town of lyme wind committee environmental may 2011 revisions

8/3/2019 Town of Lyme Wind Committee Environmental May 2011 Revisions

1/84

1

Findings of the

Lyme Citizens Wind CommitteeOn the Issues of

Environmental, Health and Safety MattersMay 14, 2011


2/84

2

Lyme Citizens Wind CommitteeOn the Issues of

Environmental, Health and Safety Matters

Dr. Paul G. Carr, P.E. (Chair)Mrs. Julia Gosier (Co-Chair)Mrs. Deanne ScanlonMrs. Joy BorowiczMrs. Muriel BarkleyMr. Seann Coffee

May 16, 2011

Municipal OfficesTown of Lyme12175 Route 12EChaumont, New York 13622

Attention: Supervisor Aubertine and the Town Board

Attached please find the Report of the Town of Lyme Citizens Committee on Environmental,Health and Safety Issues. The Committee concluded its work in recent days and is pleased to turn thedocument over to you for the benefit of the Town.

The highlights of the study findings are presented below in an Executive Summary format.

The Fire Risks, Fire Department Needs, Hazardous Chemical Exposure in Operation,Construction Disruption, Storm Water Runoff and Erosion, Earthquake Seismic Effects, Electronic &Electromagnetic Interference, Stray Voltage AKA Ground Current, Vandalism and Security all posemanageable challenges for the Town. It is not anticipated that these issues, when properly addressed will

present undo risk to the residents of Lyme.

Relative to the matter of Birds, Bats, Avian and Wildlife Impacts, it is the finding of theCommittee that given the unique nature of the area, that the cautionary guidance offered in Chapter 3 withthe white paper position of Mr. Evans and Mr. Smith should be heeded. This includes an extended periodof study to fully understand the implications of industrial winds turbines on the bat and avian populations.

Viewshed and Visual Impacts should be addressed by the Town to maintain compliance with theComprehensive Plan of the Town of Lyme. Consideration to both the existing Comprehensive Plan ineffect, and the Draft Comprehensive Plan under review should inform the Board as to the protectionsrequired for the unique character of Lyme and its natural beauty.

Recognizing that the Shadow Flicker from the Turbines can create health issues in the mostvulnerable of the population, particular care in the siting and placement of the turbines should be a highpriority in the planning of any project.

Given the continuing debate over the health effects of Low Frequency Sound [Infrasound] theTown Board should monitor this matter before any permits would ever be considered for issuance.Thematter of the impact of Infrasound remains one of active research and it is expected that clarity on thehealth effects of this type of noise will continue to evolve.


3/84

3

Sound and Noise from any potential Wind Power Project is one of the primary concerns relativeto intrusion into the daily lives of residents in proximity to the project. Generally, the Town should rejectany proposed high fixed-limit of sound, as commonly seen in other New York communities. The Townmust fully consider the change in sound levels, pre-project to post-project, with strict compliance withthe well-published guidelines of a limited increase [i.e. 5 dBA] above ambient or background soundlevels as a limit.

In addition, the committee finds that in order to fully protect the citizens of Lyme, a pre-projectambient study must be conducted by the Town through an independent non-conflicted acousticalconsultant. This ambient sound study will be provided to the developer[s] by the Town to serve as thebaseline for input into the developers acoustical models. A comparison of the developers noise to theTowns ambient study will determine if a particular plan can comply with the Town of Lyme noise limits.

In considering the Safety Zones of Protection from Tower collapse, it is expected that the area ofprotection under the turbine, and the publics exclusion from entering any area within 1,300 feet of thetower should be sufficient to obviate concerns of a dramatic tower collapse. This aligns with industryrecommendations.

On the other hand, the committee finds that the safety zone around a turbine, in the form of asafety setback from airborne debris such as blade ejection or ice throw must be much greater. The zone ofprotection must be specific to the turbine proposed, as it is a function of height and rotational speed of theblades.

The example carried in the report considers a turbine with a nacelle approximately 300 feet abovethe ground, and a blade diameter of approximately 300 feet, with a rotational speed of 18 rpm. Underthese circumstances, the throw distance of ejected debris will theoretically travel upwards of 2,800 feet.The safety setback from public spaces, including parks, public facilities, walkways, trails [includingsnowmobile trails], roadways, or any other areas where the public is present is critical for the protectionof the community. The full report addresses the impact of aerodynamic drag and other factors on debristhrow distances.

The summary of the findings presented above represent a broad overview of the researchconducted. For a better in-depth understanding of each of these issues, please refer to the full reportattached.

As questions arise relative to the research and the findings, please feel free to contact any of thecommittee members.

Sincerely,

Paul G. Carr, Ph.D., P.E.Committee Chair


4/84

4

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter 1- Fire Risks & Fire Department Needs, Hazardous chemical exposure in operationFire Risks & Fire Department NeedsHazardous Chemicals Exposure in Operation

Chapter 2 - Construction Disruption, Storm Water, Runoff Erosion, Earthquake Seismic EffectsConstruction DisruptionEarthquake Seismic EffectsGround Water ImpactsStorm Water Runoff, Erosion and Sedimentation

Chapter 3 - Birds, Bats, Avian and Wildlife Impacts

Chapter 4 - Viewshed Visual ImpactsShadow Flicker

Chapter 5 Noise: Interferences from Noise, Audible Noise and Low Frequency Sound [infrasound]Noise GeneralUnderstanding NoiseAudible NoiseApplication of Ambient SoundAcceptable Noise LevelsLow Frequency [Infrasound]

Chapter 6 - Electronic & Electromagnetic Interference, Stray Voltage AKA Ground CurrentElectronic & Electromagnetic InterferenceStray Voltage AKA Ground Current

Chapter 7 Health and Safety Zones of ProtectionTower CollapseBlade ejection, Overspeed Failure and Ice ThrowSafety Setbacks

Chapter 8 Wind Power and its Validity as Green EnergyReliability / Efficiency of Wind

Wind Power Is it Green EnergyEnvironmental Impact of Building an Industrial Wind FarmWill Wind Power Reduce our Dependency on Foreign Oil

Chapter 9 Vandalism and Security


5/84

5

TOWN OF LYME -Environmental, Health and Safety Wind

Committee Members 2011

Committee Background: The Town of Lyme Environmental, Health and Safety WindCommittee was established by the Town of Lyme after the town attempted to establish a localwind ordinance in 2007.

The Town of Lyme does not have a present wind development application; however, aportion of the Town is impacted by the proposed transmission line from the Cape Vincentproject, and there is reported to be discussion between developers and landowners within theTown of Lyme for potential wind farm development.

This committee is charged with investigating the potential Environmental, Health andSafety issues with a goal to be the protection of the Town of Lyme residents for the future; bothlandowners rights to develop, and residents rights to protections from the potential deleteriousimpacts of development.

This committee has made certain recommendations to the Town council relative to theseprotections for the Town of Lyme residents, in particular those who have a high probability ofbeing adjacent to, or in close proximity to the potential wind turbines.

Dr. Paul G. Carr, P.E. (Chair): A property owner and resident of Lyme for thirty years, resides

on Point Salubrious. Paul is an engineering professor at Cornell University and maintains an

active professional practice in Forensic Engineering and Failure Analysis. Paul is married toKathleen, and they have five children and six grandchildren.

Mrs. Julia Gosier (Co-Chair): A property owner and resident of Lyme for forty-one years,

resides near Three Mile Bay. Julia ran a designing room for a dress manufacturer in Manhattan

for seven years, ran her own custom-slipcover business locally for thirty-seven years, was town

historian for eighteen years, is the director of the Lyme Heritage Center, specializing in local and

family history research, and is an EMT with the Three Mile Bay Fire Department Ambulance

Squad. Julia is married to Guy. Together they have five children, twelve grandchildren, and one

great-grandchild.

Mrs. Deanne Scanlon: A property owner and resident in Lyme for twenty-two years, resides on

Independence Point. Deanne has served on various boards through the years and continues to

volunteer for various projects and activities in the Chaumont/Watertown area. Her participation

in the Lyme Citizen Wind Committee has been a positive endeavor, as all committee members

diligently worked together in developing a report that will be instrumental in our community

"going forward".


