Industrial Wind—Power Production Characteristics and Grid Integration
Energy – thermodynamic quantity equivalent to the capacity to do work
Power – the actual performance of work at a measurable rate on a human-defined schedule
Nameplate Capacity – theoretical output of an energy generating machine running at full capacity
Capacity Factor – Percentage of nameplate capacity generated over a period of time
Capacity Value – Reliability of a generator to be available to come on line on demand
The quality of life and economic productivity of the US depend on having reliable, dispatchable electrical
power on demand. This is accomplished via the electrical grid—a sophisticated network of generators,
transmission infrastructure, and regulating devices that provides power on demand to consumers by precisely
balancing generation output with load on a second-by-second basis. If load exceeds generation capacity,
voltage drops and blackouts ensue. On the other hand, if generation exceeds load, grid voltage surges, frying
sensitive electronics, which are in just about every type of machine these days, from computers and
coffeemakers, to industrial equipment. Thus, grid voltage must be maintained within exquisitely tight
tolerances, a balancing act performed by regional grid operators such as the Midwest Independent System
Operator (MISO) using a series of base load, load-following, and peak-load generators, all available on
demand. Historically, the approval of electrical generation methods has had to satisfy six regulatory and
economic criteria. They must: 1) produce large amounts of 2) reliable, predictable and 3) dispatchable
electricity from 4) compact generating facilities that 5) service one or more elements of grid demand (base
load, load following, peak load) at 6) economical rates. A 7th requirement has appeared recently, though not
explicitly codified in regulatory language: new generators must emit less or no carbon than existing methods.
The latter appears to be the main basis used to justify the recent proliferation of wind farms.
How does industrial wind fit into this picture? The thermodynamics of a wind generator are such that the
energy output is proportional to the cube of the wind speed. That means that if the wind speed doubles (or
decreases by half), energy output increases (or decreases) by a factor of eight or more. Due to this
relationship, modern industrial wind turbines typically do not begin producing electricity until wind speed
reaches 7-9 mph, attain their maximum output at 33 mph, and cut out at wind speeds at about 56 mph to
avoid structural damage. The same relationship means that output is low until winds are generally above
about 20-25 mph, depending on the turbine model, and that small, momentary changes in wind speed result
in enormous variations in output. Published data indicate that a typical North American land-based wind
turbine produces no energy more than 10% of the time, produces its maximum output about 10-15% of the
time, and continuously skitters between these extremes at other times, with an overall annual capacity factor
of 25% or less.
Along with its intermittent nature, it is this variability that poses the greatest challenges for grid integration.
Sudden increases and decreases in wind speed force grid operators to scramble to bring other compensating
generators off- or online with little warning, taxing the grid and causing premature wear to the balancing
generators. The problem is exacerbated because the diurnal and seasonal nature of wind velocity doesn’t
match electrical demand: peak demand in the Midwest occurs a) generally, during the afternoon and evening,
and b) particularly, during hot summer afternoons. Neither period is characterized by appreciable wind
velocity, which tends to be greatest during the swing seasons, when temperatures are moderated and demand
is lower. In northern Indiana, for example, the average annual wind speeds measured by the NWS at Fort
Wayne and South Bend in 2010 were, respectively, 8.4 and 8.2 mph; the highest average values were in
February (10.8 and 10.6 mph; March and April were similar), while the lowest were in August (4.6 and 5.9
mph; June and July were similar).
The typical response to this problem is to claim that it will go away with a sufficiently large number of
geographically-dispersed wind plants. Unfortunately, studies on some of the largest wind arrays in the
world—South Australia, the UK, Germany—do not bear this out, and instead suggest that wind velocities—
and thus, turbine output—are broadly and positively correlated over large, continent-sized areas. As a
growing number of analyses are showing, integrating the variability and intermittency of industrial wind into
a modern electrical grid has serious implications for overall grid efficiency, and thus for reducing both the
use of conventional generators and attendant emissions.
