive.....What we need is a reasoned debate and practicle solutions to address people's concerns and determine the extent of the problem.....No one is in a position to claim anything for certain and more research is required before anyone makes claims that cannot be supported by facts!!!

::)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Dec 20th, 2011 at 11:53am
It won't be long and all states will have laws requiring that noisy Bob Brown Windy Farms will need to be sited some distance from any residence that requests a separation.


Climate sceptics enter wind farm debate
   BY BEN CUBBY AND JOSEPHINE TOVEY  20 Dec, 2011 04:00 AM
The anti-wind farm movement that is gaining influence within the NSW parliament is being ''aided and abetted'' by climate sceptic groups and some mining industry figures.

The cabinet debated new wind farm guidelines yesterday, with division over whether NSW should follow Victoria and order wind turbines be set further back from houses.

The Shooters and Fishers Party, which shares the balance of power in the NSW upper house with the Christian Democrats, announced yesterday that it wanted a moratorium on new wind farms in the state.

Industry sources said a campaign was being waged against wind energy in NSW, which was expected to see up to $10 billion in investment this decade as it accelerates to meet the national 20 per cent renewable energy target.

The opponents of wind farms include a coalition of local groups under the banner ''landscape guardians'', and the Australian Environment Foundation.

The foundation's executive director, Max Rheese, said, ''Our role is, if you like, aiding and abetting what the local communities are doing and helping them voice their disapproval over wind farms.''

While local groups say they believe that the noise and vibration produced by wind farms are affecting human health, the Australian Environment Foundation does not think humans have a role in causing climate change and therefore that wind farms are an expensive extravagance.

It hosted British climate sceptic Lord Monckton when he visited last year and says it ''questions the whole science behind anthropogenic global warming''.

Mr Rheese said the foundation had paid for anti-wind signs at public meetings, and lobbied the Shooters and Fishers Party, along with the National and Liberal parties in NSW.

''The AEF is keen to help, because a lot of communities are obviously bewildered when a wind farm proposal arrives out of nowhere,'' he said.

The Shooters and Fishers Party MP, Robert Borsak, said yesterday that it would wait for the Government's cabinet decision, but would use its critical position in the upper house to to oppose any pro-wind farm legislation that comes to parliament. The party had discussed wind farms with the Australian Environment Foundation but had come up with its own policy calling for a moratorium and public inquiry into wind turbines, Mr Borsak said.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/national/national/general/climate-sceptics-enter-wind-farm-debate/2398541.aspx?src=rss

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Gist on Dec 20th, 2011 at 11:58am
More mindless parroting.

What kind of bird seed do you prefer liar? Never know, I may be in a generous mood at christmas and send you some.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Dec 20th, 2011 at 11:58am

buzzanddidj wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 4:32pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 4:14pm:
   what kind of fool automatically dismisses it just because it comes from a lobby group?






It depends on who is financing them


Example ...


buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 16th, 2011 at 4:19pm:
We have small contingent of 'ELSIE DEININGERS' here in Victoria
Under the name - LANDSCAPE GUARDIANS - they travel Victoria and South Australia disrupting public meetings, information seminars, AGM's and first 'sod turnings'


That's a few of them in the last photo at the Hepburn Wind site
This is a small, close-knit community - so it's a good thing there were no locals among them


In their spare time they run an ongoing letter writing campaign to anyone that will publish them - much like 'our Elsie'

Also, like Elsie, they have NO qualifications or evidence to back their string of claims


Australian Landscape Guardians was started by - and bankrolled by Peter Mitchell, a founding chairman of the Moonie Oil Company and now chairman of Lowell Pty Ltd, which runs an investment fund focused on oil, gas and minerals.

It's ALWAYS gets interesting when you follow the paper trail





No response ?
Lord MUCK ?
 


( ... We assume you've lost your MODERATOR powers ?
Along with your CENSORSHIP powers ?)









Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Dec 20th, 2011 at 12:00pm
Wind farm opponents target insurance industry   12 December 2011


The insurance industry can expect claims relating to health problems from wind turbines, a wind farm lobby group is warning.

The Waubra Foundation says a new wave of claims can be expected from people who live near wind farms and believe they have suffered ill health as a result.


It says health problems include sleep deprivation, hypertension, heart attacks, depression and suicidal thoughts, and a worsening of existing health problems such as angina, diabetes, migraines and tinnitus.

Federal Government health adviser the National Health and Medical Research Council reviewed scientific literature on wind farms in 2009 and found no evidence to positively link adverse health effects with wind turbines.

It looked at research on the health effects of noise, very low frequency sounds and electromagnetic interference from the turbines.

This year it held a scientific forum on wind farms and decided on a further review of the literature. The council is expected to make a public statement on wind turbines in the first half of next year following that research.

The Waubra Foundation itself has been attacked as solely being against wind farms. The foundation’s medical director, retired country GP Sarah Laurie, told insuranceNEWS.com.au the group wants more research done into whether the technology causes harm.

“The insurance industry should be aware that this is something that is emerging,” she said.

http://www.insurancenews.com.au/local/wind-farm-opponents-target-insurance-industry?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+insurancenews%2Fallstories+%28All+Stories+and+Events%29

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Dec 20th, 2011 at 12:05pm
Disaster !!  It is the middle of summer and a Bob Brown windy farm is about to start a bush fire and destroy a whole community.



Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Dec 20th, 2011 at 12:20pm
Suck it up your GREAT BIG SLOPPY , julier

You CAN'T win




http://100percent.org.au/content/dont-let-ofarrell-and-baillieu-destroy-wind-and-solar





There's TOO many good people with us

[size=24][/size]i






Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Dec 20th, 2011 at 1:15pm
This is the horrible noise that people are complaining about from the good old Bob Brown windy farms.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRWHr2ek_BQ&feature=endscreen&NR=1

It would certainly be most unpleasant to have to listen to this abrasive whoosh whoosh whoosh sound all the time. It would be nearly as bad as having to listen to Miss Gillard's vile ear breaking vocals for 1 minute. It is easy to understand how people living near this highly irritating noise would eventually suffer from health problems.

The sensible approach being taken by the Victorian Govt is to site these monstrosities a certain distance away from residences. This will allow residents and windy farms to live together peacefully. The other approach is to site the windy farms off shore and this completely removes the noise problem but off shore is more expensive. At least there is no bush fire problem if one of the turbine catches fire. There is the other problem that occurs when a rotor collapses and scatters debris over a considerable area - tough luck for anybody that is standing there.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Gist on Dec 20th, 2011 at 2:13pm
Interesting. Just how many houses are built directly beneath a wind turbine?

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Dec 20th, 2011 at 2:57pm

juliar wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 12:05pm:
Disaster !!  It is the middle of summer and a Bob Brown windy farm is about to start a bush fire and destroy a whole community.




What an absolute goose.

You have picked a good ID.
Just remove the Ju!

You know very well that this photo was taken in Britain, NOT Australia!
In Winter, Not Summer!
Caused by Gale Force winds!

When you have to resort to blatant lies in an attempt to prove your case, it's time to give the game away.

Think I'll save this post to my HD and pop it up every time you post drivel.
Crikek, it's going to get a lot of posting!!

;)

Edit:
Even if it is off-topic with the BS you are posting at the time.
:D

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Imperium IV on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:01pm
sounds like a load of sh!t on the magnitude of those claims about wind turbines giving people perpetual headaches

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:07pm

barnaby joe wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:01pm:
sounds like a load of sh!t on the magnitude of those claims about wind turbines giving people perpetual headaches



Jujube/mellie is good at load/s of sh!t on any magnitude.
;)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Andrei.Hicks on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:09pm
Wind turbines look a bit sh*t from what I can see.

Then again, if my house is powered by a nuclear plant, a coal plant or a wind turbine - I really couldn't give a toss as long as its nowhere near where I live.

There are bigger things to worry about than this.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:13pm
This is the noise from a windy farm some 1600 feet away.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78QwBM_AD3s&feature=related

Some explanation from the nearby resident based on first hand experience from living nearby.
Industrial wind turbine noise varies with the atmosphere and terrain. Often one of the quietest places to stand near a turbine is right underneath it. It's a little like standing beneath a 400 foot tall speaker. Turbine noise is broadcast outward and is especially troublesome at night when the air near the ground is still and the air at hub height is in motion. Standing beneath a turbine in the afternoon is the way most people who do not live in wind farms make their judgement about wind turbine noise. They stand there, listen for a minute, take pictures and drive off, go home and tell their friends that wind turbines don't make noise.
People who live in wind farms know more about turbine noise than they ever wanted to, and can't just drive off. Next time you want to listen to turbines, try it at nighttime, about 1000 feet to a quarter mile downwind from a turbine to get a better idea about what all the noise about turbine noise is about. To find out more about this issue, visit betterplan.squarespace.com

The warning for anyone who might be getting a windy farm located near them is to object officially as early as possible.

Windy farms and CSG have a lot in common - they are great in someone else's neighborhood but to have one installed close to one's home is inviting long term disaster and inevitable health problems which will occur as a result of enduring long term stress.

Other problems experienced with windy farms is the spraying of oil on the ground, fire in the actual turbine, and the blade/s disintegrating and hurling large pieces of debris over quite a large area as the tips of the blades are travelling very fast. Otherwise they are quite a useful addition to the generation of energy - while the wind is blowing but not too fast.

This is a wind turbine flying to bits - hope nobody was anywhere close by
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=jADMIeEHadU

This is a wind turbine catching on fire
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOfHxINzGeo

Wind power drives a wind turbine generator to make electricity, but judging from the number of wind turbine fires and other wind turbine accidents reported on YouTube alone, the wind turbine manufacturers must be having a field day replacing all the wind turbine units in farms specially built for wind turbines.

On Christmas Eve 2005, a wind turbine generator at the wind turbine farm of Nissan car plant in Sunderland caught fire at the top of one of the wind turbines, and the flames, fuelled by wind power, rapidly spread to the Wind Turbine sails before finally burning out.

Both lanes of the nearby A19 trunk road had to be closed to traffic because of the danger caused by the wind turbine fire, and the other wind turbines were stopped.

The towers of the wind turbines are 200 feet high to catch the maximum wind power, so the wind turbine generator was not accessible to fire crews.

Eventually, all 3 of the 75 foot long blades of the Wind Turbine, or what was left of them, dropped off.

The central power pack of the wind turbine generator at the top of the Wind Turbine mast is thought to be the cause of the fire, and these wind turbine accidents are not uncommon.

The 6 wind turbines were bought second hand from German wind turbine manufacturers, and there are many reports of wind turbine generator fires on the Internet.

Wind turbine accidents and wind turbine fires in the wind turbine generator units at the top of wind turbines in The Netherlands, Palm Springs CA, Hornslet near Aarhus, Denmark, and Burgos in Spain have all had accidents involving fire.

Wind Power supplies Nissan in Sunderland with just a small amount of power through 10 wind turbines.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Imperium IV on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:13pm
i agree that turbines can often ruin landscapes (especially as they are often located on elevated/undulating surfaces) but theyre not really any uglier, frequently considerably less unattractive, than other forms of infrastructure.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:13pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:09pm:
Wind turbines look a bit sh*t from what I can see.

Then again, if my house is powered by a nuclear plant, a coal plant or a wind turbine - I really couldn't give a toss as long as its nowhere near where I live.
There are bigger things to worry about than this.


Good to see that travel has broadened your mind, andrei.

(We need a 'tongue-in-cheek/sarcastic smilie button.)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:17pm

barnaby joe wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:13pm:
i agree that turbines can often ruin landscapes (especially as they are often located on elevated/undulating surfaces) but theyre not really any uglier, frequently considerably less unattractive, than other forms of infrastructure.


Driving south, on the Hume, I quite look forward to seeing them.
Gives me some perspective as to my ETA.

Also the ones on the Fed Hwy.
:)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Gist on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:29pm

Lobo wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 2:57pm:
You have picked a good ID.
Just remove the Ju!
:D


Don't hesitate. I've been calling her liar since she arrived. I figure if someone is going to give me a free kick... well...  ;)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Andrei.Hicks on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:32pm
20% of all electricity energy supply across all 50 states is provided by nuclear.

Australia has not even considered this option - low cost, low emissions for the future.
Combined with the fact Australia has considerable nuclear raw materials to enrich as well.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:57pm
“There is a problem!” Textbook Wind Turbine Syndrome (Australia)  Wednesday June 22, 2011

I’d like to thank the (Australian) National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) for organising this scientific forum and for inviting affected people to contribute—to tell their story. This is an important step in furthering our knowledge and understanding of an ongoing problem.

Be in no doubt that I am standing here because there is a problem, not because I am a flat earth, climate change denying, technophobic, anti-windfarm, luddite, NIMBY, and that any one of anger, fear, greed, jealousy, or the holy grail of compensation is a contributing factor to the adverse health we are experiencing. Nor am I an anxious, fearmongering, psychosomatic, hypochondriac. Nor disempowered. Neither is my partner. Nor the people I know in my local community who are experiencing adverse health effects since the Waubra Wind Farm commenced operation. A sweeping statement, I know, but I wanted to get the labelling out of the way.

There are several points regarding the proliferation of these labels:
I find it very disappointing that the people who have proposed these theories regarding motivations and causes have not tested their hypotheses by interviewing affected people and conducting psychological or sociological studies. Well not to my knowledge anyway. Whilst these are theories about what has and is occurring, we need robust research, rather than continued hypothesizing. Especially since it is in the context of a sensitive emotionally charged political issue.
It does not promote logical inquiry. These theories propose answers that suit certain agendas, and so have hindered the necessary questioning, probing.
It has contributed to the development of a toxic culture of put-down, ridicule and abuse.
People feel that their experience has been dismissed and they are being negated. It has also caused much distress and hurt for people who are already vulnerable. I just wanted to get that out of the way, so that what you will hear is not framed by preconceptions.

I live in Evansford, with Gunther, my partner. We purposely built our home and studios using sustainable principles and materials, to create an environment we need to fulfil our philosophical bent and to pursue our creative work. We are situated on 6o acres of bushland on a hill on the northern edge of the Waubra Wind Farm, 3.385 kilometres from the nearest cluster of turbines. There are another thirty straddling the valley and hills, to our south, southwest. And the rest of the windfarm beyond that.

We did not object to the Waubra Wind Farm. We thought it would be good for farmers, the local and broader community and the environment. We believed what we had been told. I have had good health all my life (taken an approach of prevention rather than cure, so have been attentive to diet, exercise etc. I have rarely had need to visit a doctor except more recently for the annual tests. Gunther, likewise, has had good health. He has had the same GP for 25 years, so a well documented record over that time.

The Waubra Windfarm commenced operation roll-out in February 2009 on the southern side and was fully operational by late June 2009. In May/June 2009 I woke in the night with a rapid heartbeat, shortness of breath, tightness in the chest. I had never experienced that before. It occurred several times over the course of the following month. I did not associate it with the wind turbines at that time. In July I visited my General Practitioner (GP), who noted that my blood pressure was elevated, so I was immediately sent to a cardiologist. Over the next three months all the tests were done—electrocardiogram, halter monitor, exercise stress test, and echo-cardiogram.  Results:  heart is in good health and functioning normally.

Some of the symptoms noted are: sleep disruption, headaches, ear and head pressure, tinnitus, muscular/joint aches, pain; body vibration—tingling, fizzy, prickly feeling—hypertension, cognitive impairment, emotional volatility, depression, amongst others. Myself, my partner and at least thirty people that I can confirm, and quite a few that I have heard of, are experiencing similar health issues, commencing around the same time in mid-2009. They live up to over 4 kilometres from the turbines. Not everyone has exactly the same set of symptoms, nor are they experienced with the same intensity.

Mostly, people did not initially associate their health issues with the turbines. It was only through conversations that we began to realise that something odd was going on—so many people experiencing similar health issues, starting around the same time. We heard about the Deans moving out of their home, began looking on the Internet, and found that there were people all over the world living near windfarms experiencing similar problems. We were introduced to the Deans (and here) and the Godfreys who were very badly affected. We began to keep a health journal, in an effort to see what was happening, check on whether this was what was really happening. We initially jotted down health issues and then documented wind direction, weather conditions and most lately have been noting blood pressure.

I don’t experience all of the symptoms, nor all of the time. It depends on the conjunction of turbines operating, weather conditions and wind direction. Most people have noted that the symptoms do not occur when they are away from the area or when the turbines are not operating, but return when they are in the windfarm area and the turbines are operating. Again, people have noted that the symptoms now, in comparison to when they first started, do not diminish as rapidly, and on return, the onset is quicker and intensity has increased (emphasis added).

Many people locally have noted the effect on their cognitive function.  Some say they feel as if their mind is foggy, vague.  Others that their memory has deteriorated. Certainly I feel as if concentration and focus, my ability to find a word, form a sentence, communicate clearly, my ability to plan, execute and multitask has seriously diminished (emphasis added).

Words, communication and my ability to organise and be organised are the tools of my trade. As a freelance cultural worker I have mostly managed multiple projects simultaneously for over twenty five years. Now there are days that I would be lucky and very happy if I could achieve any one of those tasks. I have had to change the way I work, like many people locally. I have to allow much more time to ensure that I meet a deadline, because I cannot reliably predict when I will be able to work efficiently and effectively.

I continue to experience rapid heartbeat, waking me from sleep, or it occurs at my desk or while gardening. It can last for varying amounts of time. Until recently, the symptoms had not occurred when I was away from the wind farm. However in just the last two months I have had the same experience in the city, both times when I was in very close proximity to air conditioning ducting in a shopping centre and a motor room opposite the room I was staying in a hotel—a very low industrial hum that triggered vibration, accelerated heart rate, tightness in the chest.

Over the two years I have noted, I have become more sensitive to noise.  I have difficulty in distinguishing words in conversations when more than one conversation is occurring. Sinusitis and a cough recur frequently, now, and I seem more prone to colds and viruses in general. Most days I feel exhausted, and all that means for your sense of well-being and simple enjoyment of life.

Gunther has similar issues. Dr. Rimas Lubinas, our General Practitioner, stated:
It’s unusual, the manner of presentation of symptoms with regard to the timing of new hypertension, sleep disturbance, muscle pain, aches, cognitive dysfunction, for two individuals. Both individuals noticed reduction in these symptoms when away from windfarm area. These symptoms returned when back in the area.

“If synonymous with other’s experience, it is worth further investigation.”
We know that our experience is synonymous with others, locally, in Australia and across the world. The effects on some people are so severe it has driven them out of their homes. No one abandons their home without good reason. The Deans, Godfreys, Stepnells have moved out because of the huge impact on their health and their lives. It continues to be an emotional, physical and financial burden. Other people should not have to experience what we have.

All we know is that there are serious health problems associated with wind farms and there needs to be a range of independent studies conducted. That is what we have been, and continue to ask for—thorough, independent research.
http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/news/2011/there-is-a-problem-textbook-wind-turbine-syndrome-australia/

Robert Rand (Reply) on June 26th, 2011
Thank you for your descriptions of your symptoms. They are very similar to those I experienced in April at 1700 feet (a bit over 500 meters) from one 1.65 MW wind turbine. During detailed analysis, the symptoms appeared to be unrelated to the A-weighted or C-weighted sound levels. There were significant, repetitive surges of acoustic energy over the entire infrasonic band occurring at the blade pass rate (about 0.7 Hertz). These repetitive, infrasonic pulsations are not created by natural sources such a wind or thunder; they are unique to the wind turbine.