6/84

6

Mrs. Joy Borowicz: Joy has been a property owner for 13 years and a resident for 5 years. She

and her husband Thomas, who is with the Syracuse Police Department, live with her mother on

Three Mile Point, where they own their home on the Bay facing the western viewshed. Joy has

attended Onondaga Community College and University College. She is retired from National

Grid. In her spare time enjoys gardening, knitting, and reading.

Mrs. Muriel Barkley: A property owner and resident of Lyme for ten years, resides in Three

Mile Bay. Muriel is a retired counselor from New York State Department of Correctional

Services. Muriel also worked part time for the YMCA as a chair aerobics instructor for five

years. Muriel has volunteered with Hospice for over twenty-five years, is on the Executive

Board of the Lyme Garden Club and volunteers at the Lyme Free Library. She has been married

to husband Warren for thirty-eight years. They have two married sons and one grandson.

Mr. Seann Coffee: Seann has lived in Three Mile Bay for Four years on Point Peninsula. Seann

moved from a more urban life to the Town of Lyme seeking a more tranquil and naturalenvironment. The peace, quiet, and pristine waterfront was the attraction. Seann attended School

of Visual Arts in New York City and now shows and breeds Golden Retrievers.


7/84

7

Introduction

In 2007, the Town Board of the Town of Lyme enacted a twelve (12) month moratoriumon industrial wind energy conversion systems (IWECS) in the Town of Lyme, a moratorium thathas been re-enacted several times while the Town Board has struggled with the issue of

Industrial Wind Projects in the Town. In October 2010, the moratorium was extended for anothertwelve (12) months. This moratorium was enacted through extension to allow the Town Board toengage two Citizens Committees to study the possible ramifications of the placement of IWECSwithin the Town of Lyme.

To facilitate the gathering, compilation and understanding of available information onIWECS, the Town selected a citizens committee comprised of six (6) residents, representing thediverse interests, occupations and viewpoints within the Town to study the Environmental,Health and Safety considerations of IWECS.

Within this report are the findings of the committee to date, outlining major issues to beconcerned with and recommended mitigation strategies.

This report is not intended as a memorandum on the suitability of wind energy as anindustry. While many members of the committee have researched the usefulness of wind energyin general, that research does not necessarily directly affect the Town. The suitability of windenergy in general and/or in theory is left for others to evaluate. This committee however hasaddressed a number of issues that would directly impact the Town of Lyme should industrialwind turbines be placed within or near the borders of the Town.

The committee has not directly addressed non-commercial turbines, believing those to beadequately handled by the Town Board. That topic is addressed indirectly; however, by simplyextrapolating data downward to the lower end of the size and scope spectrum.

The Town Board should also note the continuing nature of the discussion at the County,State and National levels. At some point in the future, these officials may choose to draftlegislation, including zoning rights and limits, to be put into place in the event the local Townshave not enacted their own zoning guidelines. It is the belief of this committee that the Townshould enact legislation to protect its residents now, rather let outside officials take our ability todecide for ourselves the best course of action to protect the citizens and residents of the Town ofLyme.

Work to Date

Beginning on January 11, 2011, and again on January 28, 2011, the committee met andduty assignments were requested by each member. The third meeting was held on February 20,2011, with the fourth on March 19, 2011. Following that meeting, individual committeemembers developed their sections of the report. This effort has included a series of exchanges fora review and consensus effort, with a target completion date of mid-May 2011.

The committee members individually chose their respective areas of interest forinvestigation. Each member was tasked with independent research, serving as a primary or


8/84

8

secondary author on their respective report sections. A review of pertinent documents publishedelectronically and traditionally, was the primary basis to inform judgments and the content of thereport. These research sources include personal communications [with appropriate cautions fordetection of personal bias], as well as web-based research, and other local, state, federal andinternational reports. Every attempt has been made to reference these resources; however, it is

possible that this reference list is not all-inclusive. In that event, upon discovery an errata will beissued.

Committee members have served as a sounding board for each other, examining allevidence critically, with a commitment from each member to do so in an un-biased and balancedmanner, which we believe has been the case.

The committee members have discussed participation in a field trip to the Wolfe IslandWind Farm in Ontario Canada. To date these visits have only been accomplished on anindividual basis, not as a group.

The committee has identified a list of significant issues, identified later in this document.Over the last four months, committee members have been researching and writing portions ofthis report on each the issues for which they accepted responsibility. These individual sectionreports have been integrated into our final report.

After thoroughly studying the scientific facts, this document represents the ConsensusFindings and Recommendations of the Lyme Environmental, Health and Safety WindCommittee. The matters considered include potential Wind Farms impacts on Shadow Flicker,Safety Setbacks, Noise and Sleep Disturbance, Stray Voltage, Construction Disruption,Earthquake Seismic Effects, Fire Risks & Fire Department Needs, Ground Water Impacts &Protection of Aquifers, Lightening Protection, Lighting Turbine Towers, Storm Water andRunoff Erosion, Road Upkeep & Repair, and Security (Vandalism/Terrorism).

The Committee understands that the Town Board may wish to discuss the CommitteesFindings, and encourages the Board to meet with us to discuss these Findings. The Committeeunderstands that the Town Board is considering a supplemental Town-wide survey of propertyowners. With the initiation of the survey development process, it is our strong recommendationthat the questionnaire be vetted through our committee to ensure the greatest probability forproper context and face validity of the inquiry instrument.

Given the broad and diverse nature of the Town of Lyme and its character, the followingmap from the Town website will serve as a distinction of various identified areas. It will be up tothe reader to make a judgment as to whether the areas identified are a sufficient guide to identifypotential areas for development. However, for the purposes of this Committees efforts we havediscussed and agreed to accept these zones as identifying unique regions within the Town.

The Watertown Daily Times has added a helpful link that guides one to articles on

developments and updates in regards to wind turbine activities in our area. "Northern New York

Wind Power" is a useful tool for reference to the many aspects of wind power in our

communities. www.watertowndailytimes.com/section/windpower
http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/section/windpowerhttp://www.watertowndailytimes.com/section/windpower


9/84

9

Figure 1 Town of Lyme Area Map [http://www.townoflyme.com/Strategicplan/Maps/TLyme_Nbhd_E.pdf]


10/84

10

Chapter 1

Fire Risks & Fire Department Needs, Hazardous chemical

exposure in operation

Fire Risk & Fire Department Needs -

While Industrial Wind Turbine catastrophic fires are uncommon, they nevertheless dooccur. It is reported that the fires may be caused by overheating and/or lubrication failure, oilleaks and structural failure. In addition, lightning is a potential source of fire ignition.

In one study used by the committee as a reference document, the Bethany Wind StudyReport refers to one fire that had occurred in Europe. The excerpt follows: In Powys, Wales in1997 a 4 year old turbine overheated and caught fire inside the nacelle. Witnesses reported

"balls of fire" coming from the turbine as burning parts flew out of the nacelle. The turbine'srotors were impossible to stop as the brake controls were aflame. Rotating, burning debris wasthrown 150m (495ft), setting the hillside and a public right-of-way on fire.

With the size of the turbines reported to our committee members to be considered forLyme, one might extrapolate the zone of danger for Lyme to be double that distance. Due to thelimitations of our fire departments, and the clear danger of falling debris, it was reported withinthe committee that our fire official recommended that in response to a turbine fire they wouldcordon the area and wait for the fire to burn out.

Through a conversation with Three Mile Bay Fire Chief Jeremiah Calhoun, the

committee received the following information, The usual responsibility of the local firedepartment for all wind turbine hazard situations is to cordon off the required area and remainon scene until relieved of stand-by by police. The wind company has their own response team forall hazardous occurrences. (1)

Adelaide Australia January 2006 Bloomingdale, Minn., 2008 Uelzen, Germany, December 2, 2009Figure 2 Example Fires in Turbines


11/84

11

Although somewhat uncommon, a recent news article highlights the reality of such fireand emergency situations:

Electrical problem expected as cause in windmill fire:

[The wind company] acknowledged the company will have to work with local firefighters in thefuture about responding to such situations.