Industrial Wind and the Environment—Emissions and Climate
Carbon Dioxide (CO2)—naturally occurring trace atmospheric gas, also produced by combustion and
thought to contribute to climate change; also referred to herein as “carbon emissions”
The two most common claims made in media reports viz industrial wind are 1) that “this wind farm will
provide “power” for X number of homes”, and 2) that it will reduce carbon dioxide (and other) emissions
derived from electricity generation. Indeed, reducing emissions appears to be the sole reason, or at least the
one usually put forward, for the recent effort by governments and others to promote wind development.
These claims are closely related, and both appear to be exaggerated when scrutinized closely.
It is true that the fuel (wind) is free and that the actual generation of electricity by a wind turbine produces no
CO2 or other emissions. However, due to the variable, intermittent, and poorly-matched demand profile of
wind, no modern grid could function reliably or maintain stability based on wind as the sole, or even the
chief, generator. As an aside, it is important not to conflate industrial, grid-connected wind with small,
building-scale wind generators attached to a bank of batteries: the latter does produce a small, though steady,
stream of power due to the presence of battery storage. On the other hand, no large-scale storage devices
presently exist at the scale of an electrical grid, hence energy must be generated, transmitted, and used
instantaneously to maintain stable grid voltage—the balancing act described earlier, as performed by MISO
and other operators. There has often been talk of such large-scale storage devices (most recently, “one
million electric cars”) being “on the near horizon”, but realistic assessments by numerous experts suggest
that such technology is unlikely to be commercially viable for decades. The only storage presently available
is hydro, possible at a large scale only in a few, widely scattered regions with suitable hydrology and terrain.
The typical 20-25% annual capacity factors of modern wind turbines means that most of the work on the grid
is still being done by conventional, reliable generators—only those generators must now work much harder
just to stand still, i.e., to maintain grid stability against the relentlessly variable output of wind generators.
This is typically accomplished by cycling natural gas generators—typically less expensive and less efficient
open-cycle (OCG) types—or small coal-fired plants up and down over short times frames to “balance” wind
output. These generators cannot be shut off due to the capricious nature of the wind resource, lest the grid be
destabilized, and they must remain on “spinning reserve” behind the scenes until they are called upon to
ramp up again. This is analogous to driving in stop-and-go traffic: obviously, your vehicle’s efficiency is
much less. Several studies examining the grid-generation behavior of real grids, in real time, using finegrained time intervals, show that emissions of carbon (as well as sulfur dioxide, nitrous oxide, mercury, and
particulates) are actually greater in this scenario than they would be without any wind in the mix. Still other
studies show that much greater emissions reductions of all types can be achieved by simply replacing the
dirtiest coal-fired plants with efficient combined-cycle gas generators (CCG) running at full capacity, which
produce about half of the carbon output of an older coal-fired plant, and none of the other emissions. The
same analogy can be extended to renewable portfolio standards and similar mandates that require utilities to
provide a certain percentage of their electricity from renewable sources, chiefly wind. This is like mandating
an average speed of 60 mph while driving across the greater LA region: most of the time, the vehicle is stuck
in stop and go traffic, so to achieve the average speed, it must suddenly accelerate to 120 mph during breaks
in the traffic, before abruptly slowing down for the next traffic jam.
The above results are being confirmed in places commonly held up as examples of wind power success:
Denmark, Texas, and California have all seen nominal, if any, reductions in overall carbon emissions from
the electrical sector since their wind build outs began, and a careful examination of the data shows that nearly
all of the reduction can be attributed to the replacement of coal-fired plants by CCG generators, much of
which is being negated by the need to cycle less efficient OCG generators up and down in response to wind
variability. This is one of the most under-reported stories by the green-energy-obsessed media.
This gets back to the first claim highlighted above: the “X number of homes powered” implicitly assumes
that the wind plant puts out its nameplate capacity 24/7/365. This is not credible, but is accepted by a gullible
(and physics-challenged) public and an unquestioning media, driven by a desire for solutions to
environmental problems. In reality, conventional generators are reliably providing nearly 100% of the power
to those homes.