Of the symptoms you listed above, the only ones I did not experience were heart rate changes and headache. The strange skin vibration sensations—fizzy, tingling feelings, along with serious eye strain issues and recurring nausea following the exposure in April—prompted medical consultation. It took several weeks to fully recover. For awhile, I found other low frequency sources (like dryers at the laundromat) unbearable.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Dec 20th, 2011 at 5:06pm
Green Hell on earth has turned peoples dream retreats into a living hell as they become sick.

How would you like to put up with this cacophonous onslaught non stop day and night ?


http://video.au.msn.com/watch/video/electricity-nightmares/xzh1xj5#::06f65387-45fd-47c5-b17e-a99c5bdf3c4a/

http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/news/2010/hell-on-earth/

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Imperium IV on Dec 20th, 2011 at 5:42pm

Lobo wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:17pm:

barnaby joe wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:13pm:
i agree that turbines can often ruin landscapes (especially as they are often located on elevated/undulating surfaces) but theyre not really any uglier, frequently considerably less unattractive, than other forms of infrastructure.


Driving south, on the Hume, I quite look forward to seeing them.
Gives me some perspective as to my ETA.

Also the ones on the Fed Hwy.
:)


i like looking at them too. they're quite the novelty.

problem is the novelty will wear off the more ubiquitous they become and the more we'll just be longing for unspoiled scenic vistas again.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Gist on Dec 20th, 2011 at 7:35pm

barnaby joe wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 5:42pm:

Lobo wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:17pm:

barnaby joe wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:13pm:
i agree that turbines can often ruin landscapes (especially as they are often located on elevated/undulating surfaces) but theyre not really any uglier, frequently considerably less unattractive, than other forms of infrastructure.


Driving south, on the Hume, I quite look forward to seeing them.
Gives me some perspective as to my ETA.

Also the ones on the Fed Hwy.
:)


i like looking at them too. they're quite the novelty.

problem is the novelty will wear off the more ubiquitous they become and the more we'll just be longing for unspoiled scenic vistas again.


Not while we're sitting in our air conditioned homes watching our big screen TVs we won't. There we'll be longing for electricity.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by ########## on Dec 21st, 2011 at 1:44pm
TOP 10 IA STORIES OF 2011

ABC Four Corners and the Sydney Morning Herald have recently both done stories on anti-windfarm front group ‘The Landscape Guardians’  — but neither scratched the surface when compared to the earlier July exposé by Australia’s leading investigative journalist, IA’s Sandi Keane.

#8: THE UGLY LANDSCAPE OF THE GUARDIANS

Environment editor Sandi Keane brilliantly exposes the Tea Party style practices and behaviour of anti-windfarm campaigners and their links to powerful vested interests, including the Liberal Party and the IPA.

Do you have Wind Turbine Syndrome?


http://www.independentaustralia.net/2011/environment/top-ia-stories-of-2011-the-ugly-landscape-of-the-guardians/

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by beware on Dec 21st, 2011 at 2:03pm

wrote on Dec 21st, 2011 at 1:44pm:
TOP 10 IA STORIES OF 2011

ABC Four Corners and the Sydney Morning Herald have recently both done stories on anti-windfarm front group ‘The Landscape Guardians’  — but neither scratched the surface when compared to the earlier July exposé by Australia’s leading investigative journalist, IA’s Sandi Keane.

#8: THE UGLY LANDSCAPE OF THE GUARDIANS

Environment editor Sandi Keane brilliantly exposes the Tea Party style practices and behaviour of anti-windfarm campaigners and their links to powerful vested interests, including the Liberal Party and the IPA.

Do you have Wind Turbine Syndrome?


http://www.independentaustralia.net/2011/environment/top-ia-stories-of-2011-the-ugly-landscape-of-the-guardians/



So if you like to post or send your address to the relevant wind farm builders you too can experience the wonders of this new technology..... or don't you want it in your backyard??????


And I love tea... my favourite refreshment!!! ;D

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Dec 23rd, 2011 at 5:09pm
Green delusionals browned off because noisy windy farms have been blown over by people power.

In Prime Minister Bob Brown's Communist society for Australia modeled on Communist Nth Korea if this sort of thing happened it would be brutally suppressed.


NSW Government offers veto option for residents in proposed wind farm zones
AAP December 23, 2011 12:52PM

PEOPLE living within 2km of proposed wind farms will have the right to veto them, under a NSW Government proposal.


Planning and Infrastructure Minister Brad Hazzard says NSW remains committed to being part of the Federal Government's 20 per cent renewable energy target by 2020, despite proposing what he has described as the world's toughest wind-farm guidelines.

Under the proposal, a company wanting to set up a wind farm in an area where landowner consent has not been given will have to go to an independent regional planning panel if there is community opposition.

"That means 100 per cent of neighbors have to be happy within that 2km zone," Mr Hazzard said.

Mr Hazzard said he hoped the idea would find a balance between residents living near wind turbines and supporters of renewable energy.

"Today I am announcing that the NSW coalition Government is putting out for public discussion some of the toughest wind-farm guidelines in the country, possibly the world," he said.

The Victorian Government this year gave residents within a 2km radius a right of veto over wind turbines.

But Mr Hazzard said the NSW proposal was different to Victoria's and that wind-farm proponents would get a bigger say.

People wishing to write submissions to the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure have until March 14.

Across NSW, there are 17 applications to build wind farms, including 13 that are yet to be shown to the public.

The NSW Greens said the proposal would kill off the wind-generation sector in favour of coal seam gas as a solution to the state's future energy needs.

"If this draft plan becomes law, the Government has effectively chosen a destructive coal seam gas future for NSW, over the clean, green and jobs-rich wind-energy sector," Greens planning spokesman David Shoebridge said.

"NSW is abandoning the most cost-effective option for reducing its carbon footprint, which in effect means it is giving the green light for coal seam gas projects across the state."

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/breaking-news/nsw-government-offers-veto-option-for-residents-in-proposed-wind-farm-zones/story-e6freuyi-1226229311656

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Dec 24th, 2011 at 1:05pm
Just when you thought you knew all - about psycosomatic contitions developing from being less than 2km from a wind turbine - here's the latest on what a smart meter can do to your quality
of life



Family forced to move after suffering "health problems"
Herald Sun November 01, 2011




A SMART meter health scare has driven residents from their homes amid fears they are being exposed to high levels of electromagnetic radiation.
A young family and another resident have fled the Keilor East street, claiming constant headaches and sleep deprivation is making their lives a misery, but authorities say the controversial devices are safe.
Marc and Maureen Florio, who have been staying with friends since Friday, said they and their four children had suffered side-effects since a neighbour's smart meter was installed three weeks ago.

"It's like an absolute nightmare," Ms Florio said.
"I do not know what we are going to do ... we are smart meter refugees."
Mr Florio said a doctor attributed constant headaches to the meter. He and his eldest son are also sensitive to other emissions.
"We are not after compensation," he said. "We just want it switched off."
Kathi Buzza, who had the meter installed, also wants the device gone.

A spokesman for the Energy Minister said testing so far showed they had complied with standards and emitted weaker electromagnetic emissions than other sources such as baby monitors and mobile phones.
MAXIMUM READINGS AT THE FLORIO HOME
CHILD'S bedroom, 182 (5 precautionary guidelines)
DOWNSTAIRS study, 167 (10 precautionary guidelines)
MASTER bedroom, 130 (5 precautionary)
UPSTAIRS kitchen, 114 (10 precautionary)
UPSTAIRS table tennis area, 101 (10 precautionary)
Source: YSHIELD.  Density measured in microwatts/m2.  Precautionary figure based on guidelines from Building Biology and Ecology Institute, Germany.

RADIO FREQUENCY EMISSIONS
Normal distance from a smart meter 50
Immediately next to a smart meter 88,000
Standing near an operating microwave oven 100,000
Wi-fi wireless routers, laptop computers, cyber cafes 100,000-200,000

Mobile phone at head up to 300,000-100,000,000

Source: Silver Spring Networks
Power density measured in microwatts/m2


http://www.news.com.au/smart-meter-shock-forces-family-out/story-fn7x8me2-1226181915461

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Dec 24th, 2011 at 1:27pm

juliar wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 5:06pm:
Green Hell on earth has turned peoples dream retreats into a living hell as they become sick.

How would you like to put up with this cacophonous onslaught non stop day and night ?


http://video.au.msn.com/watch/video/electricity-nightmares/xzh1xj5#::06f65387-45fd-47c5-b17e-a99c5bdf3c4a/

http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/news/2010/hell-on-earth/


LOL
Take note of the interview with this woman at approx 30sec mark.

All of 50/60m from the turbine and all you can hear is her whining.

Not a sound from the turbine.
:D

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Gist on Dec 24th, 2011 at 1:36pm
It can't be that bad - they still live there. Those whiners should try living under a flightpath.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by FRED. on Dec 24th, 2011 at 3:25pm

Lobo wrote on Dec 24th, 2011 at 1:27pm:

juliar wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 5:06pm:
Green Hell on earth has turned peoples dream retreats into a living hell as they become sick.

How would you like to put up with this cacophonous onslaught non stop day and night ?


http://video.au.msn.com/watch/video/electricity-nightmares/xzh1xj5#::06f65387-45fd-47c5-b17e-a99c5bdf3c4a/

http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/news/2010/hell-on-earth/


LOL
Take note of the interview with this woman at approx 30sec mark.

All of 50/60m from the turbine and all you can hear is her whining.

Not a sound from the turbine.
:D

Interesting not all smokers get cancer

Not all beach goers get melanomas

18 in 100000 get ms in Queensland

30 plus in 100000 in Victoria      34 plus in Tasmania   So why is it not possible that some people get effected in this way by elect magnetic pulse   or noise

Like some become Alcoholics   

;)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Dec 24th, 2011 at 8:57pm

FRED. wrote on Dec 24th, 2011 at 3:25pm:

Lobo wrote on Dec 24th, 2011 at 1:27pm:

juliar wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 5:06pm:
Green Hell on earth has turned peoples dream retreats into a living hell as they become sick.

How would you like to put up with this cacophonous onslaught non stop day and night ?


http://video.au.msn.com/watch/video/electricity-nightmares/xzh1xj5#::06f65387-45fd-47c5-b17e-a99c5bdf3c4a/

http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/news/2010/hell-on-earth/


LOL
Take note of the interview with this woman at approx 30sec mark.

All of 50/60m from the turbine and all you can hear is her whining.

Not a sound from the turbine.
:D

Interesting not all smokers get cancer

Not all beach goers get melanomas

18 in 100000 get ms in Queensland

30 plus in 100000 in Victoria      34 plus in Tasmania   So why is it not possible that some people get effected in this way by elect magnetic pulse   or noise

Like some become Alcoholics   

;)


The lady is not talking cancer, or melanomas and I don't think she is an alchoholic.
She was talking about NOISE!

While standing approx 50m  away from the turbine.
And you CAN'T hear any.

Not only that, but the noise that was recorded, in the close-ups, had that metallic sound you get when you put the mic against an object making a faint sound so that it will magnify that sound.

If you don't want to believe that, it's easy to try for yourself.
Take a recorder out to your car and start the motor and let it idle.
Record the sound from 5m away then, while recording, walk to your car and place the mic somewhere on the car.

Then listen to the playback and you will see that I am correct.

:)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by FRED. on Dec 25th, 2011 at 7:08am

Lobo wrote on Dec 24th, 2011 at 8:57pm:

FRED. wrote on Dec 24th, 2011 at 3:25pm:

Lobo wrote on Dec 24th, 2011 at 1:27pm:

juliar wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 5:06pm:
Green Hell on earth has turned peoples dream retreats into a living hell as they become sick.

How would you like to put up with this cacophonous onslaught non stop day and night ?


http://video.au.msn.com/watch/video/electricity-nightmares/xzh1xj5#::06f65387-45fd-47c5-b17e-a99c5bdf3c4a/

http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/news/2010/hell-on-earth/


LOL
Take note of the interview with this woman at approx 30sec mark.

All of 50/60m from the turbine and all you can hear is her whining.

Not a sound from the turbine.
:D

Interesting not all smokers get cancer

Not all beach goers get melanomas

18 in 100000 get ms in Queensland

30 plus in 100000 in Victoria      34 plus in Tasmania   So why is it not possible that some people get effected in this way by elect magnetic pulse   or noise

Like some become Alcoholics   

;)


The lady is not talking cancer, or melanomas and I don't think she is an alchoholic.
She was talking about NOISE!

While standing approx 50m  away from the turbine.
And you CAN'T hear any.

Not only that, but the noise that was recorded, in the close-ups, had that metallic sound you get when you put the mic against an object making a faint sound so that it will magnify that sound.

If you don't want to believe that, it's easy to try for yourself.
Take a recorder out to your car and start the motor and let it idle.
Record the sound from 5m away then, while recording, walk to your car and place the mic somewhere on the car.

Then listen to the playback and you will see that I am correct.

:)

;) THE point is some MIGHT GET EFFECTED and some might not 

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Dec 25th, 2011 at 3:21pm
It is now law - the horrible nauseating incessant noise from Bob Brown Windy Farms to be legally kept away from residents.

Reality has finally been recognized by real government and residents will no longer have their idyllic peaceful quiet rural retreats turned into a hell on earth and have their lives destroyed as they suffer from sickness caused by the constant tension and stress from having, day and night, to put up with the extremely irritating swirling whirling swishing sound of Bob Brown windy farms.

How long before the claims for compensation start coming in. The next move is to remove offending existing windy farms away from residences.

This shows how important it is to NOT vote for Bob Brown's Communist Greens party because under Bob Brown's Communist Australia people would simply not be allowed to complain and if they did they would be subjected to horror treatment by the Communist secret police. Just like in Communist Nth Korea which the Communist Bob Brown sees as the ideal political model for Australia.

So any person whose peaceful rural retreat is being threatened by the proposed construction of a soul destroying Bob Brown windy farm must lodge their official objection immediately or face the prospect of having their lives and health destroyed.

NSW gets world's toughest wind farm rules    December 23, 2011

PEOPLE living within two kilometres of proposed wind farms will have the right to veto them, under a NSW government proposal.

Planning and Infrastructure Minister Brad Hazzard says NSW remains committed to being part of the Federal Government's 20 per cent renewable energy target by 2020, despite proposing what he has described as the world's toughest wind-farm guidelines.

Under the proposal, a company wanting to set up a wind farm in an area where landowner consent has not been given will have to go to an independent regional planning panel if there is community opposition.

''That means 100 per cent of neighbours have to be happy within that two-kilometre zone,'' Mr Hazzard told reporters in Sydney.

Mr Hazzard said he hoped the idea would find a balance between residents living near wind turbines and supporters of renewable energy.

''Today I am announcing that the NSW coalition government is putting out for public discussion some of the toughest wind-farm guidelines in the country, possibly the world,'' he said.

The Victorian coalition government this year gave residents within a two-kilometre radius a right of veto over wind turbines.

But Mr Hazzard said the NSW proposal was different to Victoria's and that wind-farm proponents would get a bigger say.

People wishing to write submissions to the NSW Department of Planning and Infrastructure have until March 14.

Across NSW, there are 17 applications to build wind farms, including 13 that are yet to be shown to the public.

The NSW Greens said the proposal would kill off the wind-generation sector in favour of coal seam gas as a solution to the state's future energy needs.

''If this draft plan becomes law, the government has effectively chosen a destructive coal seam gas future for NSW, over the clean, green and jobs-rich wind-energy sector,'' Greens planning spokesman David Shoebridge said.

''NSW is abandoning the most cost-effective option for reducing its carbon footprint, which in effect means it is giving the green light for coal seam gas projects across the state.''

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/energy-smart/nsw-gets-worlds-toughest-wind-farm-rules-20111223-1p826.html

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Dec 26th, 2011 at 1:03pm
THE point is some MIGHT GET EFFECTED and some might not (FRED).

Some MIGHT GET (A)FFECTED, but that is NOT what this woman is whining about.

It's NOISE!!
And 50m away you can't hear the bloody thing.

Maybe her biggest whinge is one that is not being mentioned.
She didn't get in early enough, or was in the wrong location to take advantage of the money being offered.

BTW...
Did you try my experiment?
Could there possibly be a case of innaccurate or misleading reporting?
No, that wouldn't be at all possible, would it??

:D

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 6th, 2012 at 11:45am
Froggo, pleeze rejister your vocifferuss komplaints with SA govt as soon as possible.


Liberals commit to wind farm reform
Posted on January 6, 2012

The State Liberals will protect South Australian communities from wind farms built too close to homes, by banning new wind farms from being built more than two kilometres from an existing residence.


A Redmond Liberal Government will:

• Ban new wind turbines from being built closer than two kilometres from an existing home
• Allow third-party appeal rights, which Labor wants to remove
• Help develop national guidelines regarding separation distances and noise emissions
• Develop a state-wide zoning plan outlining where industrial wind turbines will be allowed
• Adopt a new approval process for wind farms which will consider associated infrastructure
• Protect adjacent landowners against economic losses caused by restrictions on aerial spraying and crop-dusting
• Develop clear guidelines for fire-fighting and bushfire protection around wind farms

Opposition Leader Isobel Redmond said that while community opposition to industrial-scale wind farms is increasing, Labor is planning to approve more wind farms closer to homes and schools.

“The South Australian Liberals believe wind farms must not be approved on sites where they create negative economic and social effects,” Ms Redmond said.

“We will protect residents by banning new wind turbines from being built closer than two kilometres from an existing home.

“We have more wind generation of any other State, with more than half of Australia's installed wind power in SA and it is time we started looking after the communities that live near wind farms.

“Labor approved changes to the wind farm approval process in a rush job designed to appease former Premier Rann.

“South Australians deserve well thought out planning processes not ill-considered rush jobs from a tired, city-centric Labor Government.”
 
http://www.isobelredmond.com.au/Media/MediaReleases/tabid/70/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/1256/Liberals-commit-to-wind-farm-reform.aspx

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Gist on Jan 6th, 2012 at 5:18pm

juliar wrote on Dec 25th, 2011 at 3:21pm:
[b]It is now law - the horrible nauseating incessant noise from Bob Brown Windy Farms to be legally kept away from residents.


What you constantly keep pointing out is that the Liberal state governments have changed progressive legislation to take it back to the last century. Is this supposed to be news? If anything it's a regular reminder of what a crap job a coalition federal government would do. They'd take us back to before the last millenium.

Thanks liar. Keep up the good work.  :D

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 18th, 2012 at 6:17am
Who does Smitham think he's fooling ? The CSIRO has to peddle lying rubbish like this because Miss Gillard has threatened that if they don't, their funds will be cut. The CSIRO are just puppets that say what they are told to say to support the never ending stream of lies from the union controlled Labor and their Communist Greens Prime Minister dear old Uncle Bob.

Strong support for wind farms obscured, says CSIRO report

Kelsey Munro, Ben Cubby   January 18, 2012

Dr Jim Smitham … found a high level of local acceptance.

THERE is much stronger public support for wind farms than media coverage of the issue would suggest, because a ''vocal minority'' who oppose wind farms secure the majority of media and political attention, according to new CSIRO research.

A peer-reviewed study by Brisbane researchers investigated attitudes to nine wind farms in various stages of development in NSW, Victoria and South Australia, concluding there was a strong level of support ''from rural residents who do not seek media attention or political engagement to express their views''.

By contrast, more than half of all wind farm proposals had been opposed by members of the Landscape Guardian group, the report noted.