Ian Tillard, chief operating officer for Shear Wind, said it took about an hour for the fire to burnitself out. In such cases, he said, the turbines are designed to stop and de-energize so there islittle the fire department needs to do other than keep the area clear underneath it.

[H]e said. Fires like this are extremely rare on these units, but there are concerns in thesummer with forest fires and public safety.

Tillard said the area around the damaged windmill has been cordoned off and the local

snowmobile club has been notified since there are some trails on the site.(2)

Hazardous solvent chemicals exposure in operation and Oil spills

The hydraulic system inside the nacelle includes gallons of oil in a sealed system. Sealedsystems sometimes leak. This is no different from any variety of other mechanical devicescommonly found throughout the Town of Lyme. It is anticipated that the IWECS maintenancestaff, as well as our first responders will be well versed in dealing with any discharge from aIWECS.

In the case of an oil or hazardous waste spill, it is reported to the committee that the local

fire chief will call Jefferson County HAZMAT who will oversee cleanup by the wind companyteam.

Any fire or natural hazard situation can be controlled by adhering to appropriate setbacks,inspections, and safety reports and local fire department and EMS training. Assigning 911addresses to each turbine makes incident reporting more efficient.


12/84

12

Chapter 2

Construction Disruption, Storm Water, Runoff Erosion,

Earthquake Seismic Effects

Construction Disruption

IWECS facilities, particularly the turbines themselves, are extremely large constructionprocesses that will result in infrastructure impacts to the Town, as well as to the individuallandowners and residents. Those landowners will include the leaseholders, but will also includethose within proximity to the travel paths during the construction period, as well as adjacent tothe construction sites.

Considerations include:a. Roadways: Disruption to existing traffic patterns; wear and tear on roadways;temporary and permanent access roads.

b. Utilities: relocation and/or addition of power lines, communications lines and poles;possible relocation or addition of cell and/or TV transmission towers.c. General: generation of dust; quarry operations; drainage issues; water well impact;construction noise.

Installation will require transporting heavy equipment and significant quantities of stone,gravel and concrete by trucks in rapid succession for each turbine site. Wind turbine componentsare also delivered to the installation site by truck. Trucks carrying turbine components and bladesmay require regular interruptions of traffic patterns, wide turning lanes and specific routes basedon roadway and/or bridge weight capacities andoverhead obstructions.

In Lyme, the intersections along Route 12 and a number of intersecting roadways can beparticularly dangerous at certain times of the day throughout the year. Within the Village ofChaumont, traffic in the summer is particularly heavy with residential and transient traffic. Itmay be advisable to limit construction traffic during certain periods, and dictate safe routes withdetours or restricted hours of operation.

Portions of the construction involving heavy equipment will not be quiet. In the past, inother communities, IWECS leaseholder agreements allow for heavy equipment access 24 hoursper day, and allow a noise limit of 60 decibels above ambient. This may pose site-specificdifficulties that should be addressed at the time of project planning.

Limitations on the use of such equipment to the hours of 7:00 am to 5:00 pm with noweekend or holiday operations (except in the case of emergency or repair) might serve to reducethe negative impact of construction on the Town of Lyme residents as well as the transient trafficthrough the Town throughout the construction season.

Creation of permanent new access roads may introduce new hazards to existing trafficpatterns, thus thorough engineering of appropriate highway / driveway cuts would be essential.


13/84

13

Earthquake / Seismic Effects

The seismic activity of the area is well known. We are in an active seismic area, wherethe Building Code of the State of New York governs the design of major structures. As such, theAmerican Society of Civil Engineers seismic standards will apply in the design consideration ofany IWECS in the Town.

The figure corresponding to the 2008 U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic HazardMap is shown below, and as is readily apparent Northern New York is an active, and welldocumented seismic zone.

Figure 3 National Seismic Map

This figure shows the probabilistic ground motion maps for Peak Ground Acceleration(PGA), 1Hz (1.0 second SA), and 5Hz (0.2 second SA). This figure corresponds to the 2% in 50-year probability of exceedance. All ground motion probabilities are computed for the B/CBoundary (Vs

30 = 760 m/s). (3)


14/84

14

This Figure shows that the extent of any wind turbine project proposed in the Town ofLyme is directly on the main zone of the historical seismic area. Significant structural damage ispossible in buildings, and tall structures such as IWECS turbines require special consideration. Acomplete seismic assessment, while difficult, should be conducted at each individual turbinelocation to obtain a design that will allow for the possibility of seismic complications in this area.

Ground Water Impact

Surface features in the Town of Lyme vary greatly across the spectrum of waterfrontproperties bordering the western portions of the Town, to agricultural areas to the northeast.There is a significant variety of soil types and surface drainage patterns. Major fieldinvestigations of any proposed project area would be essential if the true existing conditions ofthe hydrologic impacts are to be addressed.

Many residents of our Town, particularly those in proximity of the more open,agricultural land seemingly the most ideal of turbine installation, rely upon wells for their water

source. While the more densely populated portions of the Town are now served with communitywater, that is not the case for all, particularly those most vulnerable.

The investigation of the groundwater aquifer and necessary protections must be in placebefore any consideration of turbine installation may be made. Water is the life cord to theseresidents, if their wells are somehow impacted, it could lead to a complete property devaluationrendering these homes uninhabitable.

Storm Water Runoff, Erosion & Sedimentation

Any proposed IWECS project for the Town falls within portions of the Great Lakes Basin

watershed. Requirements set in the New York State Standards and Specifications for Erosion andSediment Control mandate that an erosion and sediment control plan be prepared when industrialdisturbances such as industrial-scale wind turbines and associated transformers, substations,transmission lines and cables that will disturb one or more acres.

The physical characteristics of each turbine site must be assessed to preclude disturbanceto wetlands, stream corridors and other environmentally sensitive areas

Project developer plans must also include provisions for stabilization of disturbed areassuch as re-seeding and other structural erosion control measures. Some state-required studiesrequire a full-year data set using a plan to address all points covered by the Storm Water

Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) checklist as per New York state standards.


15/84

15

Chapter 3

Birds, Bats, Avian and Wildlife Impacts

AVIAN IMPACT

Although the Town of Lyme is not on the major Atlantic Flyway, it is on a principalflyway, (see map below). According to the Audubon Society, Point Peninsula, which is locatedin the Town of Lyme, is the most critical winter concentration area in the northeast for arcticbreeding raptors including Rough-legged Hawks, Snowy Owls and Short-eared Owls. PointPeninsula is a significant migration corridor for an extensive variety of birds. Point Peninsula isdesignated an Important Bird Area (IBA) by the Audubon Society (4).

Although nearby, Little Galloo Island is not in the Town of Lyme, it is also an importantarea as it has the largest Ring Billed Gull colony in the United States and the only Caspian Terncolony and Double Crested Cormorant colony in New York State. Black crowned Night-Herons, Herring Gulls and Great-backed Gulls nest on Little Galloo Island. Little Galloo Islandis designated an Important Bird Area (IBA) by the Audubon Society (5).

The Perch River Wildlife Management Area/Perch River Bird Conservation Area islocated in the Towns of Brownville, Orleans, and Pamelia, has one of the largest concentrationsof breeding grassland birds in New York State. The area also supports an incredible wetland birdcommunity. Perch River Bird Conservation Area is designated an Important Bird Area (IBA) bythe Audubon Society (6).

Figure 4 Eastern Flyway


16/84

16

The Ashland Wildlife Management Area, which is located in the Towns of Lyme andCape Vincent, is also a bird conservation area. Many of the birds are either endangered orthreatened. These birds include the Short-eared Owl (endangered), Henslows Sparrow(threatened), Sedge Wren (threatened), Northern Harrier (threatened), and the Upland Sandpiper(threatened). There are also other grassland and scrubland birds that nest and breed at the

Ashland BCA (7).

