WIND ENERGY AND
PEOPLE
Results of Government Studies and the peer-reviewed
literature
Why I’m here
Idaho’s Wind Working Group is funded through a
grant to Boise State from DOE’s EERE program
  In addition, Boise State is designated as Idaho’s
Wind Application Center
  Both of these grants are intended to leverage the
expertise at Boise State and engage in outreach to
the general public.

What I won’t do

I won’t advocate for Wind Energy
  Although
I generally think it’s a good thing
I won’t try to argue details outside my professional
purview
  I won’t uncritically present information from wind
developers or wind trade groups

What I will do
Present the conclusions of studies done and/or
sponsored by the Department of Energy and
  Canadian and Australian government-sponsored
studies
  Peer-reviewed literature in the area
  Comment on, and discussion the process of scientific
inquiry
  All data/charts/conclusions presented here will be
attributed to the original study

Why has the wind industry grown?
Concerns about global climate change and other
environmental impacts of fossil fuel use
  Concerns about fossil fuel supplies and the
geographic locations of those supplies
  Local, State and Federal government desires to
foster economic growth through home-grown energy
supplies
  Desire to live off our income, not our inheritance.

Who doesn’t like wind?


Well, lots of people apparently
There are many complaints, but they tend to fall into
several categories
  Concerns
about human health
  Concerns about property values
  Concerns about power costs and government subsidies
  Concerns about the environment and wildlife
  Concerns about viewsheds

I’ll cover the first 3
Human Health
Human Health

What are the issues?
  Shadow
flicker
  Sound/Noise
  Infrasound
  “Wind Turbine Syndrome”
How do we “know” things?

There are two ways that health effects can be
proven
  Trace
the actual mechanism by which the cause brings
about an effect
  E.g.
We know radiation can cause cancer because we know
the mechanism (high energy particles break chromosomes)
  Statistical
correlation
  Very
difficult, need lots of data over periods of time
  Does not prove causality
  May lead to research that shows causal links

E.g. the research that link cigarettes to cancer
Findings to date


“Potential Health Impacts of Wind Turbines” A report from the Chief Medical Office
of Health, government of Canada, May 2010.
The review concludes that while some people living near wind turbines report
symptoms such as dizziness, headaches, and sleep disturbance, the scientific
evidence available to date does not demonstrate a direct causal link between wind
turbine noise and adverse health effects. The sound level from wind turbines at
common residential setbacks is not sufficient to cause hearing impairment or other
direct health effects, although some people may find it annoying.1
From Down Under


“Wind Turbines and Health: A Rapid Review of the Evidence”, Report of the
Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, July, 2010.
This review of the available evidence, including journal articles, surveys, literature
reviews and government reports, supports the statement that: There are no direct
pathological effects from wind farms and that any potential impact on humans can be
minimised by following existing planning guidelines.2
Closer to home: Our National
Academies
“Environmental Impacts of Wind Energy Projects” a
publicationof the National Research Council of the
National Acadamies, 2007.
  “Thus far, there has been relatively little
dispassionate analysis of the human impacts of
wind-energy projects. Much that has been written
has been from the vantage points of either
proponents or opponents. There also are few data
that have been systematically gathered on these
impacts.”

Also from the NAS report



“The sound power level from a single turbine is usually
around 90-105 dB(A); such a turbine creates a sound
pressure of 50-60 dB(A) at a distance of 40 meters
(this is about the same level as conversational speech).”
“While turbine noise increases with wind speed,
ambient noises—for example, due to the rustling of tree
leaves— increase at a higher rate and can mask the
turbine noise (BLM 2005a).”
“Noise produced by wind turbines generally is not a
major concern for humans beyond a half-mile or so
because various measures to reduce noise have been
implemented in the design of modern turbines.”
Take-away from the National
Academies
This is an evolving issue that merits serious scientific
study.
  No conclusive evidence exists that links wind turbines
to human health issues.

Property Values
Property Values

A legitimate concern and one of the driving factors
behind zoning laws. The activities of your neighbors
may make your place less livable, thus making
resale value lower.
  Factory
  CAFO
  Nuclear
Power Plant
  Anything that may impact the senses
Government Study
The Impact of Wind Power Projects on Residential
Property Values in the United States: A Multi-State
Hedonic Analysis
  Hoen, et al, December 2009
  Lawrence Berkeley National Lab

What did they look at?
~7500 single-family home sales within 10 miles of
wind facilities
  24 different facilities in 9 states
  8 different hedonic pricing models
  Results: “…none of the models uncovers conclusive
evidence of the existence of any widespread
property value impacts that might be present in
communities surrounding wind energy facilities.”