Industrial Wind and the Environment— Turbine Noise, Shadow Flicker, and Human Health
Decibel “A”-Weighted Scale—Logarithmic scale that quantitatively measures audible noise
Decibel “C”-Weighted Scale—Logarithmic scale used to measure low frequency (inaudible) noise
Shadow Flicker—repetitive strobe effect caused by the shadows cast by a rotating object
Numerous anecdotal reports began to surface in the early to mid 2000’s of various ill effects
suffered by persons living close to wind installations. These effects continue to be dismissed as
“psycho-somatic” or “Nimby” by wind promoters and most media, but are now starting to be
documented and understood by the medical community—and given a label called “Wind Turbine
Syndrome”, now summarized in the book of the same name. Today, there are thousands of such
adverse-effect reports associated with wind turbines, mostly self reported, along with a small
number of systematic studies. Self-reported adverse effects are a standard and accepted part of
modern epidemiology, used, for example, by pharmaceutical companies to measure effectiveness
and side effects and to develop new warning labels. A key limitation of adverse event reports is that
they do not allow the percentage of the population affected by the exposure to be determined.
The reported symptoms are varied—sleep deprivation, irritability, tinnitus, loss of amenity,
anxiousness and panic attacks, inability to concentrate, among others—but are similar across
affected populations exposed to wind turbines. Most notably, symptoms dissipate when the affected
person is removed from the presumed source (wind turbines), a well-known type of epidemiological
experiment known as “case crossover”, which is considered one of the most compelling medical
indicators of causation. Research suggests that the symptoms are caused by a combination of
shadow flicker, low-frequency noise, and/or infrasound that is inaudible to the human ear and is
“felt” by the inner ear and body. The wind industry still maintains these effects are spurious or
nonexistent, but such assertions don’t pass basic epidemiological scrutiny: when removed from their
homes and the proximity to wind turbines, people suffering the characteristic symptoms eventually
return to normal, but when returned to their homes, the symptoms resume. The percentage of the
population susceptible to “wind turbine syndrome” is unknown, but adverse event reports to date
suggest that children may be more susceptible. Infrasound is difficult to measure and quantify, but
can be approximated on the decibel “C-weighted” scale (dbC), thus it is frequently overlooked by
conventional acoustical studies that typically use the decibel “A-weighted” audible scale (dbA).
Several recent peer-reviewed papers in medical journals are beginning to unravel the complex
behavior of the inner ear and how infrasound (from any source) affects the body. In any case, the
overall mechanism by which wind turbines produce symptoms in some people, at some sites, is
incompletely understood. This severely limits the means available to mitigate the issue. Currently,
distance appears to be the only reliable method.
Audible turbine noise also poses a serious annoyance in some cases. Wind promoters commonly
claim that “turbines are no louder than a refrigerator”. While that may be true at some times and in
some places, it is also true that wind developers frequently push local governments to adopt noise
standards far greater than a refrigerator, such as the 55 dbA standard in Tippecanoe County. Many
neighbors, even at distances of thousands of feet, liken the noise from adjacent turbines to “standing
under a jet airplane poised for takeoff but never moving”, “living next to a busy airport”, “the
thumping bass sound of disco music”, and similar analogies. Apparently, the broadcasting of noise
is highly dependent on the conditions of each specific site. Beyond mere loudness, the rhythmic
frequency of turbine noise is significantly different than typical smooth background noise in rural
areas, especially at night. This rhythmic quality, along with the persistent duration of audible
turbine noise, are often reported to be the most disturbing aspects of living close to wind
installations.
Industrial Wind and the Environment— Landscape and Scale
Modern, land-based industrial wind turbines range from 400 to 500 feet tall. The rotors sweep an
area larger than a Boeing 747 and travel at speeds up to 200 mph at their tips. Larger models are in
development. For comparison, an average cell tower is 150 to 200 feet tall, whereas the tallest
building in downtown Fort Wayne is about 375 feet. Total topographic relief in Noble County is
slightly more than 300 feet, from the lowest to the highest point. In other words, wind turbines
would be the largest and most conspicuous structures in the county.