The nationwide estimated mortality rate is 2.19 birds per turbine annually. This averageis considerably less than the number of birds killed annually due to collisions with motorvehicles, tall buildings, homes and lighted communication towers. However, there are far moremotor vehicles, tall buildings and homes than IWECS facilities. The percentage of kills perturbine is higher than any other cause of death. (8)

The Wolfe Island Post Construction Avian-Bat Mortality Monitoring Report forJanuary1-June 30, 2010 states that 10 raptor carcasses along with 66 carcasses of 28 other birdspecies and 34 bat carcasses were recovered.

In the Kingston Whig Standard( January 26, 2011), Mike Norris, quotes Erwin Batalla,chairman of the nature reserve committee of the Kingston Naturalists as stating, The raptors arethe most concern. Its probably one of the higher raptor rates at a wind turbine. According toEnvironment Canada the mortality rate is within the range of other wind farms in Canada and theUnited States, but is the fifth or sixth highest.

TransAlta, owner and operator of the 86-turbine wind farm on Wolfe Island, will conductresearch this year, which will include the fall migration period of 2011. The results of thisresearch will also aid in determining the measures to reduce the effects of wind turbines on bats(9).

A study by the Department of Biological Sciences at the University of Calgary, Calgary,AB Canada, states that the decompression hypothesis proposes that bats are killed by rapid air-pressure reduction near moving turbines. The Department of Biological Sciences reports thatBarotrauma, pain and possible damage caused to organs by changes in atmospheric pressure, isthe cause of death in a high number bats through their study of the impact of wind farms on thesecreatures. The study found that 90% of the bat fatalities involved Barotrauma and that the reasonfor fewer birds than bat deaths is that the anatomy of birds is less susceptible to barotraumas thanthat of mammals (10).

The Texas Parks and Wildlife released a documentary on the use of MERLIN SCADA,Avian Radar System. This system is used for bird and bat mortality assessment monitoring. Thissystem can monitor birds or bats up to 6 miles away in a variety of weather conditions. Whenneeded, MERLIN SCADA can shut down a turbine within one minute to one rpm and in fiveminutes to stationary. Wind farm owners may not find this cost effective but it could stop largebird kills.

There are many protocols for testing. However, two documents are mentioned. The firstis the document entitledAssessing Impacts of Wind Energy Development on Nocturnally Active


17/84

17

Birds and Bats: A Guidance Documentat www.nationalwind.org, and the second is;Avian Riskand Fatality Protocol at www.nrel.gov. These are two important guidance documents for testingand assessing Avian risks in relation to wind energy development (11).

Investigations into the impact of Windpower development on the avian and bat

populations is a topic of local concern. The local issues are addressed in the white paper

authored by William Evans and Gerald Smith. This document is a concise treatise on the subject

and follows in its entirety.
http://www.nationalwind.org/http://www.nrel.gov/http://www.nrel.gov/http://www.nationalwind.org/


18/84

18


19/84

19


20/84

20


21/84

21


22/84

22


23/84

23

Chapter 4

Viewshed Visual Impacts, Lighting Turbine Towers, Shadow Flicker

Having given considerable thought and research to the topic viewshed, the committee

focused attention on the Comprehensive Plan that reflects the long-term viability of ourcommunity directed by the public-input survey of the residents.

The Town of Lyme and the surrounding towns in the Golden Crescent have beencherished by residents for over 100 years for their natural beauty, postcard-perfect vistas, andamazing plethora of waterfront recreation.

The Town of Lymes rural, peaceful waterfront location and quality of life are thestrongest and most significant attraction to residents in our community. The purpose of theComprehensive Plan is to provide for long term land use planning and protection of our smallrural scenic town on Lake Ontario from any inconsistent zoning or development. It is a land-use

philosophy that must relate to zoning intent, as NYS Law requires it.

Zoning ordinances must be in full accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, whichreflects the best interest of our community. NYS Statute on Comprehensive Planning (N.Y.TWN.) Law 272-a: NY Code Section 272-A states the following: Among the most importantpowers and duties granted by the legislature to a town government is the authority andresponsibility to undertake town comprehensive planning and to regulate land use for thepurpose of protecting the public health, safety, and general welfare of its citizens.

Measures to protect the integrity of the historical and aesthetic qualities of the Town ofLyme are consistently promoted in the Comprehensive Plan of 1999 and the Draft

Comprehensive Plan of 2010. The emphasis is to preserve the cultural, historic, scenic andarchaeological resources of the Town of Lyme with sufficient buffers to conservation andpreservation areas and important resources. The previous quote is from the Town of LymeComprehensive Plan [CP 1999], in effect as of this writing.

Any new solar, wind, geothermal, or other local energy proposals should be viewed in thecontext of their economic impact, visual effect on the scenic quality and visual character of thecommunity; as well as their potential noise and other environmental impacts.

The previous statement is from the Draft Town of Lyme Comprehensive Plan 2010.

One of the controversies concerning wind turbines is their massive structure and theunique nature of their movement. Industrial wind turbines with the height of 425 to 500 feet,white in color, with lights and motion will have an impact on our community for decades.Both day and nighttime viewsheds need to be considered. If we are to bring in 425 to 500 ft.towers, they will need to have flashing lights in order to comply with the FAA requirements.199 ft. is the highest height NOT requiring nighttime illumination via lights. Analysis beginningat a 1-mile viewshed and extending the viewshed assessment to the boundary of the Town, ratherthan 8-miles [by example] cited in Cape Vincent DEIS would better serve to protect the visual


24/84

24

impact on the three historic districts and the Route 12 Scenic Byway. Balloon tests at full heightand with navigation lights would give a realistic rendering from various distances.

In addressing the importance of aesthetics and scenic beauty, one must take intoconsideration the cumulative impact of not only wind turbines, but also the siting of the power

transmission line.

Figure 5 Example of Power Transmission Lines

Whether or not we have placement of wind turbines in the Town of Lyme, there isproposed construction of the transmission line infrastructure through our town to carry powerfrom the proposed Cape Vincent wind projects to the nearest National Grid substation #733 onCounty Rt. #179 (Chaumont-Depauville Road).

The cumulative effect of potential wind turbine development in Cape Vincent, Clayton,Brownville, Galloo Island and the Golden Crescent can be likened to a tidal wave of turbinesabout to come to our region. Refer to map for details in Cape Vincent alone.

Figure 6 Cape Vincent Industrial Wind Farm Plan


25/84

25

The map included showing proposed turbine sites does not show related projectinfrastructure (e.g., construction/access roads, concrete batch plants, operation/maintenancestructures, substations, meteorological towers, staging areas or transmission line infrastructure.)The following quote from the Overall Town Planning Vision section found in the Town ofLyme draft Comprehensive Land Use Plan 2010 is as follows:

Encourage development types and services in suitable areas that enhance town, hamletand community character while preserving or enhancing priority areas and maintaining thenatural, historic, and scenic qualities of the Town. Appropriate growth and development shouldoccur while protecting priority character areas; open agricultural and open forest ruralresidential, open recreation, waterfront residential, community residential and business centerswhile retaining or enhancing scenic views.

Scenic qualities and viewshed can be a very subjective concept. Aesthetics are a verypersonal thing. One person's trash is another's treasure. However, the following two photos,offer a sense for the viewshed that might be expected in the Town of Lyme. These photos were

not taken by anti-wind proponents, but rather from the Wind industry publication depictingthe most noted local wind project, the Maple Ridge project in Lewis County. These photos areoffered as an accurate depiction presented by the wind developer, of what the turbines mightlook like in a rural setting.

Figure 7 Photos Presented by the Wind Developers of the Maple Ridge Project

In addition to the concept of viewshed as a perception, changes are a very different thing.The Town of Lyme, and the surrounding towns in the Golden Crescent, are cherished for theirnatural beauty. The appropriateness of "industries" that have previously tried to enter our townhave been questioned (the hatchery is only one example). Our comprehensive plan surveysillustrate why this is the case. Over 2/3 of our population have stated in the surveys that theywant little to no business development in our town. The few that do want development wantsmall incremental growth only. Small town living and peace and quiet were frequently thereasons people have chosen to live in our town.


26/84

26

Viewshed sensitivities are not only aesthetically motivated. If the perception and/orreality of wind turbines is that they can negatively affect property values [both economic as wellas use and enjoyment], human health, wildlife, seasonal revenue, will be noisy, and overall willchange the quality of life, then the "viewshed" may constantly have negative sentiments that go

along with the negative aesthetics.