The CSIRO's deputy director, energy technology, Jim Smitham, one of the reviewers of the report, said it showed a disconnect between negative and conflict-oriented media coverage about wind farms and the attitude of a majority in the communities where wind farms were proposed or already operating.

''You find more media stories supporting the case against wind farms than those for it,'' he said. ''Whereas, going into the field and doing interviews at community level, they have different reasons but many of them support the wind farm; it just isn't as apparent as the people who are able to find a short sharp reason to reject it.''

Dr Smitham said wind farm developers that proactively consulted with communities and responded to their concerns had achieved far higher local acceptance of their projects.

The report, Acceptance of rural wind farms in Australia: A snapshot, by CSIRO's social research team, comes as the draft guidelines on wind farm development in this state are open for public comment.

The researchers conducted interviews with wind farm developers, councils, turbine hosts, community opponents and supporters of the projects in each of the nine locations.

Wind farm opponents cited negatives including poor consultation, visual amenity and noise, while supporters cited benefits including improved infrastructure such as roads and firebreaks, clean energy and better local job prospects, the report found.

The debate over noise and health impacts has been a key issue raised by opponents. A series of peer-reviewed studies have found no evidence that low-level sound from wind farms has made people sick, but some international studies included self-selected surveys in which people living near wind farms reported annoyance and interrupted sleep as a result of vibrations from the turbine blades.

The CSIRO report noted wind farms can create stress which affects wellbeing.

The Landscape Guardians could not be reached for comment yesterday
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/energy-smart/strong-support-for-wind-farms-obscured-says-csiro-report-20120117-1q4pj.html

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Jan 18th, 2012 at 6:52pm

Lobo wrote on Dec 26th, 2011 at 1:03pm:
THE point is some MIGHT GET EFFECTED and some might not (FRED).

Some MIGHT GET (A)FFECTED, but that is NOT what this woman is whining about.

It's NOISE!!
And 50m away you can't hear the bloody thing.

Maybe her biggest whinge is one that is not being mentioned.
She didn't get in early enough, or was in the wrong location to take advantage of the money being offered.

BTW...
Did you try my experiment?
Could there possibly be a case of innaccurate or misleading reporting?
No, that wouldn't be at all possible, would it??

:D


Instead of banging on with all your crap, mellie, try the experiment I outlined earlier.

You just might learn something.

:)


Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Jan 18th, 2012 at 6:54pm

Gist wrote on Jan 6th, 2012 at 5:18pm:

juliar wrote on Dec 25th, 2011 at 3:21pm:
[b]It is now law - the horrible nauseating incessant noise from Bob Brown Windy Farms to be legally kept away from residents.


What you constantly keep pointing out is that the Liberal state governments have changed progressive legislation to take it back to the last century. Is this supposed to be news? If anything it's a regular reminder of what a crap job a coalition federal government would do. They'd take us back to before the last millenium.

Thanks liar. Keep up the good work.  :D


mellie is a paid political hack maybe???

;)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 18th, 2012 at 7:50pm
If all you armchair arm waving Bob Brown windy farm experts want to have some credibility then go to one or more of the problem sites where people are lodging complaints and spend at least a week there in the person's house.

Go there in summer when the problem is worst due to the hot still air close to the ground which makes it hard to go to sleep and people open the windows to try to keep cool.

To actually qualify you will first need to have a medical including a HEARING test to verify you are not deaf as a post. The real concern is if you have a pre-existing heart condition you might snuff it when exposed to the stress of living with the extremely disturbing intrusive inescapable racket from these whirling dervishes. A week without sleep can be pretty devastating and can cause a high degree of dangerous stress.

Don't get too close in case one of the windy turbines disintegrates and possibly catches fire.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Kat on Jan 18th, 2012 at 7:56pm
Rubbish!

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Jan 18th, 2012 at 8:31pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:09pm:
Wind turbines look a bit sh*t from what I can see.

Then again, if my house is powered by a nuclear plant, ..... I really couldn't give a toss as long as its nowhere near where I live.





I THINK your "safe"


There will NEVER be a nuclear power plant built in Australia

After the mass radiation entering the atmosphere and food chain in Fukushima - and a century of cancers and birth defects resulting - I see the chance of any more plants being built on the Pacific Rim as not very likely








Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Jan 19th, 2012 at 3:21pm

juliar wrote on Jan 18th, 2012 at 7:50pm:
If all you armchair arm waving Bob Brown windy farm experts want to have some credibility then go to one or more of the problem sites where people are lodging complaints and spend at least a week there in the person's house.

*Go there in summer when the problem is worst due to the hot still air close to the ground which makes it hard to go to sleep and people open the windows to try to keep cool.

To actually qualify you will first need to have a medical including a HEARING test to verify you are not deaf as a post. The real concern is if you have a pre-existing heart condition you might snuff it when exposed to the stress of living with the** extremely disturbing intrusive inescapable racket from these whirling dervishes. A week without sleep can be pretty devastating and can cause a high degree of dangerous stress.

***Don't get too close in case one of the windy turbines disintegrates and possibly catches fire.


*I take it that you have done just this, melliar?

** More garbage, melliar.
I was watching 'whirling dervishes' on a travelogue not long back and they didn't make any noise at all.
Just spun round and round and round......Though the music IS quite loud.
Do the wind farms have a musical backing group, melliar??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJIofU-0jC0

*** If this was to be a problem, tell me just how many (exact number, please), out of the thousands around the world, have caught fire.


:D :D


Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 19th, 2012 at 5:58pm
Frog, For everyone's benefit tell us all just what is your IQ.

You are not discussing the topic because you know that the state governments have recognized the truth that people DO HAVE genuine valid justification for their complaints and that is now enshrined in LAW.

You are using the typical Labor style approach of unsuccessfully trying to rubbish and ridicule the person because you don't have anything useful to contribute. Just admit you have lost the debate and go and try to annoy another topic.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by adelcrow on Jan 19th, 2012 at 6:01pm
I think its easy..give the nearby residents a choice.. a windfarm, a nuclear power plant or a coal fired power plant..bet ya they all vote for the wind farm   ;D

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Gist on Jan 19th, 2012 at 6:21pm

adelcrow wrote on Jan 19th, 2012 at 6:01pm:
I think its easy..give the nearby residents a choice.. a windfarm, a nuclear power plant or a coal fired power plant..bet ya they all vote for the wind farm   ;D


I've already registered a vote in another thread. I'll happily swap our coal fired power plant for a wind farm thank you!

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Gist on Jan 19th, 2012 at 6:22pm
.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Jan 19th, 2012 at 6:39pm

juliar wrote on Jan 19th, 2012 at 5:58pm:
Frog, For everyone's benefit tell us all just what is your IQ.
You are not discussing the topic because you know that the state governments have recognized the truth that people DO HAVE genuine valid justification for their complaints and that is now enshrined in LAW.

You are using the typical Labor style approach of unsuccessfully trying to rubbish and ridicule the person because you don't have anything useful to contribute. Just admit you have lost the debate and go and try to annoy another topic.


LOL.
This from someone who cannot tell the difference between a Wind Generator and a Whirling Dervish!!

;)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Jan 19th, 2012 at 6:40pm
Just to remind you of the difference, melliar.



Lobo wrote on Jan 19th, 2012 at 3:21pm:

juliar wrote on Jan 18th, 2012 at 7:50pm:
If all you armchair arm waving Bob Brown windy farm experts want to have some credibility then go to one or more of the problem sites where people are lodging complaints and spend at least a week there in the person's house.

*Go there in summer when the problem is worst due to the hot still air close to the ground which makes it hard to go to sleep and people open the windows to try to keep cool.

To actually qualify you will first need to have a medical including a HEARING test to verify you are not deaf as a post. The real concern is if you have a pre-existing heart condition you might snuff it when exposed to the stress of living with the** extremely disturbing intrusive inescapable racket from these whirling dervishes. A week without sleep can be pretty devastating and can cause a high degree of dangerous stress.

***Don't get too close in case one of the windy turbines disintegrates and possibly catches fire.


*I take it that you have done just this, melliar?

** More garbage, melliar.
I was watching 'whirling dervishes' on a travelogue not long back and they didn't make any noise at all.
Just spun round and round and round......Though the music IS quite loud.
Do the wind farms have a musical backing group, melliar??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJIofU-0jC0

*** If this was to be a problem, tell me just how many (exact number, please), out of the thousands around the world, have caught fire.


:D :D


Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 19th, 2012 at 6:47pm
For a quiet little primitive agrarian back water like Daylesford, where the heaviest industry is the bull in farmer Gists paddock, a windy farm is probably quite adequate just so long as it is not installed too close to any of the residences and while the wind is actually blowing.

Otherwise, bring out the kerosene lamps and candles. Heaven forbid that there was a connection to the filthy dirty shocking global worming disgusting reliable coal fired grid.

Bear in mind that there is a lot of costly maintenance with a windy farm - not to mention the possibility of a catastrophic extremely expensive disintegrational collapse in a hi wind.

In a location where there are industries a windy farm is about as useless as the ALP as these puny unreliable mouse power whirling wind mills can only supply a domestic load - while the wind is actually blowing - otherwise bring out the oil lamps and candles and light up the open wood fired fireplace if it is winter.

It is a pity the "Cold Fusion" device reviewed recently by Dick Smith at Mullumbimby was not a success.


Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 19th, 2012 at 6:54pm
Give up Froggie you are embarrassing everyone.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Jan 19th, 2012 at 7:03pm

juliar wrote on Jan 19th, 2012 at 6:54pm:
Give up Froggie you are embarrassing everyone.


Strange....

You seem to be the only one going all red in the face!!

:)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 19th, 2012 at 7:14pm
Froggie, we are all waiting for you to tell us what your IQ is.

Or do we all have to guess ? As a matter of passing interest at what level did you quit school - primary ?

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Gist on Jan 19th, 2012 at 7:52pm
No bulls in our paddock. No paddock.

On a warm night, with the easterlies blowing we DO get the incessant sound of waves breaking on the beach. Fecker never stops! Westerlies bring the incredible noise of the the wind in the trees in the national park. Fecker never ever stops!!! Why aren't that useless windfarm whiners doing something about those noises? They affect far more people than a few little windfarms.

And when IS someone going to start a group protesting about the incessant WHINING from windfarm protest groups? Bastards should be outlawed! I demand they have their voices de-whined so a man can get a decent nights sleep for a change!!


juliar wrote on Jan 19th, 2012 at 7:14pm:
Froggie, we are all waiting for you to tell us what your IQ is.


I think I can have a reasonable guess at that one. Just take your IQ, add 10 and then put a zero on the end. Yep, 100! There ya go!

*sigh* You'll probably need someone to explain that to you, won't you?  ::)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Jan 19th, 2012 at 8:00pm

juliar wrote on Jan 19th, 2012 at 6:47pm:
For a quiet little primitive agrarian back water like Daylesford, where the heaviest industry is the bull in farmer Gists paddock, a windy farm is probably quite adequate just so long as it is not installed too close to any of the residences and while the wind is actually blowing.

Otherwise, bring out the kerosene lamps and candles. Heaven forbid that there was a connection to the filthy dirty shocking global worming disgusting reliable coal fired grid.

Bear in mind that there is a lot of costly maintenance with a windy farm - not to mention the possibility of a catastrophic extremely expensive disintegrational collapse in a hi wind.

In a location where there are industries a windy farm is about as useless as the ALP as these puny unreliable mouse power whirling wind mills can only supply a domestic load - while the wind is actually blowing - otherwise bring out the oil lamps and candles and light up the open wood fired fireplace if it is winter.




You would have to be the most ILL-INFORMED MORON to have ever posted here













Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 19th, 2012 at 8:59pm
Buzzo, Will you ever learn how to debate or are you just too far out of your depth ?

Simply using the std Labor technique of attacking the poster when you have nothing worthwhile to add to the actual discussion of the topic does not impress anyone as this technique suggests you have very little in the way of debating skills.

To be an effective debater does require a good education and a reasonably hi IQ, and if you don't have these then nothing you can do will substitute for these essential skills.

Just printing in ridiculously large type only makes your apparent inadequacy more painfully evident to everyone and sticking rather silly pictures up only further reflects poorly on yourself. Post some pictures of your solar panels and where you grow your food - or is china too far away to get a good snap. Include a snap of your power bill to show how good your solar panels are.

Just out of casual interest what is your IQ and did you ever finish school ?

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Jan 20th, 2012 at 12:12pm

Gist wrote on Jan 19th, 2012 at 7:52pm:
No bulls in our paddock. No paddock.

On a warm night, with the easterlies blowing we DO get the incessant sound of waves breaking on the beach. Fecker never stops! Westerlies bring the incredible noise of the the wind in the trees in the national park. Fecker never ever stops!!! Why aren't that useless windfarm whiners doing something about those noises? They affect far more people than a few little windfarms.

And when IS someone going to start a group protesting about the incessant WHINING from windfarm protest groups? Bastards should be outlawed! I demand they have their voices de-whined so a man can get a decent nights sleep for a change!!


juliar wrote on Jan 19th, 2012 at 7:14pm:
Froggie, we are all waiting for you to tell us what your IQ is.


I think I can have a reasonable guess at that one. Just take your IQ, add 10 and then put a zero on the end. Yep, 100! There ya go!

*sigh* You'll probably need someone to explain that to you, won't you?  ::)


Well, thank you, Gist.

Actually, I was ignoring the attempted deflection.

Now, where were we?

Oh yes!!
How come, in the A/V posted earlier, the alleged noise from the turbine cannot be heard above the whine of the woman who is really moaning because she was TOO slow to take advantage of the cash being offered to install said turbines??

;)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 20th, 2012 at 1:02pm
Froggo,
I appreciate you have not got much to work with in the upper region department (that is Tony Abbott's fault of course) but, given the amount of time you have been pondering the matter, it surely must have occurred to you that there is a quite sound technological reason while the raucous unbearable racket from the windy whirlers is muted while the TV interviewer is capturing the emotional distress of the unfortunate long suffering land holder.

Have you never heard of DIRECTIONAL microphones ????  The TV interviewer simply arranged the interview positions so that the directional microphone was turned away from the swinish swishing of the accursed whizzing windy machine so that every emotional sob could be captured with astounding clarity.

And to suggest I should go to the bothered landholders to experience first hand the horrible racket from these swirling twirling windy whirlers is rather absurd as I believe these decent tax paying people are genuinely suffering, as does the state govt of 3 states who have recognized the legitimacy of the people's complaints by protecting them by Law.

It is you and your cohorts who are calling these poor unfortunate long suffering decent Australians LIARS !!!!

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by adelcrow on Jan 20th, 2012 at 1:22pm
Juliar tell me what would you rather have next door to you a nuclear power plant, a coal fired power station or a wind farm?
We have to get our power from somewhere

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by philperth2010 on Jan 20th, 2012 at 1:37pm
Stuff renewable energy and expensive energy alternatives.....Australia has enough fossil fuels to keep us going for centuries to come and Australia can make large profits by supporting the fossil fuel industry......Global Warming even if it is true will take many decades to even have a minimal effect and if America, China and India do not care why should we.....Their countries will suffer much more than Australia with their large populations and lack of natural resources that Australia can take advantage of.....Australia cannot change the world but we can take advantage of our economic position and support a better life for the majority of Australian's!!!

8-)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by adelcrow on Jan 20th, 2012 at 1:40pm

juliar wrote on Jan 20th, 2012 at 1:02pm:
Froggo,
I appreciate you have not got much to work with in the upper region department (that is Tony Abbott's fault of course) but, given the amount of time you have been pondering the matter, it surely must have occurred to you that there is a quite sound technological reason while the raucous unbearable racket from the windy whirlers is muted while the TV interviewer is capturing the emotional distress of the unfortunate long suffering land holder.

Have you never heard of DIRECTIONAL microphones ????  The TV interviewer simply arranged the interview positions so that the directional microphone was turned away from the swinish swishing of the accursed whizzing windy machine so that every emotional sob could be captured with astounding clarity.

And to suggest I should go to the bothered landholders to experience first hand the horrible racket from these swirling twirling windy whirlers is rather absurd as I believe these decent tax paying people are genuinely suffering, as does the state govt of 3 states who have recognized the legitimacy of the people's complaints by protecting them by Law.

It is you and your cohorts who are calling these poor unfortunate long suffering decent Australians LIARS !!!!


I bet wind power is a lot quieter than the alternatives  ;D

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Gist on Jan 20th, 2012 at 3:23pm
This power plant sounds PRETTY DAMNED NOISY to me. No, I don't mean the wind noise either.

AND it's on fire ALL THE TIME, not occasionally when a turbine fails because the wind is blowing at superman strength!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA7hSHEwD3k&feature=youtube

Notice how the noise gets louder as the UNIDIRECTIONAL microphone points towards the power plant??

Hey Liar! Can you get your Windfarm Whiners to complain about the noise from these coal fired power plants?? I'd like to get some sleep after our move.  >:( >:(

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Jan 20th, 2012 at 3:49pm
"Have you never heard of DIRECTIONAL microphones ????  The TV interviewer simply arranged the interview positions so that the directional microphone was turned away....."(melliar)
.........

Now watch from 2.06min to 2.10 as the reporter and whiner walk past the directional mic.
You can faintly hear the woman and not the turbine.
When they pass out of view and the mic is still trained in the direction of the turbine......NO noise!!!

See ya!!

;)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Baronvonrort on Jan 20th, 2012 at 5:47pm

juliar wrote on Jan 19th, 2012 at 6:47pm:
Bear in mind that there is a lot of costly maintenance with a windy farm - not to mention the possibility of a catastrophic extremely expensive disintegrational collapse in a hi wind.

In a location where there are industries a windy farm is about as useless as the ALP as these puny unreliable mouse power whirling wind mills can only supply a domestic load - while the wind is actually blowing - otherwise bring out the oil lamps and candles and light up the open wood fired fireplace if it is winter.


What is this costly maintenance please cite to back up your nonsense and while you are at it please supply the maintenance schedule for coal and nuclear power so we can compare costs.

We should also compare the wages bill for staff at these power plants i dont see anyone working on windpower in paddocks i cant imagine a coal or nuclear plant could be left unattended like they do with wind and solar.

The catastrophic failure of a wind turbine is fairly minor compared to the consequences of a catastrophic failure with nuclear power or a coal burning power station burning to the ground.

The noise argument is bullshit do you expect people to believe on a warm night when you even said the air was "still and not moving" that a wind turbine would be working?
There is what they call a "minimum startup windspeed" which is considerably higher than zero wind.
The people who make these turbines publish the decibel readings at various windspeeds you will find this data in the specifications.




Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 20th, 2012 at 6:22pm
Froggie, will you never admit you are simply beaten.

Were you there to see WHICH MICROPHONE or how many MICROPHONES were actually being used ? The actual microphone being used won't necessarily be visible in the video. If 2 mikes were used the mike looking at the windy farm may have been turned off during this particular part of the interview just for a more dramatic effect.

These are professional interviewers who have sophisticated equipment that is designed to block out ambient noise as many interviews are conducted in a noisy environment. It is even possible that the lady was wearing a microphone, that was not visible in the video, which is designed to only hear the wearer's voice and this was done precisely to block out the ambient noise of the windy farm.

Also, have you considered the possibility that the audio recording may have been edited back at the studio in order to enhance the effect of the lady's emotional sobbing and despair.

There is also the other, for you most exasperating, possibility that THE WIND TEMPORARILY STOPPED BLOWING and, of course, the horrible noise temporarily STOPPED.