Wind turbines need to be spaced at least ten rotor diameters apart to avoid interference with one
another, known as wake turbulence. Under ideal conditions, four to six turbines could be established
within a one-square-mile section. Due to variations in terrain, lease rights, and other factors, the
spacing within an individual array is commonly greater, and more irregular. The medium-sized
wind plant proposed for southern Whitley County, for example, would have ~100 turbines
occupying about 13,000 acres (20 square miles), while the proposed Wildcat Wind Farm in parts of
four central Indiana counties would have about 262 turbines occupying 62,000 acres (97 square
miles). If all of these 2.5-mW turbines generated at a capacity factor of 25%, the Wildcat wind plant
would produce electricity equivalent to about 1.4% of Indiana’s total electrical output. By
comparison, one large combined cycle gas plant would produce 3-4 times the amount of electricity
on less than one square mile. This disparity has led to the term “energy sprawl” to describe the vast
amount of landscape taken up by utility-scale renewable energy projects. Indeed, the National
Research Council concluded that, if wind turbines were installed along every Appalachian ridgetop
and on other optimal east coast upland sites, it would reduce total carbon emissions from the US
electrical sector by no more than 1.2 – 3.6%. In contrast, ten nuclear power plants would
accomplish the same reduction using less than 40 square miles of land.
Given the vast amount of land required to produce a meaningful amount of electricity by wind, it
seems likely that wind installations will increasingly be proposed in proximity to more thickly
settled communities, and to natural areas. Noble County is such a locality. By virtue of its presence
in the Fort Wayne metro area, Noble County is among the top 33% of Indiana counties by
population (47,536), being considerably more populated than the western Indiana counties which
currently host wind farms (Benton County, at 9.421, and White County, at 25,267). With about 411
square miles of land area, the average population density of Noble County is 115 persons per square
mile; excluding the incorporated towns, it is 67 persons per square mile. This is far greater than
most rural counties in the plains states where many wind projects are being sited.
By some estimates, bird watching is a several million dollar industry in the southern Great Lakes
region. Birds and bats provide billions of dollars in free pest control services to farmers, gardeners,
and homeowners, and bats in particular are the main defense against nuisance mosquitoes and the
advance of West Nile, St Louis encephalitis, and other mosquito-borne diseases. Poorly placed wind
installations have been shown to kill hundreds or thousands of birds and bats per year per turbine.
Noble County contains large amounts of prime bat habitat, including that of the endangered Indiana
bat. Cranes, which are the largest North American waterfowl and are especially vulnerable to
turbines and transmission lines, are a frequent denizen. With Chain O Lakes State Park (the largest
in northern Indiana at 2,700 acres), the Elkhart Scenic River, and more than 2 dozen other natural
areas, Noble County is one of Indiana’s key destinations for nature tourism, which is a significant
economic force in the county according to the Convention and Visitors Bureau. The county sits on
one of the largest groundwater reserves in the southern Great Lakes, which interacts with more than
100 natural lakes and innumerable ponds and wetlands. These waterbodies are, in turn, an integral
part of one of the world’s largest migratory bird corridors, the Great Lakes Flyway, and they are a
key economic resource for the county. How will these places be perceived if they are allowed to be
surrounded by dozens of giant industrial structures?
Industrial Wind, Property Values, and Setbacks
Comparatively few direct studies of property values using standard appraisal methodology have been
conducted in and adjacent to wind installations. Wind promoters frequently cite a study by the Lawrence
Berkeley Laboratory of the Department of Energy that found “no measurable impact” on property values.
That study has been roundly criticized by others, including real-estate professionals, because more than 90%
of the subject properties it used were more than 5 miles (and thus out of sight and earshot) of wind turbines,
or were located in places where there were no turbines at all. The negative impact of industrial wind
installations on property values has largely been suspected or known anecdotally only among a certain
segment of property owners and real estate professionals located in places where such installations have
actually existed for a period of time, but has only recently begun being documented by independent studies.
Studies by professional appraisers in Illinois and Wisconsin—terrain not unlike northeastern Indiana, for
example—show property values depressed by between 5 and 40% within 2 miles of wind turbines. Some
real-estate professionals have reported “unmarketable” properties, generally within 2,000 feet of wind
turbines, and there are instances of homeowners abandoning properties in order to escape health effects. The
Iowa State University Center for Agricultural Law advises farmers considering wind leases that “assessed
value on farmland is dropping approximately 22 – 30 percent on or near land where wind turbines have been
placed”. Although none of the existing studies, either individually or collectively, are able to quantify a direct
relationship between distance and property value, the impact appears to be much less at distances of two
miles or more.