Figure 8 Windfarm in a level Topographic Area

The comprehensive plan that was generated based upon comprehensive data collection ofthe town's population via survey is a state-mandated process that dictates future zoning laws,including those for new industry. This comprehensive plan dictates the "important" areas thatare revered by residents and lawmakers. These areas include the lake and bay waterfronts,historic areas, and the hamlet of Three Mile Bay, the village of Chaumont and the Chaumont

River.

There are those who would change the Comprehensive Plan to allow for industrial windturbine development in a section of our township that is presently viewed as rural farmland(generally areas D,E and F in Figure 1). This would dramatically alter the viewshed and qualityof the town. The open space that our rural land use provides is an integral part of our quality oflife and natural beauty. Natural beauty received the highest rating in terms of its essentialimportance to quality of life among 11 aspects of the community.

In reviewing the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the Town of Lyme one finds thefollowing examples of the residents concern for the natural beauty of the area, and the need for

continuing protection of this resource:

Throughout many areas in Lyme, sweeping views of the Lake, harbors, farm fields, and forestedges comprise many spectacular viewsheds. Another quote: On average, the most essentialelement to the respondents quality of life was the Natural beauty of the area rated 2.63 on ascale of 1 to 3. Small town/rural atmosphere ranked third at 2.39, on average.


27/84

27

The waterfront area comprises approximately 40 miles of coastline between the Lake andthe Bay. The plan dictates that these areas are important to protect. By most definitions,viewshed would be included in these "protected" areas.

Unfortunately, because the town has never had to deal with development of tall buildings

or structures, the comprehensive plan dictates a 1/4 mile radius of protection to these areas. A450-500 foot high wind turbine would CERTAINLY be visible within the 1/4 mile distance. Anindependently produced professional assessment should be performed using models to determineWHERE turbines can be located (if at all) so that the viewshed is not affected in the areas thatthe town has previously decided are vitally important resources for the town. These remainingareas should then be vetted to ensure that other concerns are mitigated (sound, health, vibrationsfrom ultrasound, flicker, etc.).

Following this paragraph is a link to a study on viewshed. If the Town of Lyme is toconsider allowing turbines at all, the same methodology should be employed by anINDEPENDENT firm to determine how to protect the MOST important asset our town has...its

viewshed: http://www.otsego2000.org/documents/stonevisualizationanalysisreportrev.pdf

How one begins to assess the value of a diminished viewshed can be subjective. Werefer to the Cultural Resources Mitigation Plan of March 2010 as an example of the "value" thedevelopers (in this case, the St. Lawrence Wind Farm) considered as fair compensation for lossof open vistas taken from the Town of Lyme for the proposed wind projects in the town of CapeVincent.

Aesthetic values do not lend themselves to measurement or elaborate analysis, yet the St.Lawrence Wind Farm proposed in their Cultural Resources Mitigation Plan of March 2010payment of $14,310 to the Town of Lyme. To put this value in perspective, that represents a one-time payment of less than 21 cents per acre for the Town of Lyme; or 1.2 cents for every $100 ofassessed value. The contribution was to compensate for the Adverse Effect on cultureresources in the Town of Lyme. The Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservationdetermined on June 22, 2009 that construction of St. Lawrence Windfarm (SLW) would have anAdverse Effect on cultural resources.

SLW states that mitigating visual impacts of wind turbines is limited due to their sizeand broad regional visibility. Indeed, wind turbines with heights of 425 to 500 feet, white incolor with lights and motion do have an impact on vistas. Again, the mitigation fund of $14,310serves to compensate for these visual impacts through a stated goal of helping preserve historicalresources. The quantification of its impact, and the valuation computation is at best baffling.

BP accurately reports that due to the height of the proposed turbine structures and theunique nature of their movement, it is anticipated that the development of other wind projectsmay have cumulative visual impacts.

The community may visit the Town of Cape Vincent website for access to the plan forthat town. Here one may review the maps citing the viewshed of Cape Vincent. From thesemaps, one may determine the number of wind turbines that will be in view at different locations.
http://www.otsego2000.org/documents/stonevisualizationanalysisreportrev.pdfhttp://www.otsego2000.org/documents/stonevisualizationanalysisreportrev.pdf


28/84

28

This identifies only those turbines planned in the BP project in Cape Vincent. The BP reportcontinues to state that combined, the St. Lawrence and Cape Vincent Projects would encompassa majority of the land area of the Town of Cape Vincent. Views of the turbines would bedominant and widespread.

Statements addressing the cumulative project visibility, the BP environmental documentfor their Town of Cape Vincent project cites; Cumulative project visibility does not increaseaesthetic impact in a linear manner. Thus, particularly in the case of the Cape Vincent and St.Lawrence Projects, given their proximity, construction of one of the projects within theagricultural landscape of the Town of Cape Vincent will change the landscapes character.Installation of a second project of a close size within the same viewshed is compatible with thecharacter with the first project, and will result in a lesser impact on the aesthetic quality of theland than that of the original development.

The concern for Lyme is that each community act under their home rule authorization inorder to address the impacts resulting from any proposed project within the Town of Lyme.

The members of this committee engaged in a comparison study between the Town ofLyme Comprehensive Plan, 1999, and the Draft Comprehensive Land-Use Plan for the Town ofLyme, 2010. We found consistencies in the philosophy of both plans. We will end this sectionby quoting from the "Overall Town Planning Vision" taken from the Draft Comprehensive Land-Use Plan, 2010.

Encourage development types and services in suitable areas that enhance town, hamlet andcommunity character while preserving or enhancing priority areas and maintaining the natural,historic, and scenic qualities of the Town. Appropriate growth and development should occurwhile protecting priority character areas; open agricultural and open forest rural residential,open recreation, waterfront residential, community residential and business centers whileretaining or enhancing scenic views.

SHADOW FLICKER

Shadow flicker caused by wind turbines is commonly defined as alternating changes inlight intensity caused by rotating blades casting shadows on the ground and stationary objects,such as a window at a dwelling.

No flicker shadow will be cast when the sun is obscured by clouds/fog or when theturbine is not rotating. Shadow flicker can occur in project area homes when the turbine islocated near a home and is in a position where the blades interfere with very low angle sunlight.The most typical effect is the visibility of an intermittent light reduction in the rooms of thehome facing the wind turbines and subject to the shadow flicker. Obstacles such as terrain, trees,or buildings between the wind turbine and a potential shadow flicker receptor significantlyreduce or eliminate shadow flicker effects.

Although shadow flicker seems benign, there is mounting evidence that its effect onnearby residents causes annoyance and stress. Some studies indicate that there might be cause for


29/84

29

concern in that the cumulative effect of shadow flicker from an area densely developed withwind turbines can lead to epileptic seizures.

Wind turbine shadow flicker has the potential to induce photosensitive epilepsy seizures;however, the risk is low with large modern models and if proper planning is adhered to (12).

Planning should ensure the flash frequency does not exceed three per second, and the shadowscast by one turbine on another should not have a cumulative flash rate exceeding three persecond (13). Wind turbine shadow flicker induced adverse human health effects includeannoyance and/or stress (14).

Shadow-flicker triggers a reflexive response in animals that results in a flight or fightresponse leading to an increased heart rate, muscle tension and a sense of movement accordingto Dr. Herb Coussons who did a study of shadow flicker for Brown County in Denmark, WI. Dr.Coussons concluded; Shadow-flicker and noise can be reduced by increasing the distance fromthe wind turbine. (15)

In another report In some cases when wind power projects are being considered forpermitting, concerns are raised that turbine-related shadow flicker has the potential to causenausea, dizziness, and disorientation. Proponents of wind power argue that the empiricalevidence does not support these assertions.(16)

It is acknowledged that shadow flicker can be an issue both indoors and outdoorswhen the sun is low in the sky. Therefore, shadow flicker may be an issue in locations other thanthe home. (17) Shadow flicker modeling must consider human exposure to shadow flickeroutside a building. Protection from wind turbine shadow flicker exposure must be engineeredinto the design of the wind turbine facility during the planning stage.(18 and 19)

To ensure protection from adverse human health effects a shadow flicker study must beconducted during the planning stage of a wind turbine facility.