Frog, look why don't you go down there and interview the lady yourself then you can be absolutely sure of the real fair dinkum honest to god truth. Don't forget to get your hearing checked first in case you are partially deaf from exposure to loud industrial noise or loud music or a motor bike.

The fact that the state governments have recognized that the people complaining about the noise from the windy farms do have a genuine grievance would suggest you are chasing moonbeams.

Why don't you register a complaint with each of the 3 state governments which have already or are about to enshrine in law that windy farms cannot be built within 2km of existing residents. Tell them that you are highly suspicious of evidence considered.

On YouTube there are quite a lot of videos demonstrating the noise from windy turbines and it is hard to believe every single one is lying like Miss Gillard.

In any case you won't have to worry anymore because all new windy farms in Vic, NSW, and WA (or SA?) will keep 2km away from existing residences so the problem won't exist anymore. Any existing problems might be resolved in the courts with quite substantial damages being claimed. I hope the farmers win their compensation.


Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Jan 20th, 2012 at 8:20pm
The whole "NOISE" aspect is UTTER NONSENSE !

Unlike the "Landscape Guardians", "juliar" - and the REST of the TROGLODYTES - I have PHYSICALLY "been there"


These installations are (naturally) located in rural, VERY WINDY, locations

You cannot detect ANY noise from the turbines past 500 metres - due to the sound of the wind roaring through the trees

Yet people are believing ( ... in the case of http://hepburnwind.com.au/ ) they can hear them from one and half KILOMETRES away - over the sound of overnight freight lorries rumbling down the highway a kilometre away

The NEAREST neighbours ( ... a retired couple) have given the project their BLESSING - fron a KM away

The loudest WHINGER is one Jan Perry - of " ...the Guardians" - from near 2KM away








buzzanddidj wrote on Dec 21st, 2011 at 8:33am:

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 5th, 2011 at 12:40am:

wrote on Sep 2nd, 2011 at 9:20am:
Now wind farm opponents have been handed victory on a plate. The Government’s new policy has three main elements:

the government will amend planning laws to give households power to veto wind turbines within two kilometres of their homes.

Turbines will also be banned in the Macedon and McHarg ranges, in the Yarra Valley, on the Mornington and Bellarine peninsulas, and within five kilometres of the Great Ocean Road and the Bass Coast.

And in changes that go further than the Coalition flagged in the policy it took to last year’s state election, turbines will also be prohibited within five kilometres of 21 Victorian regional centres.

Wind farms approved by Labor and not yet built will not be affected.

The Government claims that 92% of the state is still available for wind farm development, but the people who build them have a different view.

Pacific Hydro say that they will be pursuing opportunities elsewhere after completing current projects.

The Clean Energy Council estimated prior to the election that $3.6 billion worth of investments would not go ahead under the Coalition’s policy.


Make that up to $10 billion according to Giles Parkinson at Climate Spectator. Earlier Parkinson had written about the negativity coming from right-wing governments on climate change policy.[b]

Barry O’Farrell is on record saying he doesn’t want any more wind farms built[/b]. The wind doesn’t blow so consistently in Queensland, so theoretically there should be opportunities in South Australia





New rules blamed for wind farm loss
September 01, 2011

A developer has scrapped plans for a wind farm project in south-west Victoria because of the State Government's new planning rules.

The company's managing director, David Shapiro, says it is now abandoning the development.

"The Victorian Government has changed the rules and as those rules stand now it simply wouldn't get through the planning framework," he said.

"Our reading of the situation is that really was the intention of Government to make development more difficult." 



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-09-01/new-rules-blamed-for-wind-farm-loss/2865834

Mr Shapiro says the company is unlikely to launch new developments in Victoria.





The Planning Minister has said the new rules would not threaten investment in wind energy.





Mr "Planning" Minister ...
Investment is ALREADY leaving - in the BILLIONS

... to be welcomed with open arms, in South Australia - a state that BACKS investment in renewable, clean energy





I dropped by the Hepburn Wind site today, on the way to Melbourne, for Father's Day
I got out of the car, about 200 metres from the nearest turbine

I expected a gentle "hum" from this distance ...
But between the occassional bird noise - and a passing car - GOLDEN SILENCE
The LOUDEST opponenent FROM where I was, lives over a kilometre FURTHER in the same direction - on the other side of the Daylesford-Ballan Road

She must be Superwoman, with that sort of hearing 





This photo was  a FAKE ...




"It’s right at our front door" . . . Jan Perry, president of Landscape Guardians anti-wind farm group, at Leonards Hill, northeast of Melbourne, yesterday. Picture: Stuart McEvoy Source: The Australian


... set up by JAN PERRY ( ... of Landscape Guardians)  and on the payroll of Peter Mitchell, a founding chairman of the Moonie Oil Company and now chairman of Lowell Pty Ltd, which runs an investment fund focused on oil, coal seamgas and minerals.

and "The Australian" newspaper


Hepburn Wind has TWO turbines
NEITHER of which had been erected at the photo's time of publication

AND - underground exit cables






Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Jan 21st, 2012 at 1:44pm

juliar wrote on Jan 20th, 2012 at 6:22pm:
Froggie, will you never admit you are simply beaten.

*Were you there to see WHICH MICROPHONE or how many MICROPHONES were actually being used ? The actual microphone being used won't necessarily be visible in the video. If 2 mikes were used the mike looking at the windy farm may have been turned off during this particular part of the interview just for a more dramatic effect.

**These are professional interviewers who have sophisticated equipment that is designed to block out ambient noise as many interviews are conducted in a noisy environment. It is even possible that the lady was wearing a microphone, that was not visible in the video, which is designed to only hear the wearer's voice and this was done precisely to block out the ambient noise of the windy farm.

***Also, have you considered the possibility that the audio recording may have been edited back at the studio in order to enhance the effect of the lady's emotional sobbing and despair.
There is also the other, for you most exasperating, ****possibility that THE WIND TEMPORARILY STOPPED BLOWING and, of course, the horrible noise temporarily STOPPED.

Frog, look why don't you go down there and interview the lady yourself then you can be absolutely sure of the real fair dinkum honest to god truth. Don't forget to get your hearing checked first in case you are partially deaf from exposure to loud industrial noise or loud music or a motor bike.

The fact that the state governments have recognized that the people complaining about the noise from the windy farms do have a genuine grievance would suggest you are chasing moonbeams.

Why don't you register a complaint with each of the 3 state governments which have already or are about to enshrine in law that windy farms cannot be built within 2km of existing residents. Tell them that you are highly suspicious of evidence considered.

On YouTube there are quite a lot of videos demonstrating the noise from windy turbines and it is hard to believe every single one is lying like Miss Gillard.

In any case you won't have to worry anymore because all new windy farms in Vic, NSW, and WA (or SA?) will keep 2km away from existing residences so the problem won't exist anymore. Any existing problems might be resolved in the courts with quite substantial damages being claimed. I hope the farmers win their compensation.


Oh,melliar....
You do say the funniest (weirdest)things...

* Were YOU there to say I'm wrong?
That'd be a big NO, right??

**No sh!t, Sherlock??

***Definitely!! And if they enhanced her 'emotional sobbing', could they not also enhance the sound level of the generator?
(I've already explained how this is possible.)

Give it up!!

;)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Jan 21st, 2012 at 2:12pm
One for the road!!

Have you noticed, melliar, just how many have flocked in to support you?
Even your friends(?) are giving you a very wide berth.

I believe the closest was FRED, but he was really questioning me on a possible health issue.

Perhaps if you tried a less, far less, strident approach you might get more favourable attention.

You sound like that dreadfully disgusting, strident, peroxide blond that used to appear on one of the early morning weekend CA programs.

Think you might just need a make-over.

Good luck with that!!

:)

Have fun, y'all!!!

;)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 22nd, 2012 at 10:42pm
Frog,

You have lost the debate and you are frustrated by this fact so you are now using the typical Labor technique of avoiding the topic and unsuccessfully attacking the person - a classic admission of defeat.

The things you are saying are so trivial as as to be embarrassing. You just are not much good at debating. Emotional outbursts always say the same thing - you don't have any valid argument. The silly self contradictory nonsense you write about the studio enhancement totally justifies the conclusion that you are simply out of your depth. The purpose of the studio enhancement, if that is what they did, would be to emphasize the voice and to attenuate the ambient noise for dramatic effect. Just to confuse your poor little mind a bit more the interview may have been conducted on more than one day and the wind had dropped when they did the interview which seems to be causing you so much distress and delusion.

Get out of your armchair and stop waving your arms about and challenge the state government and ask to see their justification. Go and speak to your local member.

It is YOU who are calling the Australian landholders LIARS - so justify yourself because you have failed dismally so far. I dare you to go and confront these landholders and call them LIARS to their faces.

By the way did you vote for the GREENS - you certainly fit the profile of a typical uninformed idealistic GREENS voter.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by ########## on Jan 23rd, 2012 at 6:47am
ATTENTION


http://news.sp@m/tech/wind-power-without-the-blades.html





Noise from wind turbine blades, inadvertent bat and bird kills and even the way wind turbines look have made installing them anything but a breeze. New York design firm Atelier DNA has an alternative concept that ditches blades in favor of stalks. Resembling thin cattails, the Windstalks generate electricity when the wind sets them waving.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by ########## on Jan 23rd, 2012 at 6:49am

Wind Power Without the Blades


Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by ########## on Jan 23rd, 2012 at 6:49am

After completion, a Windstalk should be able to produce as much electricity as a single wind turbine,




http://news.sp@m/tech/wind-power-without-the-blades.html

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Jan 23rd, 2012 at 12:03pm

juliar wrote on Jan 22nd, 2012 at 10:42pm:
Frog,

You have lost the debate





SWEETHEART ...

YOU lost the "debate" way back HERE



http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1324270974/0#0


( ... try and throw a few FACTS into the mix - you might get a bit of a START up)




Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 23rd, 2012 at 10:09pm
Shocking destruction of wilderness by Bob Brown windy farm monstrosity !!!

Wind Power Australia – The Musselroe Wind Farm Travesty In Tasmania
  Posted on 01/18/2012 by TonyfromOz
Why is it that some of the most pristinely beautiful sites are the ones chosen for those new eyesores, Wind Towers. Such is the case for a proposed new Wind Power Plant, euphemistically called ‘Wind Farms’. How I hate that term ‘Wind Farm’, and they use that term to make them sound like they are doing something constructive, associating it with the land somehow. This new Wind Plant, The Musselroe Wind Farm, in Australia, is to be located in Tasmania, that large Island to the South of the Continent.

This new situation has a remarkable symmetry to what happened in Tasmania back in the 1980′s when a new dam was proposed for the Franklin River wilderness on that same Island, and part and parcel with that proposed dam was a Hydro electric plant. Back then however, environmentalists came from everywhere, Tasmania, Mainland Australia, and indeed from the wider World, all to protest against a Dam in a pristine wilderness area. Now however, it seems that something like this Wind Plant is somehow okay.

Back in the 1980′s one of the most vocal protesters, and in fact the leader of the protest was Bob Brown. That same Bob Brown is now an Australian Senator for the Australian Greens Party, representing the State of Tasmania, where this Wind Plant is to be constructed. Part of his agenda, and in fact, his Policy, is the introduction of Renewable Power Plants, so will he be protesting anything like this? In exactly the same manner as the dam on the Franklin that he protested against was a going to be a blot on the pristine Tasmanian landscape, this Wind Plant will also be a highly visible blot on the landscape, in his own home State.  Will he be protesting? Will his Greens Party deputy, Senator Milne, also from Tasmania be protesting as well?  No. In fact, this time, anybody who is protesting will be labelled by these same environmental advocates as ‘shills’ for ‘Big Oil’. They will be labelled as ‘Deniers’. They will be vilified if they make any protest whatsoever. How times change!

So then, let’s look at this new Musselroe Wind Plant, not from an environmental aspect, but from the absolute core of what this Plant is supposed to do, provide electrical power. First, let’s look at some of the technical details of the towers themselves. Vestas V90-3MW Nacelle - On top of each tower will be the Vestas V90-3 Nacelle. The -3 indicates that this nacelle will be housing a 3 MW generator. This nacelle weighs 70 tonnes, so the structure itself needs to be quite sturdy. Each tower will weigh in the vicinity of 285 Tonnes. The tower will be 105 metres tall, measured to the hub. That’s just a tick over 340 feet. Attached to that hub are the three blades, having a swept diameter of 90 metres, which is around 300 feet. So, from the base of the tower to the top of the rotating blades, that height is now just under 390 feet. There will be 56 of these huge towers in that pristine countryside. So, with 3MW generators, that total power comes in at 168MW.

This sounds like it is in fact quite a large amount of power, but as I have always said, that ‘up front’ Nameplate Capacity is not what should be highlighted. What should be focussed on wholly should be that actual power delivered to consumers in the State of Tasmania, because as with all power plants of any sort, they only supply a relatively local area. That expected power to be delivered for consumption is a theoretical total of 420GigaWattHours (GWH). Again, this sounds like it is a lot of power, and when you, as consumers look at your current electricity bill, you will see that your household consumption is stated there in KWH. (KiloWattHours) That delivered power of 420GWH is in fact 420,000,000KWH, and when stated like that, in comparison to your residential account, it actually does look to be a large amount. What that total power delivered number does tell us is just how efficient a Plant of this nature really is. If those rotating blades on every tower were to rotate 24 hours a day for a whole year, they would generate for consumption 1,472GWH of power. So, knowing the (theoretical) power delivery of 420GWH, we can calculate the Capacity Factor (CF) for this Plant.
That CF comes in at 28.5%.

Now, remember how I said the Plant can generate that huge total if it were to operate for the full 24 hours. Effectively, that 28.5% CF means that this Plant, all of those huge 56 towers will only be supplying their power for just under 7 hours a day. (28.5% of 24 hours) That’s 7 hours of power in every 24, averaged over the full year. The website for the Plant itself says that this Plant will be supplying the power needs for 50,000 homes, and when it is stated like that, it makes it sound like they are supplying an awful lot of power. This plant will not be connected directly to those 50,000 homes, and if it is only supplying power for just under 7 hours a day, then surely it would never supply all the needs for those 50,000 homes anyway. This Wind Plant will be connected to the Tasmanian Power Grid only. That grid supplies power to three sectors, the residential sector which consumes 38% of all power from the grid, The Commerce Sector (37%) and the Industrial Sector. (24%) So, that again shoots down the claim that this Plant WILL meet the electricity needs of those 50,000 homes. So, why do they use this figure when it’s so easy to discount.  It’s a clever ploy on behalf of the Company proposing this Plant. They cannot (and never do) state in the proposal that their Plant only has a CF of 28% and will only be supplying power for around those 7 hours a day. If they did that, people would ask some pretty stern questions of them.

So, what they do is, knowing the theoretical total power that the Plant ‘might’ generate, and knowing the total residential consumption for that area, they extrapolate the theoretical total into what an average residence might consume, and from that, they can then say that the Plant can supply the needs for that (X) number of homes, in this case 50,000. This way, it makes the Plant look pretty impressive, instead of pretty average, and they can actually say that they told the truth ‘up front’. The problem with that is that the average person does not know the technical details to work it out. The Plant then states at their website that they will in fact be saving 450,000 tons of Carbon Dioxide emissions each year, again making it sound like this Plant is actually doing something substantial. Again, this is ‘artful’ interpretation.

If they were to construct a coal fired plant of around the same size, then that coal fired plant would emit around that total of 450,000 tons of CO2, so that’s how they come by that number. If they construct this Wind Plant, then they are saving that 450,000 tons of CO2 by NOT constructing an equivalent coal fired plant. It could also be said that because this Wind Plant is supplying that electricity to the grid, then there would be a saving of CO2 emissions from Plants that do supply the grid, in this case Natural gas fired power plants, but again, that is a spurious figure, because, as I have said, this Wind Plant is only supplying power for, on average, 7 hours a day, and those hours are not firm, but can be any time, so, in fact, those same other power plants will still need to be operational to supply power, because they don’t know when this Wind Plant will be running, or just sitting there with the blades not turning due to lack of wind, or even too much wind.

This electrical power data alone is enough to make people think seriously about the efficacy of constructing 56 huge towers in such a pristine area. The average life of a Plant of this nature is (at best) 25 years, while the average life of current coal fired plants is around 50 years, and even that can be extended out. At the end of that 25 years, these now expired Wind Towers will just be huge and totally useless concrete structures.

This Plant will cost around $400 Million. The Company proposing the Plant will need to find finance for that and a large part of that has already been secured, from, of all places, China, the China Light and Power Company, trading in Australia as TRUenergy. Will the Vestas V90-3 Nacelles with the generator complex inside be constructed here in Australia, providing technical jobs for Australians? No.  Those nacelles will be imported from the manufacturer, based in Denmark.

The area where this construction is now under way is a known bird life habitat, but the Company says at their website that they will take that into account, and they say at their site: During operation of the wind farm a monitoring program will be undertaken that continues to look at bird use of the area. They will be looking at bird use of the area. Well, that’s a relief. Thank heavens for that. Look, there’s a bird. The area is also culturally significant to the local indigenous aboriginal people and this has also been taken into account when the Company says at their site: The project team continues to consult with the Aboriginal community as construction proceeds, and all construction team members attend a Cultural Awareness training session presented by members of the Aboriginal community as part of their induction to the wind farm site. Well, that too is a relief.

The Plant is situated on the North Eastern tip of Tasmania, and the Plant’s website says that this will take advantage of the ‘Roaring Forties’ that famed Latitude 40 Degrees South where the winds blow so strongly, and in fact the winds utilised to bring that very first fleet of settlers to Australia in 1788.
Read rest of distressing destruction in ref
http://papundits.wordpress.com/2012/01/18/wind-power-australia-the-musselroe-wind-farm-travesty-in-tasmania/

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Jan 24th, 2012 at 1:51am

buzzanddidj wrote on Jan 18th, 2012 at 8:31pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Dec 20th, 2011 at 3:09pm:
Wind turbines look a bit sh*t from what I can see.

Then again, if my house is powered by a nuclear plant, ..... I really couldn't give a toss as long as its nowhere near where I live.





I THINK you're "safe"


There will NEVER be a nuclear power plant built in Australia

After the mass radiation entering the atmosphere and food chain in Fukushima - and a century of cancers and birth defects resulting - I see the chance of any more plants being built on the Pacific Rim as not very likely







Seismologists predict big quake likely for Tokyo
January 23, 2012



Japanese researchers have warned of a 70 per cent chance that a magnitude-7.0 earthquake will strike Tokyo within four years - much higher than previous estimates.

Researchers at the University of Tokyo's earthquake research institute based the figure on data from the growing number of tremors in the capital since last year's March 11 earthquake off north-east Japan, the Yomiuri Shimbun reported.

According to the meteorological agency, an average of 1.48 earthquakes with magnitudes ranging from three to six have occurred per day in and near Tokyo since March.

That is around five times as many as before the disaster, the researchers said, according to the Yomiuri.

The Japanese government has forecast that the chance of a major quake of magnitude 7.0 or more in the Tokyo region is 70 per cent over the next 30 years.

Naoshi Hirata, one of the University of Tokyo researchers, says the results show seismicity has increased in the area around capital, which is expected to lead to a higher probability of a major quake.

The magnitude-9.0 earthquake last year and the resulting tsunami left more than 19,000 people dead or missing and crippled the cooling systems at the Fukushima nuclear power station, causing meltdowns in some of its reactors.