Digging a little deeper



“Specifically, neither the view of the wind facilities nor
the distance of the home to those facilities is found to
have any consistent, measurable, and statistically
significant effect on home sales prices. “
“Although the analysis cannot dismiss the possibility that
individual homes or small numbers of homes have been
or could be negatively impacted, it finds that if these
impacts do exist, they are either too small and/or too
infrequent to result in any widespread, statistically
observable impact.”
In other words: your mileage may vary.
Government Subsidies
Governent Subisidies


This is a really hot topic these days:
PTC: Production Tax Credit
  2.1c/kwh

ITC: Investment Tax Credit
  30%




for 10 years of operation
of up-front costs
Wind developers can choose ITC or PTC, not both
In Lieu Of grant (one-time payment from federal
government to developer instead of the ITC or PTC)
State tax rebate (to be discontinued next month)
PTC comes and goes at the whim of congress
From Representative Simpson’s recent
column:
“All energy is subsidized, but subsidies for wind
energy are massive -- $23.37 per megawatt hour
for wind versus $1.59 for nuclear and 44 cents for
coal (http://eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/subsidy
2/pdf/execsum.pdf).”
  This was a 1999 study. It also says that:

  “The
subsidy must be specific; for example, depreciation
schedules that can be used in non-energy sectors as well
as energy sectors are not included in the definition of a
subsidy for this study.”
Also from the 1999 study

“In 1999, the two largest items are the alternative
fuels production tax credit, largely used to develop
coalbed methane and tight sands ($1.0 billion), and
the percentage depletion allowance for the oil, gas,
and coal industries. Tax deferrals on enhanced oil
recovery are the third largest expenditure.”
(Million 1999 Dollars)
Summary of 1999 Expenditures
Type of Subsidy
Fuel
Oil
Gas
Coal
Oil, Gas, and Coal
Combineda
Nuclear
Renewables
Electricity
Total
Direct
Expenditures
Tax Expenditures
Income
Research and
Development
Excise
Total
0
0
0
0
263
1,048
85
205
0
0
0
0
49
115
404
0
312
1,163
489
205
0
4
0
4
0
15
40
1,656
0
b725
0
725
640
327
c33
1,56
640
1,071
73
3,953
he category Oil, Gas, and Coal Combined includes expenditures that were not allocated to any one of the three individual fuels.
fuels excise tax.
cElectricity research and development is advanced turbine technology. Other generation technology research and development is distributed by fuel.
Sources: Most information drawn from Office of Management and Budget, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2000 (Washington, DC,
February 1999).
aT
bAlcohol
A lot has changed since 1999
In 1999, wind was responsible for about one-tenth
of one percent of the electricity produced in the US.
  In 2010, that proportion was 1.8%
  That’s 15-fold increase in 10 years.
  That’s what government subsidies are for, to help
level the playing field to make room for new, lessentrenched technologies.

A slightly more recent report
“Analysis of Federal Expenditures for Energy
Development”
  September 2008
  Management Information Services, Inc
  Prepared for the Nuclear Energy Institute.
  “The Bezdek Report”

From the Bezdek Report
Also From The Bezdek Report
In Conclusion
Here’s the evidence to date
  It’s still a work in progress
  A finding that finds no proof of an effect is not the
same thing as proof of no effect.
  Wind industry needs to listen to concerns and
engage in the discussion
  If we all take the high road, the destination will be
much better

Sources

Report from Canadian Health Ministry:


Report from Australian Health Ministry


http://books.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11935
LBL report on property values



http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/file/publications/synopses/
evidence_review__wind_turbines_and_health.pdf
Report from the National Academies


http://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/public/publications/ministry_reports/
wind_turbine/wind_turbine.pdf
http://eetd.lbl.gov/ea/emp/reports/lbnl-2829e-ppt.pdf
http://eetd.lbl.gov/ea/ems/reports/lbnl-2829e.pdf
The Bezdek report on subsidies

http://coen.boisestate.edu/WindEnergy/WindWorkingGroup.asp