The shadow flicker study should:1. Calculate shadow flicker based on the actual location of the wind turbines.2. Calculate shadow flicker exposure on the entire neighboring properties and not just

the receptor (house).3. Calculate shadow flicker for both sun and moon induced flicker using conservative

assumptions to ensure maximum protection against adverse human health effects andsafety risks.

4. Protect against photosensitive epilepsy by ensuring the flash frequency does notexceed three per second, and the shadows cast by one turbine on another do not havea cumulative flash rate exceeding three per second.

Based on the best available science the following conclusions can be drawn.Wind turbines produce noise and visual burdens. Scientific research confirms visuals impactscan adversely affect human health. Wind turbine shadow flicker has the potential to inducephotosensitive epilepsy seizures; however, the risk is low with large modern models and if


30/84

30

proper planning is performed. Wind turbine shadow flicker induced adverse human health effectsinclude annoyance and/or stress.

No generalized dose-response curves have yet been modeled for wind turbine shadowflicker primarily due to the lack of results of published field studies.

Protection from wind turbine shadow flicker exposure must be engineered into the designof the wind turbine facility during the planning stage.


31/84

31

Chapter 5

Noise: Interferences from Noise, Audible Noise, Low

Frequency Sound [infrasound]

Noise General

Industrial Wind Turbines are unquestionably a source of noise introduced into the naturalenvironment. There has been significant research and field evaluation completed over recentyears to better understand this issue and its impact on communities where wind turbines havebeen installed and are considered for installation. The following section of this report addressesthe issues with noise from industrial wind turbine projects.

The following quote from Dick Bowdler, of New Acoustics, from Dumbartonshire

Scotland readily captures the issue facing the Town of Lyme related to noise from wind turbines.The issue of noise [unwanted sound] entering an environment as a result of change due todevelopment is captured in this statement (20).

Figure 9

The issue with noise has been a matter of concern in the Town of Lyme since thebeginning of the deliberation on wind development within the Town. The general promotion ofthe developers has been, and continues to be [as seen in the recent report on Cape Vincent andBP] that 50 decibels at the participants [leaseholders] residence and 47 decibels at the non-participants residences are the levels of noise that can be expected when their plans for theproject are completed.

The discussion among potential developers considering the Town of Lyme, are that giventhe similarities in the topography, population density, the density of turbine layout and other

factors, the noise levels predicted for Cape Vincent are likely similar to those that would beexpected here.

The Watertown Daily Times reported the controversy and positions in the followingexcerpt:


32/84

32

Figure 10

The news report goes on to say that the measured ambient or background noise in the

development area ranged from 30.5 to 46.7 decibels at different times of the year and underdiffering wind conditions. The Town of Cape Vincents consultant rejects those studies and theconclusions (21). The critique follows:

The solution to this debate is simple the Town of Lyme, when approached by adeveloper, must engage a non-conflicted acoustical consultant to map the proposed developmentarea to establish the Towns assessment of the ambient sound levels at different times of the yearand at differing wind speeds.

The Town of Lyme will then provide this data to the developers as input into theiracoustical models, limiting any debate by the developer as to what the current background soundlevels are in the Town of Lyme. This background sound is referred to as the ambient sound level.This acoustical mapping is akin to the mapping of any other resource or condition such astopography. These existing conditions are not variable with any particular development plan, butrather the baseline acoustical mapping is unique to the community, accurately depicting theexisting conditions under which development is planned.

WIND FARM IS SPACED OUT CONSTRUCTION ON HORIZON: BP's Cape Vincent project down to 84

turbines

ByNANCY MADSEN TIMES STAFF WRITER WATERTOWN DAILY TIMES THURSDAY, MARCH 3, 2011 CAPE VINCENT BP Wind Energy has reduced the size of its planned Cape

Vincent Wind Farm to 84 towers.

But the developer designed the project allowing up to 50 decibels ofaudible noise at participating landowners' residences. The project is alsodesigned to allow the turbines to generate at or below 48 decibels ofaudible noise on the property of nonparticipating landowners and at orbelow 47 decibels at nonparticipating residences.

In the supplemental statement, BP sticks with a study by

Hessler Associates, Haymarket, Va., that finds anaverage background noise of 46.7 decibels of audiblenoise in the summer and 30.5 decibels in the winter. The

study came to that conclusion using an analysis that tiednoise to wind speeds.

The study drew criticism from the town's independent

noise consultant, Cavanaugh Tocci Associates, Sudbury,Mass., who said that the Hessler study did not show astrong correlation between wind speed and noise levels

because the wind speed monitors and decibel meterswere not in close proximity.


33/84

33

The Town should not be placed in a defensive position to protect the rights of all of itscitizens. This baseline mapping by the Town would be done without bias. A low ambient mightbe seen as too restrictive and unrealistic, while a high ambient might allow development thatimpinges upon the rights of non-participating citizens, thus the true ambient, established by theTown of Lyme, representing all property owners in Lyme is essential.

The factual and correct ambient mapping of the Town is essential to protect the health,welfare and safety of all Town residents, regardless of any individual positions on wind energydevelopment.

Understanding Noise

In order for the Town to understand the importance of this matter, it is essential tounderstand:

1. the basics of sound propagation2. the current background sound levels, typical of the Town of Lyme3. the acceptable levels of noise intrusion resulting from development4. the impacts on the health and welfare of the residents and visitors to the Town of Lyme

Basics

Wind turbines generate noise in various ways, both mechanical and aerodynamic. Astechnology in the wind energy industry has advanced, wind turbines have become quieter.However, sound from wind turbines is still a significant siting issue. Wind turbines produce twomajor categories of sound audible and infrasonic.

a. AudibleAlthough sound levels can be measured, the public's perception of wind turbine noise

noise being defined as any unwanted sound is often a subjective determination. The intensity ofsound is measured using units known as decibels (dB). On the decibel scale the smallest audiblesound is 0 dB. A sound ten times louder is 10 dB. A sound 100 times louder is 20 dB. Somecommon sounds and their dB ratings follow:

a. Silence 0 dBb. A whisper 15 dBc. Normal conversation 60 dBd. Lawnmower 90 dBe. Jet engine 120 dB

The measurement of sound is reported as an L rating, which refers to the amount oftime the sound is exceeded in the following measurement periods.

LA10 Sound Level Exceeded 10% of a Measurement PeriodLA50 Sound Level Exceeded 50% of a Measurement PeriodLA90 Sound Level Exceeded 90% of a Measurement PeriodLAeq Equivalent Sound Level


34/84

34

The common sounds and the decibel levels of measured sound pressures (22) in a quietrural and suburban nighttime have background sound levels are reported to be between 20decibels and 35 decibels. Of course, this is reported as common expected sound levels, whileeach community will experience their own, unique sound character. A character that will change

with seasons and environmental changes, thus it is critical to capture in the ambient baselinestudy of the most vulnerable time period.

The question of what the expected background sound levels that will be experienced inthe Town of Lyme now comes into play. It is the background or ambient sound level that definesthe current conditions in the Town of Lyme. The comparison of the existing sound level to thepost-project sound level will determine the acceptability of the noise increases.

So the question arises is there any data to begin to inform the Town Board as to whatthe sound levels presently are in the community? The answer to this is yes. There have beenindividual studies of the area performed, and studies conducted by the various wind development

companies. Some of those findings are presented below.

The first example is from the proposed Flat Rock project where at the turbine cut-inspeed of 4 m/s wind speed it may be seen that the measured background or ambient sound levelsare in the 17 to 28 decibel range.

Figure 11 Ambient Sound Levels [Typical Finding]

The second study, performed in Cape Vincent, uses the L90 measurement. In this study,the nighttime background sound levels were measured at 20 to 25 decibels. This is consistentwith the developer-funded study at Flat Rock. As seen in the graph, the nighttime ambient soundlevels in Cape Vincent drop to the 20-25 decibel range (Schomer and Associates BackgroundSound Measurements and Analysis of Cape Vincent, New York, May 11, 2009).