The last time a "big one" struck Tokyo was in 1923, when the magnitude-7.9 Great Kanto Earthquake claimed more than 100,000 lives, many of them in fires.

Previously, in 1855, the Ansei Edo quake also devastated the city.

Japan, located on the tectonic crossroads known as the Pacific Ring of Fire and dotted with volcanoes, is one of the world's most quake-prone countries, with Tokyo lying in one of its most dangerous areas.

The megacity sits on the intersection of three continental plates - the Eurasian, Pacific and Philippine Sea plates - which are slowly grinding against each other, building up enormous seismic pressure


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-01-23/seismologists-predict-big-quake-for-japan/3789072







Title: Re: Wind Turbine Illness ~ Dubious
Post by Greens_Win on Jan 24th, 2012 at 4:09am
Science on wind turbine illness dubious, say experts


FEARS that wind turbines make people sick are ''not scientifically valid'', and the arguments mounted by anti-wind farm campaigners are unconvincing, according to confidential briefings given to the state government by NSW Health.

Documents obtained under freedom-of-information laws show that health officials repeatedly warned ministers last year that there was no evidence for ''wind turbine syndrome'', a collection of ailments including sleeplessness, headaches and high blood pressure that some people believe are caused by the noise of spinning blades.

But the department's advice contrasts with the view of the Planning Minister, Brad Hazzard, who was responsible for draft guidelines, released in December, that significantly tighten the approvals process.

"I take the view that the jury is still out on the health impacts from wind farms,'' he told the Herald last night. "When it comes to people's health, I'll take a precautionary approach every time.''

Mr Hazzard said his view was consistent with that of NSW Health in that strong planning guidelines minimised any risk. The guidelines include a proviso that anyone living within two kilometres of a proposed turbine can send it through an extra planning process that takes account of health impacts.

NSW Health said in its briefings that the guidelines would minimise any health impacts but was scathing of presentations to the government by anti-wind farm groups, including the Landscape Guardians.

One study by Nina Pierpont, which is central to the claims that wind turbines make people ill, was dismissed as ''not of sufficient scientific rigour'' by NSW Health. ''This 'study' is not a rigorous epidemiological study; it is a case series of 10 families drawn from a wide range of locations,'' according to the ministerial briefing on July 5 last year. ''This work has not been properly peer reviewed. Nor has it been published in the peer-reviewed literature. The findings are not scientifically valid, with major methodological flaws stemming from the poor design of the study."

The documents, obtained under FOI laws by the environment group Friends of the Earth, say existing studies had been examined and no known causal link could be established. The assessment undermines the claims of an anti-wind farm group, the Waubra Foundation, which had been lobbying the government for a moratorium on new wind farms.

"The documents from NSW Health confirm our belief that the foundation has been 'cherry picking' data that supports its allegations about 'wind turbine syndrome' by talking with people who believe they have … symptoms,'' said a Friends of the Earth spokesman, Cam Walker. ''This becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy and is not the basis of good science … Yet, as has been noted by a growing number of medical authorities, there is no credible evidence of a causal link between turbines and ill health.''

The president of the NSW Landscape Guardians, Humphrey Price-Jones, claimed to have observed a ''churlish attitude'' among NSW Health officials who had sat through presentations by anti-wind farm groups.

''We find it extremely peculiar that the Department of Health would dismiss, out of hand, anecdotal evidence,'' Mr Price-Jones said. ''The fact that it is anecdotal doesn't mean it should be ignored or cast aside.''

The group believes evidence linking illnesses caused by low-level sound from turbines is mounting and would soon be impossible for the government to ignore. It said a thorough investigation was required.

A landowner near Lake George, Marcia Osborne, said her family had had no medical problems or trouble sleeping from the seven or eight turbines close by. ''Quite the opposite really, they've done nothing but help us,'' she said.

''We are farmers … things were pretty tough [during the drought] … When they asked us if they could put a wind farm on the place it was like a gift from God. We used to curse the wind, now we get paid for the wind.''

The guidelines are on exhibition until March 14.

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/energy-smart/science-on-wind-turbine-illness-d...

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Jan 24th, 2012 at 6:19am
We were wrong on turbine noise, admit protesters
Monday, October 31, 2011

When they first heard there were going to be four giant wind turbines on their doorsteps, villagers feared the worst.

But now even some of the most hardened protesters have admitted fears over the noise have come to nothing.






The county's first commercial wind farm has towered over the countryside between the villages of Gilmorton, Ashby Magna and Dunton Bassett, near Lutterworth, since its construction in March.

Concerns over noise from the 410ft turbines prompted swift action from residents who campaigned against the project. However, after being in operation for almost a month homeowners have said they are getting used to the gentle "swoosh" of the giant blades.

John Phillips, 70, lives in Ashby Road, less than a mile from the wind farm. He said he was against the construction at first.

He said: "I went to all the protest meetings and I was against them from the start.

"But now, I must say they don't really bother me. I can't hear them and I can barely see them.

"It's like the industrial revolution all over again – people don't like change until it actually happens and they get used to it."


Kelly Gamage, 33, moved into her home in Gilmorton in July, and said she had no idea about the plans to build a wind farm there. She said: "It was a shock when we found out, we certainly didn't expect anything like this when we moved in.

"At first we didn't want them on our doorstep, but now they're up, they're not doing any harm and there's no noise coming from them."

The turbines, which cost £1.8million each, stand between the three villages.

David Dewes, who owns Low Spinney Farm, after which the wind farm is named, said: "I think now the ice has been broken people are warming to them. Our home is very close to one of the turbines and the most we hear is a slight swooshing sound – some people have said it's quite calming actually."

The wind farm, which is connected to the National Grid, is expected to provide enough power for 5,000 homes.

It is estimated that it has produced 2.5 gigawatts of electricity since the blades began turning at the start of October.

Parish councils at Gilmorton, Ashby Magna and Dunton Bassett will receive £5,333 a year as part of the agreement with the developer, Broadview Energy.


http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/wrong-turbine-noise-admit-protesters/story-13713002-detail/story.html




‘Wind turbine syndrome’ due to anxiety, not wind turbines
August 13, 2011

Once we perceive that something bad, dangerous or threatening is in our lives (or in our immediate environment) we become hypervigilant and aroused. People who are in an anxious state typically experience high startle reflex, insomnia, headaches, nausea, twitches, electrical sensations and various other symptoms.
I see them every day. The symptoms described by the affected individuals in the program are very typical somatic symptoms associated with hypervigilance. Some, like the man who described “a sensation of his heart wanting to leap out of his chest, and just feeling as if he was going to – about to die”, are experiencing panic attacks.

While some people suggest that these individuals are just noticing random symptoms that we all experience, and attributing them to the wind turbines, in my view the individuals interviewed on the 4 Corners were clearly anxious and distressed, and were experiencing genuine physical symptoms. Anxiety related symptoms are not imagined – they are real.
When these individuals leave the area they feel better because they feel safe – hypervigilance drops and nervous arousal subsides. However this is not the same thing as the biological pathways that are being proposed by those who claim a direct causal link between turbines and ill-health.


http://yes2renewables.org/2011/08/13/wind-turbine-syndrome-due-to-anxiety-not-wind-turbines/




Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 24th, 2012 at 10:58am
It is a bit late to close the gate after all the cows have got out of the paddock.

All the arm waving from the armchairs and pointless posturing and copying biased reports from parties who gain financially from these Bob Brown whirling noisy inefficient costly monstrosities is not going to make the slightest difference to the 3 states that have already done the research and concluded simply that the swirly twirly noisy environment spoiling inefficient mouse power blots on the landscape have to be kept 2km away from existing residences.

You arm waving hysterics should have got out of your armchairs and campaigned BEFORE the governments made the decisions.

The next interesting part will be to see what legal claims for compensation are lodged by landholders who are being adversely affected by noise and vibrations from these environmentally damaging monstrosities. The claims will be on the basis that landholders were knowingly given misleading info when the development applications were put up.

What will really get the legal thing going is when one of these heavily loaded large mechanical structures fails and disintegrates and hurls large chunks of debris and kills someone or something or damages a house. All that is required is for the rotor brake to fail in a hi wind and it will all come crashing down. If the cooling fails then the generator part will overheat and catch fire. These things only have a life of 25 years and as they get older the probability of a catastrophic disintegration rises dramatically - particularly if the costly maintenance is neglected. Anyone living close to one of these potential disasters should make certain their insurance covers damage caused by a disintegrating windy pole mounted doodah.

An interesting theory re the low frequency vibrations is that the huge hollow support is shaken by the huge whirling rotor and acts like a giant didgeridoo.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Doctor Jolly on Jan 24th, 2012 at 12:01pm

juliar wrote on Jan 24th, 2012 at 10:58am:
It is a bit late to close the gate after all the cows have got out of the paddock.

All the arm waving from the armchairs and pointless posturing and copying biased reports from parties who gain financially from these Bob Brown whirling noisy inefficient costly monstrosities is not going to make the slightest difference to the 3 states that have already done the research and concluded simply that the swirly twirly noisy environment spoiling inefficient mouse power blots on the landscape have to be kept 2km away from existing residences.



You are such a massive enermy of freedom juliar. If its not forcing kids to register their bikes, its putting in draconian planing permission restrictions on windmills, just because you dont like either.

A regular little dictator you are.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Jan 24th, 2012 at 2:15pm

juliar wrote on Jan 22nd, 2012 at 10:42pm:
Frog,

You have lost the debate and you are frustrated by this fact so you are now using the typical Labor technique of avoiding the topic and unsuccessfully attacking the person - a classic admission of defeat.

I wouldn't say 'unsuccessfully!! Or 'lost the debate, for that matter.You appear to be the one doing all the spitting and spluttering!

The things you are saying are so trivial as as to be embarrassing. You just are not much good at debating. Emotional outbursts always say the same thing - you don't have any valid argument. The silly self contradictory nonsense you write about the studio enhancement totally justifies the conclusion that you are simply out of your depth.
And you are the expert?? I presume your adviser is your 8yo son.

The purpose of the studio enhancement, if that is what they did,
(Well, did they, or didn't they? You were the one to first suggest it, so make up your mind.)
would be to emphasize the voice and to attenuate the ambient noise for dramatic effect. Just to confuse your poor little mind a bit more the interview may have been conducted on more than one day and the wind had dropped when they did the interview which seems to be causing you so much distress and delusion.

No 'distress and delusion' on MY part, too bad I can't say the same for you.

Get out of your armchair and stop waving your arms about and challenge the state government and ask to see their justification. Go and speak to your local member.



It is YOU who are calling the Australian landholders LIARS - so justify yourself because you have failed dismally so far. I dare you to go and confront these landholders and call them LIARS to their faces.

Not those 'landholders' who have inlstalled the product who, I might add, seem quite happy with such.

By the way did you vote for the GREENS - you certainly fit the profile of a typical uninformed idealistic GREENS voter.
Are you trying to infer here that YOUR opinion is informed??



;) ;)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Jan 24th, 2012 at 2:16pm

buzzanddidj wrote on Jan 23rd, 2012 at 12:03pm:

juliar wrote on Jan 22nd, 2012 at 10:42pm:
Frog,

You have lost the debate





SWEETHEART ...

YOU lost the "debate" way back HERE



http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1324270974/0#0


( ... try and throw a few FACTS into the mix - you might get a bit of a START up)


Way, way before that, buzz.
:)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by froggie on Jan 24th, 2012 at 2:21pm
All the arm waving from the armchairs and pointless posturing and copying biased reports.... (melliar)

Oh, the irony!!

Gun, Foot.....BANG!!!

;)

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 24th, 2012 at 4:35pm
Oh Froggo,

the childish foot stamping is quaint but is not going to get the 3 state govt's attention as they won't be able to hear the pitter patter of your little tootsies over the raucous racket from the Bob Brown windy farms.

Make yourself useful and get down to Tasmania and save the mutton birds from extinction by the utterly wilderness destroying Bob Brown windy farm at Musselroe.

Oh Froggo, you forgot to say if you voted for the Greens - that info would explain a lot about your general lack of expertise.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 24th, 2012 at 7:03pm
The Daylesford Downwind Dynamo

about hepburn wind
Hepburn Wind is the owner and operator of Australia’s first community owned wind farm, at Leonards Hill, just south of Daylesford Victoria.
The 4.1 MW wind farm comprises two turbines and is located at Leonards Hill, in Central Victoria, just south of Daylesford and approximately 100 km north-west of Melbourne.
Hepburn Wind is the trading name of Hepburn Community Wind Park Co-operative Ltd, a co-operative registered in Victoria, Australia.
Hepburn Wind was established in 2007 by the Hepburn Renewable Energy Association, now known as SHARE.
the co-operative
Hepburn Community Wind Park Co-operative Ltd (Hepburn Wind) is a trading co-operative registered in Victoria (Reg. No: G0003442Y, ABN: 87 572 206 200) with over 1900 members, the majority of whom are local to the project. The co-operative structure, with each member having one vote, ensures democratic control however members will receive dividends proportional to their investment. The co‑operative is managed by a board of nine volunteer directors who are elected at Annual General Meetings of the co‑operative. Operational support is provided by a local executive team.
Shares in Hepburn Wind may only be purchased by co-operative members. If you are interested in joining the co-operative and purchasing shares, please register your interest. You will then be able to download our disclosure information and application form.

electricity sales
Red Energy, a retailer owned by Snowy Hydro, purchases the total output of the wind farm. Red Energy and Hepburn Wind have developed Community Saver a retail product available to all residents of Victoria. This provides a 100% renewable electricity product at competitive pricing. In addition, Red Energy contributes up to $50 a year to the Hepburn Wind Community Fund for each customer on the Community Saver plan who pays their bill on time.

hepburn wind community fund
A proportion of the revenue from the sale of electricity, plus the contribution from Red Energy goes to community projects through the Hepburn Wind Community Fund. Per turbine, the fund is the most generous community fund of any wind farm in Australia and is projected to provide well over $1m to local sustainability projects over the next 25 years.
funding
The project’s financing comprises:
capital from members and applicants — $9,640,225
Sustainability Victoria RESF grant — $975,000
Regional Development Victoria RIDF grant      — $750,000
Bendigo and Adelaide Bank loan (10 years, not fully drawn) — $3,100,000
a debt guarantee from Embark Australia — $1,000,000
Future Energy Pty Ltd underwrote a significant portion of the early stage development costs.

more information
see our FAQs for more information
see our planning and compliance page
see our official documents page for the rules of the co-operative and financial reports
read the detailed case study at Embark
register your interest to join
contact us
http://hepburnwind.com.au/about/

An inside glance into the potent powerhouse on long legs:-

Why just two turbines?
The scale of the project is suited for the energy requirements and financial resources of our community. The site of the Hepburn Community Wind Farm is suitable for only two turbines. Our rules permit us to invest in more wind turbines, however any additional turbines will not be on Leonards Hill.

How are the turbines be maintained?
We have entered into a comprehensive and long-term maintenance and services contract with REpower Systems.
REpower employs service technicians that maintain turbines at several sites across Victoria. The turbines are also monitored from a 24 hour control room in Germany.
Our wind farm manager lives approximately 800 m from the turbines and oversees works on site.

What responsibility do members have for the activities of the Co-operative?
Each individual member’s risk is limited to the value of their fully paid up share capital (as well as any personal debts owing to the co-operative) upon winding up. Members are not otherwise liable for the activity of the co-operative.
We maintain a comprehensive insurance policy which specifically addresses risks of claims arising from the operation of the wind farm.

What kind of turbines are installed?
The Hepburn Community Wind Farm comprises two REpower MM82 wind turbines, each with a maximum capacity of 2.05 MW. The wind farm has been designed to output 4.1 MW when operating at full power. The wind farm has a predicted capacity factor of 34%.
The planning permit constrained the maximum height of the wind farm to 110 m from ground to blade tip. The REpower turbines sit on a 68 m tower and have a blade length of 41 m. At this height, no aircraft warning lights are required.

What is the wind like on Leonards Hill?
A wind monitoring mast was installed on the Leonards Hill site in August 2006. After 12 months of data had been collected, Garrad Hassan Pacific Pty Ltd, a recognised world leader in wind energy analysis, was engaged to perform an expert wind energy assessment for the site.
Garrad Hassan’s assessment predicts a hub-height average wind speed of 7.7 m/s with a standard error of 0.50 m/s. The wind energy analysis is available in the planning and compliance section of this website.
Garrad Hassan analysed the detailed wind data and the nominal performance of the chosen wind turbines and predicted that the average annual energy production of the wind farm will exceed 12.2 GWh in 50% of years, 10.8 GWh in 75% of years, and 9.4 GWh in 90% of years.
While the methodology applied is rigorous, the predictions are based on a number of estimates and assumptions which may lead to error (positive or negative) in the predictions. Furthermore, actual performance of any system harnessing natural forces will exhibit variability, and as such there is a significant risk that average estimates will not be met in a given year.

What is the working life of the wind farm?
The directors believe that 25 years is a reasonable estimate for the life of the turbines. Much like any machinery, maintenance costs will increase as the turbines age and at some point in the distant future the current turbines will reach the end of their economic life.
Many years from now our board of directors will consult with members and the landowner and determine the appropriate course of action, currently expected to be either:
decommissioning the turbines, returning residual funds to members
recommissioning of the wind farm (known as ‘repowering’).

What happens in extreme wind conditions?
On the rare occasions that the wind exceeds 25 m/s, the turbines automatically ‘feather’ their blades so that they catch minimal wind. A brake is applied and the turbine stops and waits for the high wind conditions to pass.
The blades, towers and foundations are designed to withstand wind speeds well in excess of anything that can reasonably be expected at Leonards Hill.

What fire risks do turbines present?
Turbine fires are very rare, but occur very occasionally, just as they do with other activities that involve electricity, heat and machinery such as cars, tractors, harvesters, trains, buildings, mines, schools and houses.
It is our understanding that over the past 15 years there have been only three turbine fires in Australia, all of which were contained. In context, there are an estimated 220 haystack fires each year in Victoria alone.
Each turbine has a lightning collection system providing a safe path for lightning from the blades, down the tower and into a copper earth grid underground. By providing an alternate and preferred route for lightning, it is likely that turbines reduce the incidence of lightning induced bush-fires in the local vicinity.
The CFA was consulted both during the planning process and for the development of our fire management plans.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 24th, 2012 at 7:25pm
So it looks like the 3 state govts are correct in keeping Bob Brown windy farms at least 2km away from residences.

Are wind farms a health risk? US scientist identifies 'wind turbine syndrome'

Noise and vibration coming from large turbines are behind an increase in heart disease, migraine, panic attacks and other health problems, according to research by an American doctor

BY MARGARETA PAGANO   SUNDAY 02 AUGUST 2009
 
Living too close to wind turbines can cause heart disease, tinnitus, vertigo, panic attacks, migraines and sleep deprivation, according to groundbreaking research to be published later this year by an American doctor.

Dr Nina Pierpont, a leading New York paediatrician, has been studying the symptoms displayed by people living near wind turbines in the US, the UK, Italy, Ireland and Canada for more than five years. Her findings have led her to confirm what she has identified as a new health risk, wind turbine syndrome (WTS). This is the disruption or abnormal stimulation of the inner ear's vestibular system by turbine infrasound and low-frequency noise, the most distinctive feature of which is a group of symptoms which she calls visceral vibratory vestibular disturbance, or VVVD. They cause problems ranging from internal pulsation, quivering, nervousness, fear, a compulsion to flee, chest tightness and tachycardia – increased heart rate. Turbine noise can also trigger nightmares and other disorders in children as well as harm cognitive development in the young, she claims. However, Dr Pierpont also makes it clear that not all people living close to turbines are susceptible.