Setbacks are a standard and widely accepted zoning tool used to protect property owners from deleterious
effects of neighboring land use, and to ensure some level of privacy, safety, and amenity. The primary
purpose of setbacks from wind turbines is to provide safety in the event a neighboring turbine topples or
comes apart at high speed, prevent the intrusion of noise and shadow flicker, and protect property values. For
example, Vestas, a major manufacturer of turbines,
recommends for its V90 turbine with a rotor span of 300 feet and a height of 410 feet, that its workers
maintain a distance of 1,300 feet from an operating turbine. Blades and other large fragments have been
known to travel more than 2,500 feet when turbines disintegrate. Whether actually incorporated into a
regulation or merely recommended, setbacks range widely from locality to locality, country to country, and
agency to agency. Some jurisdictions use setbacks measured from neighboring property lines, others from
dwellings, and still others use measurable “decibel” setbacks from adjoining property lines, ranging from 35
dbA to as high as 55 dbA. By comparison, ambient rural nighttime noise levels are typically in the 25-35
dbA range. A small sampling of setbacks and setback recommendations appears below:
French Academy of Medicine: 1 mile from dwelling (recommendation)
UK Noise Association: 1 mile from dwelling (recommendation)
Dr. Nina Pierpont (“Wind Turbine Syndrome” author): 1.25 miles from dwelling (recommendation)
Ontario Environment Ministry: 5 km from shoreline (proposed for offshore turbines)
France: 1 mile (regulation, land based turbines)
Ontario: 1,200 meters from dwelling (regulation, land based turbine, regulation)
United Kingdom: ½ km from dwelling (regulation)
Trempeleau County, WI: 1 mile from dwelling (zoning ordinance)
Riga Twp., Lenawee Co., MI: ½ mile from property line (zoning ordinance)
Wisconsin, proposed state rule: 1,800 feet from neighboring property lines
Indiana: 1,000 feet from dwelling (voluntary industry guideline)
Jasper Co., Indiana: 4 miles from boundary of Jasper-Pulaski Fish &Wildlife Area (ordinance)
Experience suggests that the smaller setbacks (1,000 – 2,000 feet) are insufficient, particularly when multiple
turbines are present. In Illinois, Dave and Stephanie Hulthen’s home has 13 turbines within one mile, with
the nearest being 1,400 feet away. They are regularly subjected to shadow flicker, infrasound, and loud noise,
which is graphically illustrated on their website www.lifewithdekalbturbines.blogspot.com, and debris from a
shattered turbine traveled nearly 2,000 feet. Their use of a simple decibel meter (readings visible in several of
the videos posted on their blog) is instructive.
Industrial Wind Economics
Subsidies to the wind industry began in the 1970’s to support an “infant” industry. Despite the
subsidies, wind generated less than one tenth of one percent of US electricity and the industry was
on the verge of collapse by the mid 1990’s. In 1997, Enron purchased Zond Wind (a major player at
the time) and resuscitated the industry when it concocted, along with then Texas Gov. George W.
Bush, the modern set of subsidies and mandates that now support the industry, such as renewable
energy credits, production tax credits, and renewable portfolio standards. Today, up to 60-80% of
the cost of a typical wind project is borne by taxpayers and ratepayers. A brief list of subsidies
given to big wind include: section 1603 cash grants for 30% of capital costs; the federal production
tax credit, which currently awards 2.2 cents per kwh without any requirement that the electricity
generated actually offsets “dirty” energy or carbon emissions; federal accelerated depreciation;
reductions in state corporate income tax liability for “green” energy; state and local treatment of
wind turbines as personal property instead of real estate for tax purposes (a tactic commonly
pursued by developers after the project is installed); long-term property tax abatements; and hidden
“public benefit” taxes on utility bills that support additional payments to wind developers. On top of
all this, many states have imposed (and the federal government is considering) “renewable portfolio
standards” that basically require utilities to purchase (subprime) wind energy at above-market rates,
thereby shifting blame for rate increases from politicians to utilities. A key question is what happens
if some or all of these subsidies are cancelled, as appears to be the case with the section 1603 grants
and production tax credit, both of which expire in the near future and appear unlikely to be renewed.