17 to 28 dBA


35/84

35

Figure 12 Cape Vincent Ambient

A third study of summer ambient sound levels in Cape Vincent showed a daytime high of45 decibel, but the background sound in the overnight period dropped to the 25-decibel range(Clif Schneider sound study).

Figure 13 Cape Vincent typical daily fluctuation in sound levels

The fourth study, which would be highly predictive of what the Town of Lyme mightexpect is the study performed in the Town of Clayton for the Horse Creek project. There were anumber of measurements taken, however the measure of the ambient sound level [L90], taken at

night [the most sensitive period for residents disturbance], finds that the background soundlevels at the time when the turbine would begin operation can be expected to be in the 20 to 25decibel range. This matches closely with the Flat Rock study previously presented.

Ambient Sound Levels


36/84

36

Figure 14

The state of Oregon requires that a pre-project ambient study is conducted, and if the

study is not conducted to establish the true ambient sound for the project area, the backgroundambient sound level of 26 decibels will be used for comparison (23).

Each of these studies, and the guidance from Oregon are consistent, particularly theHorse Creek project in Clayton, which borders on the northeast side of the Town of Lyme. It isreasonable to assume that the Town of Lyme nighttime ambient sound levels are expected to bein the 20 to 30 decibel range.

The importance of this is that when the Town allows a developer funded study of thebackground sound levels to serve as the basis of the development, controversy ensues. The oldadage of the fox guarding the chicken coop comes to mind, where one party has a real or

perceived conflict of interest.

Figure 15

The Town of Lyme when considering any wind project as a first order of business shouldconduct a thorough ambient sound study, performed by a non-conflicted acoustical consultant, toestablish the baseline ambient. Based upon the research, the committee believes that the ambientsound at nighttime in Lyme will be in the 20 25 dBA range.

Is the Ambient Sound Level

Around 20 to 25 dBA 45 dBAOr is it


37/84

37

The question then will be; of what consequence is the background sound level?

The next section of the report addresses this question.

B. Application of these Ambient Sound Levels

As new sound sources are entered into the environment, such as the sound from industrialwind turbines, this noise will add to the pre-existing background sounds levels. It is the change innoise levels that results from this added sound source that must be evaluated, planned andcontrolled.

The following paragraphs simply and briefly outline how sound enters the environment,and how much of that sound will be heard by the observers. The simple assessment is, the fartheryou are away from the sound source, the lower the sound level you hear.

The sound level falls with increasing distance from the source. The principal reason is thewave front spreads over a larger area, the farther from the source you are. This is known as the"inverse square law" and it applies to turbines. The simple rule of thumb is that with a doublingof the distance from a point source produces a reduction in sound level of 6-dBA.

Figure 16

Sound propagation outdoors can be compared to ripples created by throwing a stone into a pond with acalm surface. The ripples spread out uniformly in all directions of the pond surface decreasing in

Sound Basics [setbacks]6 Decibel Drop with Doubling of Distance

90 6 = 84 84 6 = 78 78 6 = 72


38/84

38

amplitude as they move away from the source. For a stationary noise source outdoors, the sound leveldrops by 6 dB every time the distance from the source is doubled. Thus, if the sound level is 50 dBA at500 feet, the sound level at 1000 feet will be 44 dBA and will be 38 dBA at 2000 feet. Obstacles in thesound path, such as intervening terrain or buildings, and weather conditions may affect outdoor soundpropagation (24)

Note: A 6dB decrease is equivalent to moving double the distance away the soundsource, thus given initial intensity of sound at a source, the computation of the expected setbackto achieve a particular sound level is a relatively simple matter.

The following turbines were used on the Mars Hill project in Maine and may represent atypical turbine that could be considered for Lyme. The projection of the sound levels at variousdistances may be computed from this data, recognizing the sound reduction of 6-dBA with adoubling of the distance from the sound source.

General Electric 1.5 MW Series Wind Turbine BrochureSound level performance specifications for the GE 1.5sle wind turbine provide information on how the

sound power level emitted by the wind turbine varies with wind speed. The GE specification soundpower levels represent the wind turbine as a point source at the hub (rotor center)The maximum sound power level for the 1.5MW wind turbine is 104 dBA, which is equivalent to a soundpressure level of 72 dBA at 50 feet. Typical uncertainty for the specification sound power level is plus orminus 2 dBA (24)

Given these data, 72 dBA at 50 feet from the source, the distance / sound levels can beroughly predicted, for a rule of thumb sense of noise limit setbacks.

Essentially, this is the method used in computer models to produce the sound level mapsthat predict the post-project sound levels to be expected in a community. An example of thatprediction mapping is shown in the following study from the Town of Clayton, Horse Creekproject. This would be typical of that produced by the developer for the Town of Lyme should aproject be considered here.


39/84

39

Figure 17 Horse Creek Town of Clayton Sound Predictions


40/84

40

The predicted sound contours, as shown in the Horse Creek example, would be comparedto the background ambient sound levels, previously mapped for the Town of Lyme to determineif compliance with our Wind Zoning ordinance would be achieved with the proposed turbinelayout.

If yes, the project would move forward on that issue. If no, the project turbine layoutwould be adjusted, and a new model run to predict the sound levels across the project area undera modified layout.

As may be observed in the Town of Clayton map, the outer ring of acoustical isotropiclines is the prediction of a 40-decibel level of sound [noise] emanating from the turbine array.As one may also observe, the vast majority of homes within the project boundary will experiencesound levels in the 40 to 50-decibel range. There is no reason to believe that the plan for Lymewould differ significantly from the proposal presently before the Town of Clayton.

The question then becomes, what are the sound levels, or sound level increase overambient that would be considered acceptable?

Acceptable Noise Levels

The interferences to daily living derived from noise intrusion are well documented. TheWorld Health Organization [WHO], and other institutional and governmental entities offer clearguidelines as to what level of sound is considered as intrusive. The measure is both in thedifferential between the introduced noise [from the turbine operation] and the background level[ambient] sound level of the area prior to the project development.

In addition, there are absolute values measured in decibels that set the upper limits forhuman exposure. Those limits for audible sound are not generally limiting for industrial windfarms, with the exception of sleep disturbance as defined by the WHO. The document on theGuidelines for Community Noise entitled Community Noise (25) that was prepared for theWorld Health Organization and published in 1995 states:

If negative effects on sleep are to be avoided the equivalent sound pressure level shouldnot exceed 30 dBA indoors for continuous noise.

Therefore, it is essential that separate noise studies be carried out for daytime andnighttime. The emphasis should be on preventing sleep disturbance. This is highlighted in therecent Noise Conference post-conference finding that (26):

The main effect of daytime wind turbine noise is annoyance. The nighttime effect is sleepdisturbance. These may lead to stress related illness in some people. Work is required in understandingwhy low levels of wind turbine noise may produce affects which are greater than might be expected fromtheir levels.


41/84

41

The New York State agency with jurisdictional authority over industrial sound and noisehas issued the following chart where the comparison between the ambient sound and the soundresulting from development offers a descriptive human reaction. It is further established that ifthe sound does not increase over the ambient by more than 3 decibels, it is considered noimpact. (22)

Figure 18

The New York State document goes on to say that if the ambient sound level is increasedby less than 3 decibels, there should be no effect on receptors [residents], while an increase of upto 6 decibels could impact the more sensitive receptors (22).

An increase of 6 or more decibels would have an impact, while when the audible noiselevel increases by 10 decibels avoidance would be required in most cases. This is consistent

with the prior recommendation that defines an increase over ambient of 10 decibels is the borderbetween intrusive and very noticeable. In order to avoid the potential for adverse impacts, thefollowing excerpt defines a maximum of 6 decibels over ambient should be the limit.


42/84

42

Figure 19 Excerpt from NYS Document (22)

The NYS guidelines suggest limiting the sound increase above ambient to no more than6-decibels, with an absolute increase of 10 decibels. Then, accepting that Lyme could expect anambient sound study would likely demonstrate sound levels across the Town in the 20 25decibel range, this would then target a fixed limit of sound levels at non-participants propertylines which is quite low. The consideration should be to establish a limit in noise produced by the

turbine array as a function of a set limit above the established ambient sound levels throughoutthe Town.