Until now, the Government and the wind companies have denied any health risks associated with the powerful noises and vibrations emitted by wind turbines. Acoustic engineers working for the wind energy companies and the Government say that aerodynamic noise produced by turbines pose no risk to health, a view endorsed recently by acousticians at Salford University. They have argued that earlier claims by Dr Pierpont are "imaginary" and are likely to argue that her latest findings are based on a sample too small to be authoritative.

At the heart of Dr Pierpont's findings is that humans are affected by low-frequency noise and vibrations from wind turbines through their ear bones, rather like fish and other amphibians. That humans have the same sensitivity as fish is based on new discoveries made by scientists at Manchester University and New South Wales last year. This, she claims, overturns the medical orthodoxy of the past 70 years on which acousticians working for wind farms are using to base their noise measurements. "It has been gospel among acousticians for years that if a person can't hear a sound, it's too weak for it to be detected or registered by any other part of the body," she said. "But this is no longer true. Humans can hear through the bones. This is amazing. It would be heretical if it hadn't been shown in a well-conducted experiment."

In the UK, Dr Christopher Hanning, founder of the British Sleep Society, who has also backed her research, said: "Dr Pierpont's detailed recording of the harm caused by wind turbine noise will lay firm foundations for future research. It should be required reading for all planners considering wind farms. Like so many earlier medical pioneers exposing the weaknesses of current orthodoxy, Dr Pierpont has been subject to much denigration and criticism and ... it is tribute to her strength of character and conviction that this important book is going to reach publication."

Dr Pierpont's thesis, which is to be published in October by K-Selected Books, has been peer reviewed and includes an endorsement from Professor Lord May, former chief scientific adviser to the UK government. Lord May describes her research as "impressive, interesting and important".

Her new material about the impact of turbine noise on health will be of concern to the Government given its plans for about 4,000 new wind turbines across the country. Ed Miliband, the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, has made wind power a central part of his new green policy to encourage renewable energy sources. Another 3,000 are planned off-shore.

Drawing on the early work of Dr Amanda Harry, a British GP in Portsmouth who had been alerted by her patients to the potential health risk, Dr Pierpont gathered together 10 further families from around the world who were living near large wind turbines, giving her a cluster of 38 people, from infants to age 75, to explore the pathophysiology of WTS for the case series. Eight of the 10 families she analysed for the study have now moved away from their homes.

In a rare interview, Dr Pierpont, a fellow of the American Academy of Pediatrics, told The Independent on Sunday: "There is no doubt that my clinical research shows that the infrasonic to ultrasonic noise and vibrations emitted by wind turbines cause the symptoms which I am calling wind turbine syndrome. There are about 12 different health problems associated with WTS and these range from tachycardia, sleep disturbance, headaches, tinnitus, nausea, visual blurring, panic attacks with sensations of internal quivering to more general irritability.

"The wind industry will try to discredit me and disparage me, but I can cope with that. This is not unlike the tobacco industry dismissing health issues from smoking. The wind industry, however, is not composed of clinicians, nor is it made up of people suffering from wind turbines." The IoS has a copy of the confidential manuscript which is exhaustive in its research protocol and detailed case series, drawing on the work of leading otolaryngologists and neurotologists – ear, nose and throat clinical specialists.

Some of the earliest research into the impact of low-frequency noise and vibrations was undertaken by Portuguese doctors studying the effects on military and civil personnel flying at high altitudes and at supersonic speed. They found that this exposure may also cause the rare illness, vibroacoustic disorder or VAD, which causes changes to the structure of certain organs such as the heart and lungs and may well be caused by vibrations from turbines. Another powerful side effect of turbines is the impact which the light thrown off the blades – known as flicker – has on people who suffer from migraines and epilepsy.

Campaigners have consistently argued that much research hitherto has been based on written complaints to environmental health officers and manufacturers, not on science-based research. But in Denmark, Germany and France, governments are moving towards building new wind farms off-shore because of concern over the potential health and environmental risks. In the UK there are no such controls, and a growing number of lobbyists, noise experts and government officials are also beginning to query the statutory noise levels being given to councils when deciding on planning applications from wind farm manufacturers. Lobbyists claim a new method of measuring is needed.

Dr Pierpont, who has funded all the research herself and is independent of any organisation, recommends at least a 2km set-back distance between potential wind turbines and people's homes, said: "It is irresponsible of the wind turbine companies – and governments – to continue building wind turbines so close to where people live until there has been a proper epidemiological investigation of the full impact on human health.

"What I have shown in my research is that many people – not all – who have been living close to a wind turbine running near their homes display a range of health illnesses and that when they move away, many of these problems also go away."

A breakthrough into understanding more of the impact of vibrations came last year, she said, when scientists at Manchester University and Prince of Wales Clinical School and Medical Research Institute in Sydney showed that the normal human vestibular system has a fish or frog-like sensitivity to low-frequency vibration. This was a turning point in understanding the nature of the problem, Dr Pierpont added, because it overturns the orthodoxy of the current way of measuring noise. "It is clear from the new evidence that the methods being used by acousticians goes back to research first carried out in the 1930s and is now outdated."

Dr Pierpont added that the wind turbine companies constantly argue that the health problems are "imaginary, psychosomatic or malingering". But she said their claims are "rubbish" and that medical evidence supports that the reported symptoms are real.

Case study: 'My husband had pneumonia, my father-in-law had a heart attack. Nobody was ill before'

Jane Davis, 53, a retired NHS manager, and her husband, Julian, 44, a farmer, lived in Spalding, Lincolnshire, until the noise of a wind farm 930m away forced them to leave

"People describe the noise as like an aeroplane that never arrives. My husband developed pneumonia very quickly after the turbines went up, having never had chest problems before. We suffer constant headaches and ear nuisance. My mother-in-law developed pneumonia and my husband developed atrial fibrillation – a rapid heartbeat. He had no pre-existing heart disease. Our blood pressure has gone up. My father-in-law has suffered a heart attack, tinnitus and marked hearing loss.

" I understand this can be regarded as a coincidence, but nobody was ill before 2006."

Read more in ref:-
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/are-wind-farms-a-health-risk-us-scientist-identifies-wind-turbine-syndrome-1766254.html

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 25th, 2012 at 11:18pm
Oh my goodness gracious me what a sacrilegious suggestion - the global wormers will be wriggling in indignant horror.

Why bother with wasteful wind ?

Let’s try to understand wind power.

Every wind farm needs backup generators to supply power when the wind fails.

If there is no wind, zero electricity is produced by the turbines and all power comes from the backup generators (mainly coal or gas in Australia).

If wind speed exceeds design capacity, the turbines are shut down to prevent damage, and all power comes from the backup generators.

In freezing still air, the wind turbines take electricity from the backup generators to prevent damage from cold. And they draw power to get reconnected.

When the wind blows strongly all over the wind farm, the grid may not be able to cope with the surge in supply so some turbines may be paid to close down, producing no electricity.

And on those rare occasions when a steady wind in the right place produces just the right amount of power to supply the demand at that time, the backup generators produce no useful power but waste fuel to maintain “spinning reserve” and to ramp up and down when the wind fluctuates.

Now we find that wind power probably increases the production of carbon dioxide (not that this matters).

One question.

Why not scrap the wind turbines and produce a steady supply of low cost power from the backup generators?

Viv Forbes is chairman of the Carbon Sense Coalition. He has a degree in Applied Science and has spent his career in the mining, farming, energy and investment industries, with many positions from rouseabout, to investment manager, to chairman of the board. He has lived in Canberra and has worked for state and federal public services. He is now semi-retired. He is a non-executive director of a small Australian coal explorer.
http://australianconservative.com/2012/01/why-bother-with-wasteful-wind/

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 25th, 2012 at 11:21pm
This will make the global wormers puff and blow.

Why wind won’t work


Why are governments still mollycoddling wind power?

There is no proof that wind farms reduce carbon dioxide emissions and it is ludicrous to believe that a few windmills in Australia are going to improve global climate.

Such wondrous expressions of green faith put our politicians on par with those who believe in the tooth fairy.

Tax payers funding this largess and consumers paying the escalating power bills are entitled to demand proof.

Not only is there no climate justification for wind farms, but they are also incapable of supplying reliable or economical power.

It is also surprising those who claim to be defenders of the environment can support this monstrous desecration of the environment.

Wind power is so dilute that to collect a significant quantity of wind energy will always require thousands of gigantic towers each with a massive concrete base and a network of interconnecting heavy duty roads and transmission lines. Then when they go into production, they slice up bats and eagles, disturb neighbours, reduce property values and start bushfires.

Finally, to cover the total loss of power when the wind drops or blows too hard, every wind farm needs a conventional back-up power station (commonly gas-fired) with capacity at least twice the design capacity of the wind farm to even out the sudden fluctuations in the electricity grid.

Why bother with the wind farm – just build the backup?

There is no justification for the continuation of mandates, subsidies or tax breaks favouring wind power over reliable and cheaper electricity generation options.

Wind power should compete on an equal basis with all other electricity options.

All of the above statements are supported and expanded in a recent submission to the Australian Senate is entitled: “Why Wind Won’t Work? – It’s as Weak as Water.”

For a summary of the submission see:
http://carbon-sense.com/2011/02/08/why-wind-wont-work/

For the full report with pictures and all the gory and depressing details see:
http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/why-wind-wont-work.pdf

Viv Forbes is Chairman of the Carbon Sense Coalition, an Australian organisation which opposes pollution and waste of energy, and promotes rational carbon energy policies.

http://australianconservative.com/2011/02/why-wind-wont-work/

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 25th, 2012 at 11:25pm
It is enough to make the global wormers go batty.

Wind turbines 'hit' bat populations

Wind turbines are killing many thousands of bats contributing to a population decline that may be costing farmers millions of pounds, say researchers.

By  Richard Alleyne, Science Correspondent  8:00PM BST 31 Mar 2011

Scientists found the blades of wind turbines were a major threat to bats particularly when they are migrating.

Bats are useful to farmers because they eat large numbers of crop damaging insects, reducing the amount that has to be spent on pesticides.

Writing in the journal Science, the researchers estimated that bats could be worth billions to agriculture around the world.

Several migratory tree-living species of bats were being slaughtered "in unprecedented numbers" by wind turbines, said the researcher.

The work concentrated on North America but backs up research carried out in Britain that had similar findings.

Researchers urged policy-makers not to wait before addressing the issue of bat decline.

"Not acting is not an option because the life histories of these flying, nocturnal mammals – characterised by long generation times and low reproductive rates – mean that population recovery is unlikely for decades or even centuries, if at all," said lead researcher Dr Gary McCracken, from the University of Tennessee at Knoxville.

According to the researchers, a single colony of 150 big brown bats in Indiana ate almost 1.3 million potentially damaging insects a year.

"Without bats, crop yields are affected," said Dr McCracken.

"Pesticide applications go up. Even if our estimates were quartered, they clearly show how bats have enormous potential to influence the economics of agriculture and forestry."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/8419796/Wind-turbines-hit-bat-populations.html

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 25th, 2012 at 11:28pm
The global wormers will see red over this.

Stop the stupidity – green power generates red ink


It’s time to end the mollycoddling of wind and solar energy toys before this stupidity does irreversible damage to Australia’s electricity supply and costs.

The mindless green dream of producing serious base load power from whimsical breezes and intermittent sunbeams has caused a halt to new low-cost coal power, a boom in expensive gas power, a national debate about nuclear power and no effect at all on global climate.

The frivolous wind and solar generators already installed have caused a surge in electricity prices, a bonanza for Chinese manufacturers and well founded doubts about our future ability to keep the lights on.

Provision of cheap reliable energy is a basic requirement for modern civilisation and is the engine that lifts people from poverty. It is far too important to be left to green dreamers, anti-industrial zealots, vote seeking politicians, engineering illiterates and guilt-ridden millionaires.

It is already obvious from Denmark, Spain, California and Germany that subsidising green power creates very little power but much red ink in the accounts. It always causes massive burdens for tax payers, electricity consumers and industry. Tax payers and investors will rue the day they allowed politicians to waste their savings on chimeras.

Get rid of all the mandated markets, subsidies and tax breaks for all energy generators, and leave power engineers and business managers to work out how best to supply our future energy needs in a free competitive market.

Subsidised power must collapse under its own dead weight. But every day’s delay increases the eventual cost.

Viv Forbes is Chairman of the Carbon Sense Coalition, an Australian organisation which opposes pollution and waste of energy, and promotes rational carbon energy policies.
http://australianconservative.com/2010/12/green-power-generates-red-ink/

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 25th, 2012 at 11:31pm
The global wormers will have to pray for guidance from their holy heros Bob Brown and Christine Milne.

Wind, solar, geothermal, now to cost a $1 trillion plus

There is a huge government sponsored push to establish huge wind farms and solar thermal and geothermal power in Australia.

Geothermal is moderately successful in places where the hot rock is relatively close to the surface of the planet. So far, it is a costly failure here.

Wind farms and solar thermal projects are expensive failures everywhere. Billions of dollars have been wasted.

There is no mention here, from anybody about nuclear energy, as almost every nation in the world except New Zealand and Australia are rushing into nuclear power.

Nobody except possibly a few of Bob Brown’s and Christine Milne’s followers can be stupid enough to believe that wind and solar can replace Australia’s coal fired power stations.

Malcolm Turnbull and some of his followers are as enthusiastic as ever to install an ETS and meddle with wind and solar.

Sensible people must ask the question why?

Of course the public will bear the cost of this dream world fantasy if it is attempted to be implemented.

What will be the next moronic fantasy of the Canberra Kremlin.

http://australianconservative.com/2010/08/wind-solar-geothermal-now-to-cost-a-1-trillion-plus/

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 25th, 2012 at 11:36pm
Bob Greens Communist Browns socialist tax to transfer money from the wealthy to the poor.

Carbon taxes energy production and technology: more green nonsense


Gerard Jackson  BrookesNews.Com   Monday 1 March 2010

Greens argue that solar and wind power are genuine alternatives to centralised electricity generation. Therefore the long term effect of a carbon tax would be to substitute the latter for the former with little or no loss in production. Critics counter that these alternative energy sources are very inefficient and would require substantial subsidies. This approach leaves me somewhat bewildered. To argue that solar and wind are inefficient alternatives to coal-fired power stations because they are more costly is no argument at all.

The greens' response is to state that a carbon tax would have the effect of inducing greater efficiency while encouraging the development of new technologies. Our critics have remained silent in the face of this defence. No wonder considering that Professor Sinclair Davidson used a similar defence when defending a rise in the value of the Australian dollar. (Australia Will Survive the Greenback's Fall, Wall Street Journal, 9 November 2009).

We all know that a rise in the exchange rate has a similar effect as a direct tax on exports. A carbon tax has basically the same effect. Hence Davidson's efficiency argument against alternative energy is undermined by his own advice to Australian manufacturers to overcome the effect of a rising exchange rate by simply becoming more efficient, despite the fact that there is a strict limits to just how efficient a firm can be. Moreover, there is no reason whatsoever to assume that exporters have not already reached that limit. It is this kind of elasticity of thinking by our rightwing that has given the greens a free ride.

Let us now do what the critics have failed to do and that is examine the nature of the inefficiencies that would make alternative energy sources a complete economic disaster. First and foremost, solar energy is extremely dilute (wind* is also a form of solar energy). The maximum amount of solar energy striking the Earth under optimum conditions is just under 1Kw. (Optimum conditions are rare and could only be maintained for a short period.) This means that vast collecting areas are required, not to mention the colossal amounts of materials needed for the construction of collectors.

What this means in economic terms is that solar and wind involve massive diseconomies of scale. In plain English, unlike centralised power generation these so-called alternatives are marked by long run rising average costs of production. For those who think otherwise, they should bear in mind that solar and wind involve no indivisibilities to speak of. No indivisibilities means no economies of scale, a fact that even the critics have overlooked.

If we make the simple assumption (as do mainstream economists) of basically treating capital (the material means of production) as uniform wooden blocks that can be easily fitted together the situation will become much clearer. Firms — including power companies — will combine a number of blocks (capital) with labour and land in such away as to try and minimise their average costs of production.

Having done this the politicians now decides that it would be an absolutely spiffing idea to upset the whole capital structure by imposing a carbon tax with the intention of totally destroying certain factor combinations, meaning coal-fired power stations, so as to replace them with solar and wind. But because of the extremely dilute nature of solar energy many more blocks (capital) are need to produce the same output.

As it takes x number of blocks and y amount of land for a coal-fired power station to produce z amount of power and, say, 20x and 1000y (this is no exaggeration) for a solar plant to produce the same amount of power it becomes crystal clear why solar is grossly inefficient. Actually, the situation would be even worse. A determined switch to solar power would quickly deliver a double whammy to the economy. The first effect would be to drain away masses of capital which in turn would deprive industry of investment funds. This would be swiftly followed by a devastating rise in energy costs that would savage the economy and slash the standard of living.

Actually it would not reach this state of affairs because the damaging effects of the attempted switch would quickly make themselves felt long before the process could be completed, as the case of Spain amply demonstrates. We can therefore conclude that given the insurmountable natural limitation that solar power diluteness presents it is a physical impossibility for solar to satisfy Australia's electricity needs, or that of any advanced economy, a fact that critics have so far failed to note. (Of course, the situation would be different if the average standard of living was reduced to that of a medieval peasant.) It is also clear that there is absolutely no way in this universe that the barrier of diluteness can be overcome, unless greens think they can repeal the first law of thermodynamics.

If critics of the carbon tax want to make a greater impact they must do all within their power to inform the public of the insuperable problems that afflict so-called alternative energy sources. They must also stress the massive social and economic costs of these alternatives. So far they have failed to do both.

Technology and taxes

The idea that raising the cost of energy will induce the emergence of new technologies could only be proposed by people completely ignorant of economic history and the history of technology. I cannot think of a single instance of this happening. Taken to its logical conclusion we can argue that the Romans would have developed the steam engine — if not the car — if only the emperors had have had the foresight to put a heavy tax on horses and bullocks. (Horses were so inefficiently harnessed in ancient times that they where not even used in agriculture.) And if taxes are all that is needed to bring about technological progress why haven't heavy petrol taxes in Europe led to new transport technologies?

Note: Rather than make several brief comments on the nature of technological progress allow me to refer the reader to the following highly informative works:

A Short History of Technology: From the Earliest Times to A.D. 1900, T. K. Derry and Trevor I. Williams, Dover Publications, 1993

The Economic Laws of Scientific Research, Terence Kealey, Macmillan Press LTD, 1996

The Mediveval Machine: The Industrial Revolution of the Middle Ages, Jean Gimpel, Pimlico 1993.

The Sources of Invention, John Jewkes, David Sawers, Richard Stillerman, Macmillan & Co. LTD, 1958

Ordeal by Planning, John Jewkes, Macmillan & Co. LTD, 1948

A History of Mechanical Inventions, Abbott Payson Usher, Dover Publications, Inc. 1982

Technical Change: The United States and Britain in the 19th Century, S. B. Saul, Methuen & Co LTD, 1976

Science Technology and Economic Growth in the Eighteenth Century, A. E. Musson, Saul, Methuen & Co LTD, 1972

Forbes: Greatest Technology Stories, Jeffrey Young, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1998

Then there is Fernand Braudel's monumental three volume work:

The Structures of Everyday Life: Civilization and Capitalism, Volume 1.