None of what little electricity is generated by local wind plants is sold at market rates to local
residents, who bear most of the externalized costs of the wind plants. In many cases, the only
investment and jobs likely to be local will be those associated with the concrete and rebar used to
make the turbine pads. Most turbine components are foreign made, and turbines are erected by
specially trained crews from elsewhere who travel from site to site. Empirical data indicate that
wind installations create a rather small number of permanent local maintenance jobs, usually
between 2 and 6 jobs per 100 MW of installed capacity. Realistically, most of the investment
dollars dangled by wind developers will go elsewhere, to foreign component manufacturers and
distant speculators (think: Goldman Sachs) looking to make an easy return on the vast government
subsidies that accompany wind installations. It might also be noted that the discussion so far ignores
the enormous costs involved with new transmission requirements associated with wind plants: those
costs will be reflected in higher local electric rates, thereby making Noble County, and existing
industries, less economically competitive.
Large tax payments are often suggested as a reason local communities should host wind turbines,
but they may not materialize. In many cases, once the project is approved, the developer promptly
requests a large, 10-or-more-year tax abatement—or sells the project to a distant utility, which does
the same. This is currently happening in Madison County, where it is interesting to note that three of
the county council members voted “no” on the abatement because they felt that the number of jobs
that might be created fell far short of what a typical abatement is awarded for.
Wind Leases: Landowners who host turbines most often focus on the compensation they are
promised, but it comes at a high price: to taxpayers (see above), to neighborly relations, in lost
rights to decide how one will use one’s own land for the next 20-30 years (a typical contract length),
and in the loss of freedom via confidentiality clauses (standard in all wind contracts) that prohibit
the lessee from disclosing any negative impacts about wind turbines or participating in any
activities perceived by the wind developer as being “anti wind”. Typical leases give wind
companies supreme control over the property, including where to place turbines and the access
roads to them, while severely limiting landowner rights—a fact often lost on those who sign leases
because they do not first have them reviewed by an attorney experienced in such matters.
Annotated Bibliography (A small sampling of a large body of literature, web resources, and media reports)
General Resources for Science Based Information, Analytical Studies, Raw Data, and Media Reports
The Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration (www.eia.gov) website maintains a vast
library of resources on all things energy, including national and state-by-state statistics, production,
transmission, subsidies, and carbon emissions. It is unbiased and indispensable.
American Wind Energy Association (www.awea.org). An industry perspective. AWEA is a lobbying
organization that promotes industrial wind and the government subsidies essential to its existence.
Wind Power Facts (http://www.windpowerfacts.info/?74afe090) Informative website by a physicist who
speaks in plain English, describing the electrical grid and wind energy. Includes: Electrical Energy: Sound
Scientific Solutions (http://www.slideshare.net/JohnDroz/energy-presentationkey-presentation).
Industrial Wind Action Group (www.windaction.org). Maintains a large library of studies, op-eds,
eyewitness accounts, current news stories, etc., all free and well organized by topic. Hundreds of links to
other sources of information on the web.
National Wind Watch (www.wind-watch.org). Also maintains a large library of documents and media
reports, including many studies on health, amenity, property values, and other topics.
Power Production Characteristics, Electrical Grid, Integration
“The case for baseload” by Charles E Bayless, in Edison Electric Institute, Electric Perspectives, Aug. 2010
http://www.eei.org/magazine/EEI%20Electric%20Perspectives%20Article%20Listing/2010-09-01BASELOAD.pdf
Integrating Renewables: Have Policymakers Faced Reality? This summary, and several related studies by
Kent Hawkins are available at http://www.masterresource.org/category/windpower/integrationfirming/
“Analysis of UK Wind Power Generation, November 2008 to December 2010” (URL: http://www.windwatch.org/documents/analysis-of-uk-wind-power-generation-november-2008-to-december-2010/ Summary
documenting wind’s miniscule output during peak demand periods in one of the world’s windiest countries.
“Overblown” by Jon Boone http://www.stopillwind.org/downloads/Overblown.pdf).