The Wheels of Commerce: Civilization and Capitalism 15th-18th Century, Volume 2.

The Perspective of the World: and Capitalism 15th-18th Century, Volume 3.

(All three volumes published by Phoenix Press, 1988. Unfortunately, Braudel, a former Marxist, was not a very good economist. Nevertheless, these works are of considerable intellectual value).

*Wind has a maximum efficiency of 59.3 per cent. This is called the Betz limit. In addition, wind power is severely restricted by the third power, meaning that small changes in wind velocity result in large disproportionate changes in output.

http://brookesnews.com/100103alternativenergy.html

Title: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 25th, 2012 at 11:39pm
And you all know how great the EuroZone is.

Green lessons from Europe

Viv Forbes

While the Rudd climate regiment is stuck in Copenhagen, achieving not much, they should look beyond their posh hotel for some lessons in energy generation.

First, slip over to France and note how these wily promoters of carbon rationing rely on nuclear power for 76% of their own energy.

Then visit UK and observe the frenzied construction of coal mines and nuclear power stations to prevent future blackouts caused by UK’s silly dalliance with costly and unreliable wind farms.

Don’t miss out on Spain where the cost of subsidising green energy has created a financial crisis and destroyed 2.2 real jobs for every green job “created”.

They could also visit Scandinavia, which relies heavily on hydro power, or Iceland, where geothermal power is easily harnessed. No wonder these countries are relaxed about imposing carbon Ration-N-Tax Schemes on the rest of us.

A quick trip to Moscow could reveal how the cunning Russians, despite their well known scepticism about the west’s thermomania, have managed to trick Europe into buying huge quantities of gas together with the millions of emissions permits needed to burn it. Boris loves the ETS.

Just next door in Germany, Minister Wong could find out how the Greens have left Germany dangerously reliant on Russian gas. The German gamble with alternate energy has produced little power and no environmental benefits at great cost.

Finally, without leaving Copenhagen, Mr Rudd could easily discover how the forests of Danish windmills have produced little useful power and large financial losses for the suffering Danes. Freezing Copenhagen is heated mainly by imported electricity.

This short European trip will illustrate the stupidity of Australia promoting a carbon Ration-N-Tax Scheme and dreaming that we can maintain our industry and our lifestyle on costly and totally unreliable alternate energy sources like wind and solar.

Viv Forbes is Chairman of the Carbon Sense Coalition, an Australian organisation which opposes pollution and waste of energy, and promotes rational carbon energy policies.

http://australianconservative.com/2009/12/green-lessons-from-europe/

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 25th, 2012 at 11:50pm
This all sounds very similar to the glorious globbledidook that poured forth from the various talking heads when global worming was still the fashion.

Tilting at Windmills

By Nicole Russell on 3.1.10 @ 6:06AM

The dubious turbine industry.

You know the saying: Ignorance is bliss. Unfortunately for the American taxpayer, when it comes to the wind turbine industry, ignorance is not as blissful as it is infuriating. According to a new report by the Investigative Reporting Workshop (in coordination with ABC's World News with Diane Sawyer and the Watchdog Institute), Obama can now add wind turbines to his growing list of failures within the stimulus package.

Renewable energy industry is growing; wind turbines are a key avenue of that growth. Obama has said he would like to be a leader in clean energy but that the United States is struggling to make this goal a reality. He's right, but that's only half the story. The Workshop reports that $2.1 billion in stimulus grants have been given to wind, solar and geothermal companies to make good on Obama's objective but almost 80% of those went to foreign companies. A bankrupt Australian company nabbed the largest grant so far-$178 million. With that, Babcock & Brown built "a Texas wind farm using turbines made by a Japanese company."

Even Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY), hardly a foe of Obama's stimulus package, was disappointed with the news that foreign companies were receiving-4 to 1-stimulus funds and jobs on renewable energy-related projects. In an interview with ABC News he said: "Very few jobs here, lots of jobs in China. That is not what I intended or any other legislator who voted for the stimulus intended...It is fine that the Chinese make them. But why don't we use the stimulus money to start building up an industry to build them here, that was the very point of the stimulus."

Of the 80% of stimulus grants going to wind facilities, the majority of those are turbines which prevail in popularity both with renewable energy advocates, professional and laymen alike. If the 4 to 1 ratio is frightening, never fear: According to StimulusWatch.org, several organizations around the country are receiving your tax dollars-I mean stimulus money-to fund large-scale wind turbine projects. The National Science Foundation is receiving $435,231 in grant money to work on a wind turbine project in Buford, Wyoming. Likewise, the Department of Energy received nearly $25 million to "design, construct, and ultimately have responsibility for the operation of the Large Wind Turbine Blade Test Facility" through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center. According to the report, no jobs are being created through those projects.

While the stimulus funds for energy projects are creating little to no jobs in the United States, they number they produce overseas is maddening. Allow the numbers to illuminate: The Renewable Energy Policy Project did a study and estimated that for every 1 megawatt of wind energy that is developed, 4.3 jobs are created. There were about 1,219 turbines built by foreign-owned manufacturers which equates to 2,279.5 megawatts. If you crunch the Renewable Energy Policy Project's numbers, the installation of these turbines may have created as many as 6,838 manufacturing jobs -- anywhere but here.

Such news may cause taxpayers to pause and evaluate the cost-benefit ratio of the turbines. Estimates vary but some sources say it can cost $300,000 to transport the turbines and a 2007 estimate by Windustry reported that a commercial scale wind turbine cost $3.5 million installed.

If one wind turbine produces 1.8 megawatts of energy -- enough energy for 500 households per year -- and each household spends on average $2,150 on their energy bill per year, the turbine saves $1.75 million per year in energy. At a cost of $3.5 million installed, a wind turbine will have earned its proverbial keep in two years.

While the math works out, the economics still don't. Turbines are only entirely beneficial if American taxpayer dollars were given to companies here to give to American workers here to construct them and if they worked like a charm once they were built. Unfortunately, therein, as the Bard would say, lies the rub.

In Minnesota, for example, a state which spent $3.3 million on eleven wind turbines, but which regularly experiences cold, winter weather, discovered this year their turbines freeze up when it's freezing. Apparently the hydraulic fluid which propels the turbines was supposed to work in colder temperature but failed to. There's a plan in progress to heat the fluid but as Minnesota native Ed Morrissey of Hot Air  reported: "That will drastically reduce the net energy gain from each turbine, depending on how much heating the turbine fluid needs to stop congealing in the winter. Since cold weather here lasts anywhere from 4-6 months, that makes it mighty inefficient as an energy resource."

Blame could rest on the shoulder of the state on one side, the manufacturer on the other, and obviously this is an isolated incident. But if each American family only saves a few dollars every month after the wind turbines run efficiently and after they pay for themselves but their tax dollars were sent overseas for others to build them in the first place, is there a true cost benefit besides the warm, fuzzy feeling that we're all utilizing clean energy? Like his stimulus package, Obama's ideas work only if the theory is put into practice.

About the Author   Nicole Russell writes from Northern Virginia.
http://australianconservative.com/2010/03/tilting-at-windmills/


Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Jan 25th, 2012 at 11:55pm
This is a revision of what the more visionary political monitors knew anyway and what the mere mortals will gradually come to realize.

Gillard’s desperate carbon tax is really neo-socialist wealth redistribution


Bob Brown and Julia Gillard’s carbon tax is a monument to the irrationality that so often infects beleaguered governments. Rather than pursue considered policy processes that take into account the full potential impact on the nation, a government under pressure responds to trials with a haphazard approach.

Gillard’s government has already proved itself to be even more incompetent than its predecessor with a spectacular list of policy failures including the East Timor solution, the citizens’ assembly and the cash for clunkers scheme.

Two days ago, they released the details of their latest folly – a price on pollution called a carbon tax. Or that’s what they call it.

It is not a price on pollution or a tax on carbon. It is in fact a new tax on carbon dioxide; that colourless and odourless gas that is entirely necessary for life on Earth.

However, while carbon dioxide might be an important plant food, in this instance it has been declared the primary source of sustenance for Gillard’s big government.

To put it bluntly, the Gillard government has run out of your money to spend. They have raised the nation’s debt ceiling twice already and have borrowed hundreds of billions of dollars to pursue their wasteful programs. Even the socialist left faction of the Labor Party (of which Gillard is a member) knows that this cannot be allowed to continue. Left unchecked, national debt can bankrupt a nation or destroy a national currency within a very short time frame.

There are some notable examples of this malaise afflicting western European nations with Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland and Italy all unable or unlikely to pay their outstanding accounts.

Australia is a long way from that scenario but then again, so were these other countries when the decline set in.

Our national challenge is how to return the budget to surplus and start repaying Labor’s debt. Where the Coalition favours more prudent expenditure and smaller government, Labor simply wants to tax you more.

Their most recent foray into the world of big tax and neo-socialist wealth redistribution is their so-called carbon tax.

It will ensure that no family escapes the burden imposed by rising electricity, food and transport costs while doing absolutely nothing for the environment.

While the tax may directly apply to only 500 companies, the flow-on effects will impact every small business and every electricity user, while doing absolutely nothing for the environment.

We will see the disappearance of the single competitive advantage that Australia has over virtually every other nation – cheap coal-fired power, while doing absolutely nothing for the environment.

Gillard will in fact be closing down power stations in pursuit of some ridiculous and unviable green dream that we can fuel our industry and lifestyle through wind and sun power alone.

This fanciful ideal has been demonstrated as a green mirage in countries similarly afflicted by governments bound and blindfolded by the radical green agenda.

How can we believe that a brand new tax will leave us miraculously better off? How will exporting jobs and industry overseas make Australia a more prosperous and productive nation? How will exporting emissions save the world from the dreaded carbon dioxide?

The answer to all of this of course is that it won’t. This tax is a grab for your money, plain and simple. Gillard and her brethren in the Greens want to impose a tax that will grow in its rapacious voracity while bribing you to accept it in its early stages.

You can guarantee that in the years ahead, as her tax receipts grow, as industry departs our shores and more families struggle under the Gillard legacy, the one-off sweeteners will be forgotten.

They will be replaced by the bitterness of having been deceived and conned by the most irresponsible and untrustworthy government in Australia’s history.

Senator Cory Bernardi is the Shadow Parliamentary Secretary Assisting the Leader of the Opposition and a Senator for South Australia. This article is courtesy of his personal blog which can be found at http://www.corybernardi.com.
http://australianconservative.com/2011/07/gillards-desperate-carbon-tax-is-really-neo-socialist-wealth-redistribution/

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Feb 9th, 2012 at 7:51am
Even Prime Minister Bob Green of the Communist Browns is getting concerned that his windy farms are sending voters to an early grave.

Health fears over wind farms unite Coalition, Greens

by: Graham Lloyd, Environment editor   From:The Australian February 09, 2012 12:00AM

GREENS and Coalition senators have joined forces to demand the Gillard government immediately fund independent studies into the health impacts of wind turbines.

An amended motion calling on the government to adopt the recommendations of a Senate inquiry into the impact of wind farm developments on rural areas was passed without a vote, as only Labor was against the motion.

Before being accepted, the motion was amended to remove a call for an immediate moratorium on wind farm developments.

Negotiations are under way to have a similar motion put to the lower house this week.

Last year's Senate inquiry report said urgent, government-funded research should be undertaken into the potentially disastrous health impacts of wind farms on nearby residents.

The committee recommended that noise measurements be expanded to include low-frequency noise or infrasound. It also said new rules were needed on how close wind farms could be built to houses.


Victorian DLP senator John Madigan, who moved yesterday's motion, said he was pleased the Senate had noted the government's need to respond to the seven recommendations.

However, it was disappointing the call for a moratorium was removed from the motion, he said. "I've spoken to literally hundreds of people in Victoria and South Australia who have been steamrolled by wind farm proponents. These people are having serious health concerns ignored."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/health-fears-over-wind-farms-unite-coalition-greens/story-fn59niix-1226266182244

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Doctor Jolly on Feb 9th, 2012 at 8:13am

juliar wrote on Feb 9th, 2012 at 7:51am:
Before being accepted, the motion was amended to remove a call for an immediate moratorium on wind farm developments.


Hard to fathom that someone is calling for a moratorium on wind farms (with no evidence of health impacts) yet the same people wont support a moratorium on Coal seam gas where there is plenty of evidence in the US of underground water contamination.

Get your priorities right.


Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Feb 9th, 2012 at 11:03pm

buzzanddidj wrote on Jan 20th, 2012 at 8:20pm:
The whole "NOISE" aspect is UTTER NONSENSE !

Unlike the "Landscape Guardians", "juliar" - and the REST of the TROGLODYTES - I have PHYSICALLY "been there"


These installations are (naturally) located in rural, VERY WINDY, locations

You cannot detect ANY noise from the turbines past 500 metres - due to the sound of the wind roaring through the trees

Yet people are believing ( ... in the case of http://hepburnwind.com.au/ ) they can hear them from one and half KILOMETRES away - over the sound of overnight freight lorries rumbling down the highway a kilometre away

The NEAREST neighbours ( ... a retired couple) have given the project their BLESSING - fron a KM away

The loudest WHINGER is one Jan Perry - of " ...the Guardians" - from near 2KM away








buzzanddidj wrote on Dec 21st, 2011 at 8:33am:

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 5th, 2011 at 12:40am:

wrote on Sep 2nd, 2011 at 9:20am:
Now wind farm opponents have been handed victory on a plate. The Government’s new policy has three main elements:

the government will amend planning laws to give households power to veto wind turbines within two kilometres of their homes.

Turbines will also be banned in the Macedon and McHarg ranges, in the Yarra Valley, on the Mornington and Bellarine peninsulas, and within five kilometres of the Great Ocean Road and the Bass Coast.

And in changes that go further than the Coalition flagged in the policy it took to last year’s state election, turbines will also be prohibited within five kilometres of 21 Victorian regional centres.

Wind farms approved by Labor and not yet built will not be affected.

The Government claims that 92% of the state is still available for wind farm development, but the people who build them have a different view.

Pacific Hydro say that they will be pursuing opportunities elsewhere after completing current projects.

The Clean Energy Council estimated prior to the election that $3.6 billion worth of investments would not go ahead under the Coalition’s policy.


Make that up to $10 billion according to Giles Parkinson at Climate Spectator. Earlier Parkinson had written about the negativity coming from right-wing governments on climate change policy.[b]

Barry O’Farrell is on record saying he doesn’t want any more wind farms built[/b]. The wind doesn’t blow so consistently in Queensland, so theoretically there should be opportunities in South Australia





New rules blamed for wind farm loss
September 01, 2011

A developer has scrapped plans for a wind farm project in south-west Victoria because of the State Government's new planning rules.

The company's managing director, David Shapiro, says it is now abandoning the development.

"The Victorian Government has changed the rules and as those rules stand now it simply wouldn't get through the planning framework," he said.

"Our reading of the situation is that really was the intention of Government to make development more difficult." 



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-09-01/new-rules-blamed-for-wind-farm-loss/2865834

Mr Shapiro says the company is unlikely to launch new developments in Victoria.





The Planning Minister has said the new rules would not threaten investment in wind energy.





Mr "Planning" Minister ...
Investment is ALREADY leaving - in the BILLIONS

... to be welcomed with open arms, in South Australia - a state that BACKS investment in renewable, clean energy





I dropped by the Hepburn Wind site today, on the way to Melbourne, for Father's Day
I got out of the car, about 200 metres from the nearest turbine

I expected a gentle "hum" from this distance ...
But between the occassional bird noise - and a passing car - GOLDEN SILENCE
The LOUDEST opponenent FROM where I was, lives over a kilometre FURTHER in the same direction - on the other side of the Daylesford-Ballan Road

She must be Superwoman, with that sort of hearing 




This photo was  a FAKE ...




"It’s right at our front door" . . . Jan Perry, president of Landscape Guardians anti-wind farm group, at Leonards Hill, northeast of Melbourne, yesterday. Picture: Stuart McEvoy Source: The Australian


... set up by JAN PERRY ( ... of Landscape Guardians)  and on the payroll of Peter Mitchell, a founding chairman of the Moonie Oil Company and now chairman of Lowell Pty Ltd, which runs an investment fund focused on oil, coal seamgas and minerals.

and "The Australian" newspaper


Hepburn Wind has TWO turbines
NEITHER of which had been erected at the photo's time of publication

AND - underground exit cables
i



This is Jan Perry's LATEST bout of erratic behaviour ...
A sign in the window of a clothing and "nick-nack" shop she owns in Daylesford called "Kabuki"




It should be pointed out, she doesn't live "under 120m turbines" - but, rather, a kilometre and a half away
She is by no means the closest neighbour - but the ONLY complainer

SHE - and she ALONE - could have stopped the Hepburn Wind project under Ted Baillieu's anti-renewable energy legislation

Yet the REST of the community, COMBINED, couldn't stop a coal mine and ajoining coal-fired power plant









Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Andrei.Hicks on Feb 9th, 2012 at 11:29pm
You don't half have some nerve though Buzz.

If you want to live a certain way with the ecology and environmentalism - then do so.

The issue I have is - why do you want to try and enforce it onto me and how I live?

How about we accept we both have different priorities in life and I will live my way and you live yours?

I don't stop you.

Wind-farms, wave power, home solar systems - whatever floats your boat.
See - I am perfectly happy to allow you to do what you like?
Stop trying to tell people like me how to live if I want to fly in planes, drive a 5 liter car and run my air con all day.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Feb 10th, 2012 at 11:28am
Buzzo,

You are probably deaf as a flaming post and could not hear the noisy Bob Green Windy Farms if you sat on one !!!!!

How did you go about "listening" to the SUB-AUDIBLE (= at a freq too low for humans to hear) noise which is a major source of sickness complaints ?

A theory is that the whirlygig propellor, which is trying to fly the whole contraption to Wup Wup, creates vibrational disturbances to the HOLLOW support column which then acts like a GIGANTIC DIDGERIDOO and emits disturbing LOW FREQ noise which humans, even those with good hearing, can not hear.

One of the residents, in the tv video shown in an earlier post, adversely affected by the nearby Bob Green whizzing whirling monstrosities purchased a low freq monitor and it quite clearly showed a high level of low freq sound.

So Buzzo go and get your hearing checked first of all and then send an email to Prime Minister Bob Green of the Communist Browns and ask him why he is now so concerned about his whizzing wong dongs killing rural voters.

Be aware that, like humans, all Bob Green Windy Farms are not created equal and that different types of windy doodahs produce different types of human sickness disturbances. The ones at Daylesford are just 2 tiny mousepower units. Compare this to a big installation of, say, 30 or more of these whirling spinning creators of cacophonous clamor using big ratpower units.

I understand that it is deeply disturbing and anger empowering when your cherished beliefs are shown to be just self delusional rubbish.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Feb 10th, 2012 at 2:02pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 9th, 2012 at 11:29pm:
You don't half have some nerve though Buzz.

If you want to live a certain way with the ecology and environmentalism - then do so.

The issue I have is - why do you want to try and enforce it onto me and how I live?

Stop trying to tell people like me how to live if I want to fly in planes, drive a 5 liter car and run my air con all day.



an OBVIOUS response ...

Could you contain the "fruits" of your irresponsible, self indugent lifestyle to your OWN "world" - I wouldn't have an issue

But you CAN'T

When you infect your OWN world with exessive carbon emissions - you infect EVERYONES

The Earth has but ONE atmosphere
It belongs to ALL of us
It's care is the RESPONSIBILITY of all of us






But you raise an interesting point ...
As the most "frequent flyers" - with the BIGGEST houses, the BIGGEST cars and the BIGGEST air-cons - "the rich" create the BIGGEST emission outputs and are, hence, the BIGGEST drivers of climate change

It is only fair that they should be the demographic that pays slightly more in the carbon pricing compensation arrangements


They CAN pay
They SHOULD pay
They WILL pay








Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Andrei.Hicks on Feb 10th, 2012 at 4:54pm
Unless of course you are Chinese.

The world's worst polluter and who have stated they will not be paying.
;D  ;D  ;D

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Feb 20th, 2012 at 2:05pm
NSW Planning Minister Brad Hazzard recognizes the insidious health HAZARDS that the Global Worming Bob Brown Windy Farms pose for nearby residents. A triumph for people power !!! When will the compensation claims start ?

Government orders noise audit of wind farms
AAP February 20, 2012 2:01PM

NEW South Wales' three working Government-approved wind farms are to be audited, with residents claiming they make too much noise.

NSW Planning Minister Brad Hazzard says the decision to audit the three southern NSW farms follows ongoing complaints from local residents.

The three facilities in question are the Capital, Cullerin Range and Woodlawn farms near Canberra.

Mr Hazzard says previous investigations by his department found the farms were complying with noise limits, but residents continue to complain to Government.

"To address this, the NSW Government will engage an independent, specialist noise consultant to determine the issue," he said in a statement.

"The audit will also provide information on low-frequency noise from these wind farms to provide input into the finalisation of statewide wind farm guidelines."

Mr Hazzard says wind farms will play an important part in the state's energy future, but it is important the community has confidence they are operating in line with their consent conditions and are not diminishing people's lifestyles.

He says the planning department will also assess visual issues and the impact of the wind farms on flora and fauna.

Opposition Environment spokesman Luke Foley later accused the Government of "pandering to the flat-earthers" opposed to wind energy.

"All the signals the Government is sending out are hostile to the development of wind energy in this state," he said.

The audit is set to be completed by August.

http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/government-orders-noise-audit-of-wind-farms/story-e6frfku0-1226275937804

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Feb 20th, 2012 at 2:56pm

Quote:


Mr Hazzard says investigations by his department found the farms were complying with noise limits, but residents continue to complain to Government.

Opposition Environment spokesman Luke Foley later accused the Government of "pandering to the flat-earthers" opposed to wind energy.

"All the signals the Government is sending out are hostile to the development of wind energy in this state," he said.




GREAT names !



Hazard

1. A chance; an accident.
2. A chance of being injured or harmed; danger.
3. A possible source of danger: a fire hazard.


Foley

1. A technical process by which sounds are created or altered for use in a film, video, or other electronically produced work.
2. A person who creates or alters sounds using this process.








Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by thelastnail on Feb 20th, 2012 at 3:42pm

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 4:14pm:

Gist wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 3:38pm:

juliar wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 3:02pm:
Bob Brown windy farms a bit like the Labor party - a lot of noise but not much useful output.


Noisy wind farms breach environmental laws, according to submission to NSW Planning
AAP December 19, 2011 12:33PM


WIND farms are breaching NSW environmental laws with excessive noise causing sleep loss, stress and other health problems, it is claimed.


The claims are made in a submission to NSW Planning by a group opposed to plans for a wind farm in Flyers Creek, near Orange in the state's central west.

"There is a pattern of systematic non-compliance by wind farms with audible and inaudible noise going beyond agreed allowable limits," the report's author, rural GP and farmer Dr Alan Watts said.

"That has real impacts on the health of people living near turbines, such as sleep deprivation and stress."

Cabinet is meeting this week to consider guidelines that will determine the future of wind power in NSW.

About 20 applications for new farms have been put on hold while the government decides how to balance competing interests.

Lindsay Soutar, a campaigner for community group 100% Renewable, said the issue was a test of the government's credibility.

"It would be completely out of step with community opinion if Barry O'Farrell and his cabinet turn their back on wind power in NSW," she said.

"Decisions are being made right now that will affect the potential for thousands of new jobs and billions of dollars worth of investment in NSW."

But Dr Watts, a campaigner for the Flyers Creek Wind Turbine Awareness Group, said the government had a duty of care to people.

The group tested noise levels at the Capital Wind Farm near Lake George in NSW and found significant noise impacts above that predicted for the wind farm.

A report surmised the Flyers Creek wind farm would generate offensive noise, have a significant impact on residents and breach the NSW Protection of the Environment Operation Act.

"It is scandalous that it took the community to put in place and pay for the noise monitoring that has uncovered this systematic non-compliance by the wind industry," Dr Watts said.

"Wind farms should be strictly monitored.

"If they are unable to comply by producing excessive noise then they should be shut down and removed."

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sydney-nsw/noisy-wind-farms-breach-environmental-laws-according-to-submission-to-nsw-planning/story-e6freuzi-1226225712234


If they'd stopped their incessant whining when they were doing those tests the results would likely have shown no noise at all.

What kind of fool would publish information from a pressure group as gospel? What kind of fool would believe such rubbish?


and what kind of fool automatically dismisses it just because it comes from a lobby group?


yes and a report on four quarters produced no technical evidence to substantiate their ridiculous claims of excessive infrasonic sound pressure levels. It appeared the ones who were barking the loudest were the rich libbos that didn't want others to compete with and take profits away from their dirty fossil fool energy industries :(

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by thelastnail on Feb 20th, 2012 at 3:43pm

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Feb 10th, 2012 at 4:54pm:
Unless of course you are Chinese.

The world's worst polluter and who have stated they will not be paying.
;D  ;D  ;D


why not just tax the exports of dirty coal to china ?? That would make them pay ;)

And have you ever been to china lately ? It's filthy because of pollution :(

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by skippy. on Feb 20th, 2012 at 3:47pm
You lot ought to have more respect for Bobby, he is still in mourning over the death of his ex wife,Whitney.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by thelastnail on Feb 20th, 2012 at 3:56pm

skippy. wrote on Feb 20th, 2012 at 3:47pm:
You lot ought to have more respect for Bobby, he is still in mourning over the death of his ex wife,Whitney.


WTF !!  [smiley=huh.gif]

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Feb 20th, 2012 at 3:57pm
Buzzo, Your reply is just meaningless rubbish !!!!

You have totally failed to address the TOPIC and just engaged in typical small minded Juliar Gillard style of selectively picking out tiny bits of the post and then adding some confused jumble of incoherence to this.

Really Buzzo, Labor will never pay you as a Labor Troll unless you dramatically improve your standards. Try to accept that your cherished beliefs may just be self delusional rubbish.

Try to understand that when you post this sort of unthinking emotional nonsense all you are telling everyone is that you agree with the post because you have no evidence to suggest otherwise - which is not surprising as it is now officially acknowledged by State Governments and by the Prime Minister Bob Brown of the Communist Greens that the Global Worming Bob Brown Windy Farms DO CAUSE damaging to health interference to nearby residences.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Feb 20th, 2012 at 5:30pm

longweekend58 wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 4:14pm:

Gist wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 3:38pm:

juliar wrote on Dec 19th, 2011 at 3:02pm:
Bob Brown windy farms a bit like the Labor party - a lot of noise but not much useful output.


Noisy wind farms breach environmental laws, according to submission to NSW Planning
AAP December 19, 2011 12:33PM


WIND farms are breaching NSW environmental laws with excessive noise causing sleep loss, stress and other health problems, it is claimed.


The claims are made in a submission to NSW Planning by a group opposed to plans for a wind farm in Flyers Creek, near Orange in the state's central west.

"There is a pattern of systematic non-compliance by wind farms with audible and inaudible noise going beyond agreed allowable limits," the report's author, rural GP and farmer Dr Alan Watts said.

"That has real impacts on the health of people living near turbines, such as sleep deprivation and stress."

Cabinet is meeting this week to consider guidelines that will determine the future of wind power in NSW.

About 20 applications for new farms have been put on hold while the government decides how to balance competing interests.

Lindsay Soutar, a campaigner for community group 100% Renewable, said the issue was a test of the government's credibility.

"It would be completely out of step with community opinion if Barry O'Farrell and his cabinet turn their back on wind power in NSW," she said.

"Decisions are being made right now that will affect the potential for thousands of new jobs and billions of dollars worth of investment in NSW."

But Dr Watts, a campaigner for the Flyers Creek Wind Turbine Awareness Group, said the government had a duty of care to people.

The group tested noise levels at the Capital Wind Farm near Lake George in NSW and found significant noise impacts above that predicted for the wind farm.

A report surmised the Flyers Creek wind farm would generate offensive noise, have a significant impact on residents and breach the NSW Protection of the Environment Operation Act.

"It is scandalous that it took the community to put in place and pay for the noise monitoring that has uncovered this systematic non-compliance by the wind industry," Dr Watts said.

"Wind farms should be strictly monitored.

"If they are unable to comply by producing excessive noise then they should be shut down and removed."

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sydney-nsw/noisy-wind-farms-breach-environmental-laws-according-to-submission-to-nsw-planning/story-e6freuzi-1226225712234


If they'd stopped their incessant whining when they were doing those tests the results would likely have shown no noise at all.

What kind of fool would publish information from a pressure group as gospel? What kind of fool would believe such rubbish?


and what kind of fool automatically dismisses it just because it comes from a lobby group?





Have you MET the lobby group ?













SOME of them still have STRAW on their floors !i



Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Feb 21st, 2012 at 11:51am
Buzzo,

Why is it that the poor soul under the huge 120m whirling whooshing windy wingding CAN NOT SELL the property ?

Is it because that now many people have heard, and possibly experienced, the unbearable sub audible and audible health destroying vibrational emissions that exists around all windy farms ?

It is not only the highly irritating whoosh whoosh audible sound from the propeller but it is also the insidious sub audible vibration that occurs in the hollow vertical support column which is excited by the vibrations from the whirling propeller and acts like a huge organ pipe or didgeridoo. Be aware that the low freq sub audible emission can travel quite a long distance with only a small attenuation. Whales use this low freq technique to converse over very long distances. (I bet you pick on this sentence)

So perhaps it is not surprising that no one wants to move anywhere near a windy farm and that is why the property values plummet like Miss Gillard's polling.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Feb 21st, 2012 at 12:32pm

juliar wrote on Feb 21st, 2012 at 11:51am:
Buzzo,

Why is it that the poor soul under the huge 120m whirling whooshing windy wingding CAN NOT SELL the property ?





Perhaps, actually, putting it up for SALE may have helped ?

And Jan Perry DOESN'T live "underneath the turbine"
She lives a good kilomete and a half away - on the other side of a heavy transport route

There are a half dozen, or so, dwellings that are CLOSER - none of whose occupants have a problem









Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by buzzanddidj on Apr 16th, 2012 at 1:17pm

buzzanddidj wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 1:12pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 10th, 2012 at 8:29am:

buzzanddidj wrote on Feb 9th, 2012 at 11:03pm:

buzzanddidj wrote on Jan 20th, 2012 at 8:20pm:
The whole "NOISE" aspect is UTTER NONSENSE !

Unlike the "Landscape Guardians", "juliar" - and the REST of the TROGLODYTES - I have PHYSICALLY "been there"


These installations are (naturally) located in rural, VERY WINDY, locations

You cannot detect ANY noise from the turbines past 500 metres - due to the sound of the wind roaring through the trees

Yet people are believing ( ... in the case of http://hepburnwind.com.au/ ) they can hear them from one and half KILOMETRES away - over the sound of overnight freight lorries rumbling down the highway a kilometre away

The NEAREST neighbours ( ... a retired couple) have given the project their BLESSING - fron a KM away

The loudest WHINGER is one Jan Perry - of " ...the Guardians" - from near 2KM away








buzzanddidj wrote on Dec 21st, 2011 at 8:33am:

buzzanddidj wrote on Sep 5th, 2011 at 12:40am:

wrote on Sep 2nd, 2011 at 9:20am:
Now wind farm opponents have been handed victory on a plate. The Government’s new policy has three main elements:

the government will amend planning laws to give households power to veto wind turbines within two kilometres of their homes.

Turbines will also be banned in the Macedon and McHarg ranges, in the Yarra Valley, on the Mornington and Bellarine peninsulas, and within five kilometres of the Great Ocean Road and the Bass Coast.

And in changes that go further than the Coalition flagged in the policy it took to last year’s state election, turbines will also be prohibited within five kilometres of 21 Victorian regional centres.

Wind farms approved by Labor and not yet built will not be affected.

The Government claims that 92% of the state is still available for wind farm development, but the people who build them have a different view.

Pacific Hydro say that they will be pursuing opportunities elsewhere after completing current projects.

The Clean Energy Council estimated prior to the election that $3.6 billion worth of investments would not go ahead under the Coalition’s policy.


Make that up to $10 billion according to Giles Parkinson at Climate Spectator. Earlier Parkinson had written about the negativity coming from right-wing governments on climate change policy.

Barry O’Farrell is on record saying he doesn’t want any more wind farms built The wind doesn’t blow so consistently in Queensland, so theoretically there should be opportunities in South Australia





New rules blamed for wind farm loss
September 01, 2011

A developer has scrapped plans for a wind farm project in south-west Victoria because of the State Government's new planning rules.

The company's managing director, David Shapiro, says it is now abandoning the development.

"The Victorian Government has changed the rules and as those rules stand now it simply wouldn't get through the planning framework," he said.

"Our reading of the situation is that really was the intention of Government to make development more difficult." 



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-09-01/new-rules-blamed-for-wind-farm-loss/2865834

Mr Shapiro says the company is unlikely to launch new developments in Victoria.





The Planning Minister has said the new rules would not threaten investment in wind energy.





Mr "Planning" Minister ...
Investment is ALREADY leaving - in the BILLIONS

... to be welcomed with open arms, in South Australia - a state that BACKS investment in renewable, clean energy





I dropped by the Hepburn Wind site today, on the way to Melbourne, for Father's Day
I got out of the car, about 200 metres from the nearest turbine

I expected a gentle "hum" from this distance ...
But between the occassional bird noise - and a passing car - GOLDEN SILENCE
The LOUDEST opponenent FROM where I was, lives over a kilometre FURTHER in the same direction - on the other side of the Daylesford-Ballan Road

She must be Superwoman, with that sort of hearing 




This photo was  a FAKE ...




"It’s right at our front door" . . . Jan Perry, president of Landscape Guardians anti-wind farm group, at Leonards Hill, northeast of Melbourne, yesterday. Picture: Stuart McEvoy Source: The Australian


... set up by JAN PERRY ( ... of Landscape Guardians)  and on the payroll of Peter Mitchell, a founding chairman of the Moonie Oil Company and now chairman of Lowell Pty Ltd, which runs an investment fund focused on oil, coal seamgas and minerals.

and "The Australian" newspaper


Hepburn Wind has TWO turbines
NEITHER of which had been erected at the photo's time of publication

AND - underground exit cables
i



This is Jan Perry's LATEST bout of erratic behaviour ...
A sign in the window of a clothing and "nick-nack" shop she owns in Daylesford called "Kabuki"




It should be pointed out, she doesn't live "under 120m turbines" - but, rather, a kilometre and a half away
She is by no means the closest neighbour - but the ONLY complainer

SHE - and she ALONE - could have stopped the Hepburn Wind project under Ted Baillieu's anti-renewable energy legislation

Yet the REST of the community, COMBINED, couldn't stop a coal mine and ajoining coal-fired power plant










Wind turbines not a health problem, say Germans and Danes. 
April 4, 2012

Over the past four years, claims have been made that large wind turbines cause a wide range of adverse health effects, including tinnitus, headaches and memory and balance problems.

In response to this, there have been 17 Inquiries around the world. All have concluded that there is no scientific evidence for the claims.

This has placed the opponents to wind power on very shaky ground.


Now this ground has become even more unstable with the publication of a paper by a former energy economist and researcher, Neil Barrett. Barrett has had a long term interest in wind power since the first turbines were built in Europe in the 1970s. In 2006, he spent a week interviewing people living and working around two large wind farms in Germany . “At that time I heard nothing about any adverse health effects, said Barrett.

“Three months ago I contacted some of the people I met in 2006 and they confirmed that health effects from wind power are not a significant issue on the agenda in Germany. This is despite the fact that Germany has around 22,000 turbines in an area not a lot bigger than Victoria and much more highly populated.

“Intrigued by the difference between Australia and Europe, I decided to study the situation in both Germany and Denmark more closely. I wrote to MPs and examined over 100 websites of wind opponents, including 80 referred to in glowing terms by Germany’s main conservative newspaper, Der Spiegel.

“Denmark’s parliamentary spokesman on energy, Steen Gade, replied:

`The opponents to windpower in Denmark try to raise the issue of adverse health effects but with little success. It is just not an issue which has achieved much traction in this country. Windpower has strong public acceptance and a majority in parliament support the expansion of windpower capacity, both onshore and offshore’.

“And the Chief Whip for the Greens in the German parliament, Volker Beck, stated that: `Health effects are currently no issue in the debate about wind power in Germany’.

“Even more telling”, writes Barrett, “was the evidence from Wind opposition websites. Of the 80 opposition websites I examined, only 18 devote more than two lines to health effects and not one of them refers to particular cases where individuals have claimed illness or moved away from the turbines. Nor could I locate any press reports of such events.


http://yes2renewables.org/2012/04/04/wind-turbines-not-a-health-problem-say-germans-and-danes/




Quote:
... there have been 17 Inquiries around the world.



http://yes2renewables.org/2012/02/08/wind-farms-health-17-reviews-of-evidence/





Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Kat on Apr 16th, 2012 at 1:28pm

IMO, these nut-bars opposed to wind-farms should be strapped to the blades of one for 48 hours.

Useless, screaming, whinging 'nimbies', they deserve no less.

Sounds like 'Cat' Bailleau has NFI, either....

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by juliar on Apr 16th, 2012 at 7:17pm
The loopy green delusional dreemers, now inspired by Senatrix Milne, may delude themselves anyway they like, but the ultimate death knell for the whoop whoop whirlygig windy turbines, which produce little but dead birds and bats and destroy the health of all those living nearby, is that the Coalition, after 2013, will most likely reduce or eliminate the Govt SUBSIDY for Windy FARMS.

Windy farms are simply uneconomic WITHOUT THE Govt SUBSIDY and are too EXPENSIVE to install, maintain, and repair because they don't produce enough profitable power output to cover all the costs WITHOUT THE NICE BIG FAT Govt SUBSIDY which is paid for by other profitable enterprises like mining and coal fired power generation.

Sad for the few investors in the 2 mouse power turbines at Daylesford when the tiny profits they imagine they see now suddenly turn into nasty red debts. The gearboxes are normally expected to need replacing after 5 years at a very high cost so poor old Daylesford residents will realize they have been conned into putting money into a permanently loss producing "investment" - sad but true.

This is to be expected because the Communist Greens stated aim is to reduce Australia to an impoverished primitive agrarian Communist country where everybody starves just like Nth Korea.

Title: Re: Bob Brown Windy Farms too Noisy
Post by Kat on Apr 16th, 2012 at 7:45pm

And neither, it seems, does a certain somebody else   ^^^^

Australian Politics Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2024. All Rights Reserved.