Emissions and Climate
“Wind Energy Gets Huge Subsidies: So Where are the CO2 Reductions?” by Robert Bryce. (URL:
http://www.robertbryce.com/node/377). This piece originally appeared in the Wall Street Journal.
Several analyses of industrial wind and emissions reductions on real grids can be found here:
http://www.masterresource.org/category/windpower/emissions-reduction-wind/
A New Study Takes the Wind Out of Wind Energy, Forbes Magazine, July 19, 2011
http://www.forbes.com/2011/07/19/wind-energy-carbon.html
Promoters Overstated the environmental benefits of wind farms
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/windpower/3867232/Promoters-overstated-the-environmentalbenefit-of-wind-farms.html
Landscape, Wildlife, and Environment
Wind turbines would need to cover Wales to supply a sixth of the UK’s energy needs
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/windpower/3500971/Wind-turbines-would-need-to-cover-Wales-tosupply-a-sixth-of-countrys-energy-needs.html
Energy Sprawl or Energy Efficiency: Climate Policy Impacts on Natural Habitat in the USA
http://www.nature.org/ourinitiatives/regions/northamerica/unitedstates/northcarolina/policy/tnc_energy_spra
wl-3-1.pdf
A green dark age, by Matt Ridley http://www.spectator.co.uk/essays/all/6954843/a-green-dark-age.thtml
Bats worth billions to agriculture: pest-control services at risk http://www.prnewswire.com/newsreleases/bats-worth-billions-to-agriculture-pest-control-services-at-risk-119064614.html
Turbine Noise, Shadow Flicker, Human Health
Does this sound like a refrigerator to you? (video)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWyNfN9HJZk&feature=player_embedded
Properly Interpreting the epidemiological evidence about the health effects of industrial wind turbines on
nearby residents, Carl Phillips, Bulletin of Science, Technology, and Society, v 31(4), p.303-315.
Visit this website and experience noise and shadow flicker for yourself from 1400 feet away
www.lifewithdekalbturbines.blogspot.com
Property Values and Setbacks
“Life with a wind turbine 1300 feet away” http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/life-with-a-wind-turbine1300-feet-away-the-wirtz-family. Well written and ultimately tragic account of one family’s ordeal.
Noise & Health Effects of Large Wind Turbines http://www.wind-watch.org/ww-noise-health.php)
Short summary of health effects and setbacks recommended by several medical and acoustical experts
Wind Turbine Property Value Impact Study-Wisconsin. http://docs.wind-watch.org/AGO-WINDTURBINE-IMPACT-STUDY.pdf Performed by a company “specializing in forensic appraisal, eminent
domain, stigmatized properties, and valuation research”, this is one of the few published property-value
studies that has been done using credible industry methodology.
Testimony of Michael McCann on property value impacts in Adams County IL
http://www.windaction.org/documents/27736. Professional appraiser summarizes impacts on property values
For links to other property-value studies and commentary, visit the following:
http://www.windaction.org/documents/c117/ and http://www.windwatch.org/documents/category/issues/impacts/property-values/
NY Town Ordinance to Require Wind Developers to Guarantee Property Values URL:
(http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20101213/NEWS05/312139985) Every forward-thinking local
wind ordinance needs to do this, both to protect property owners and the tax base!
Economics and Leases
British firms paid to shut down wind farms when the wind is blowing
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/windpower/7840035/Firms-paid-to-shut-down-wind-farms-whenthe-wind-is-blowing.html
Informed Farmers Coalition: Know the Facts Before You Sign a Wind Lease!
http://www.informedfarmers.org/Images/IFC%20FactSheet.pdf
Wind Energy Production: Legal Issues and Related Liability Concerns for Landowners, legal brief by Roger
McEowan, Iowa State Center for Agricultural Law and Taxation
http://www.calt.iastate.edu/briefs/CALT%20Legal%20Brief%20-%20Wind%20Energy%20Production.pdf
Enron’s Wind Whispers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/steffy/5817644.html
From One Farmer to Another: Before Signing a Wind Lease, Read What Happened to Us…
http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/from-one-wisconsin-farmer-to-another/