The State of Oregon has set a maximum limit on the sound levels over the entire range of

operation of the wind turbine (23).

purposes of determining whether an operating wind energy facility complies with theambient noise standard where a landowner has not waived the standard, noise levels at theappropriate measurement point are measured when the facilitys nearest wind turbine isoperating over the entire range of wind speeds between cut-in speed and the windspeedcorresponding to the maximum sound power level and no turbine that could contribute to

the noise level is disabled. The facility complies with the noise ambient background standardif the increase in noise over either the assumed ambient noise level of 26 dBA or to theactual ambient background L10 and L50 noise level, if measured, is not more than 10 dBAover this entire range of wind speeds.

In order to reduce the risk of negative health impacts from wind turbine noise AcousticalEngineers George Kamperman and Richard James recommend audible sound limits of 5dBAover the pre-existing background sound levels (ambient level).

Even the British Wind Energy Association, the trade association representing the windindustry, offers guidance on the limits of sound increase for an acceptable project, with an

increase of no more than 5 dBA above average nighttime levels, with a fixed limit in the 35decibel range. This recommendation is at odds with most proposals we find from the developersin this area (27).


43/84

43

Figure 20

From these considerations, it is clear that the issue, the question that is essential to answeris; what is the true background, or ambient sound levels throughout the Town under differentconditions. There is wide variance between the developer funded Cape Vincent study [46.7 dB],and the levels expected in rural environments posited not only by independent scientists, but also

by the British Wind Energy Association. Defining the baseline or the ambient sound levelthroughout the Town is an essential first step.

Low Frequency [infrasound]

Noise, Including Infrasonic

In the Town of Orleans study, the following excerpt is a well-worded basis forconsideration of infrasound.

Infrasound, also produced by wind turbines, is below the limit of human perception

(sound below 20 Hz or cycles per second). Infrasound travels farther than higher frequencies.Infrasound may be perceived as a tactile sensation or feeling of pressure. Some effects ofinfrasound include fatigue, hypertension and abdominal symptoms.

Infrasound is an especially important consideration for rural-agricultural areas such asBethany. G. P. Van den Berg, in his study of a wind turbine park on the Dutch-German borderfound that "Residents living 500m (1,500ft) and more from the park have reacted strongly to thenoise; (and) residents up to 1,900m (5,700ft) distance expressed annoyance, particularly atnight."

Van den Berg has pointed out that, although inaudible, turbine blades passing their

towers produce higher frequency sounds, which are periodic with the effect strengthened atnight. If several turbines are in the area, such as proposed for several projects in western NewYork state, there can be an amplification effect of the rhythmic thumping caused when turbineblades pass the towers on which they are mounted [A:E.5]. Some residents have experiencednoise levels 15dB higher than expected.

Wind turbines are not only a matter of renewable energy policy, but also a matter ofpublic health policy. Sound from wind turbines is a major siting issue. If improperly sited, they

Preliminary recommendations from the Wind

Turbine Noise Working Group*1, established by the

DTI, are that turbine noise level should be kept to

within 5 dB(A) of the average existing evening ornight-time background noise level.

A fixed low level of between 35 and 40 dB(A) may bespecified when background noise is very low, ie.

less than 30 dB(A).


44/84

44

can have a negative impact on the health of residents, particularly in areas of low ambient noiselevels such as the Town of Lyme.

It is essential that one understands that wind turbines generate noise in various ways, bothaudible and infrasonic. Mechanical (audible or high frequency) noise is from the interaction of

the turbine components. This audible wind turbine noise is commonly measured by a dBA scale.

Living in a rural environment as opposed to a suburban area increases the risk ofresidents being impacted by noise because of the low ambient SPL (sound pressure level). Datataken in the North Country typically have nighttime ambient in the range of 20-30 dBA.

Noise not only annoys, it can cause stress that can have an impact on our health and well-being. Scientific and medical literature essential for communities researching the health riskfactors are referenced in WHO, 1999. Guidelines for Community Noise (25). An excerpt of thisreport follows:

3. Adverse Health Effects of Noise

3.1. Introduction

The perception of sounds in day-to-day life is of major importance for human well-being.Communication through speech, sounds from playing children, music, natural sounds inparklands, parks and gardens are all examples of sounds essential for satisfaction in every daylife. Conversely, this document is related to the adverse effects of sound (noise). According to theInternational Programme on Chemical Safety (WHO 1994), an adverse effect of noise is definedas a change in the morphology and physiology of an organism that results in impairment offunctional capacity, or an impairment of capacity to compensate for additional stress, orincreases the susceptibility of an organism to the harmful effects of other environmentalinfluences. This definition includes any temporary or long-term lowering of the physical,

psychological or social functioning of humans or human organs.

3.5. Cardiovascular and Physiological Effects

Acute noise exposures activate the autonomic and hormonal systems, leading totemporary changes such as increased blood pressure, increased heart rate and vasoconstriction.After prolonged exposure, susceptible individuals in the general population may developpermanent effects, such as hypertension and ischaemic heart disease associated with exposuresto high sound pressure levels (for a review see Passchier-Vermeer 1993; Berglund & Lindvall1995). The magnitude and duration of the effects are determined in part by individualcharacteristics, lifestyle behaviours and environmental conditions.

3.7. The Effects of Noise on Performance

It has been documented in both laboratory subjects and in workers exposed tooccupational noise, that noise adversely affects cognitive task performance. In children, too,environmental noise impairs a number of cognitive and motivational parameters (Cohen et al.1980; Evans & Lepore 1993; Evans 1998; Hygge et al. 1998; Haines et al. 1998).


45/84

45

Among the cognitive effects, reading, attention, problem solving and memory are moststrongly affected by noise.

Infrasound (inaudible noise or low frequency) produced by wind turbines below the limitof human perception (sound below 20 HZ or cycles per seconds), travels not only seismically but

also airborne over terrain. On occasion, the local geography can act like a giant microphone.Wind turbine noise may not be heard but rather felt as a vibration or feeling of pressure. It isessential to stress the importance of proper integration of and emphasis of the low frequencysound energies for environmental noise assessment. Many factors affect the noise impactincluding turbine design, constantly changing atmospheric and wind speed, temperature andterrain.

Since low frequency noise travels farther than higher frequency noise without losing itspower, it can travel through walls, rattling objects resulting in vibration. Medical research hasreported complaints from people who experienced this symptom similar to that associated withVibroacoustic Disease (VAD). VAD has been studied in aviation workers as well as other

industries and community settings. Just as we cannot detect X rays (our eyes are not sensitive tothis frequency) yet can be harmed by them, so we can be harmed by non-audible noise (pressurewaves in the air) though our ears are not sensitive to them (28 and 29).

The mechanism of the harm is the differing resonance frequencies of different parts of thehuman body, especially the chest and skull. Air pressure (sound) waves of certain wavelengthsresonate inside these walled spaces, setting up vibrations to which the body responds byreinforcing its softer tissues with extra collagen, causing such problems as thickening of thepericardium (membrane inside which the heart beats) and cardiac valves, fibrosis of the lungs,and proliferation of supporting cells in the brain.

Acousticians measuring noise do not take into account the physiologic/medical aspects ofnoise. Those with backgrounds in medicine, the human biologic sciences, and the epidemiologyare best suited with their expertise to properly study the effects and responses of the human bodyto environment noise. Human life must be the highest exponent of importance in the placementof wind turbines. Focus should be placed on the fundamental problems of environmental noiseof which there are abundant scientific studies. The siting standards must protect all the citizenryin our rural setting including the elderly, ill, impaired and the very young.

In other words, it is the obligation of the Town to protect the most vulnerable among us.

Infrasound is a particularly important consideration for rural-agricultural areas such asthe Town of Lyme where enjoyment of the external environment can be as important as theenvironment within the house. Those who visit a wind turbine during the day will usually nothear the turbine sounds referred to as lapping, swishing, clapping, beating, or the thesurf. G. P. Van den Berg, found that Residents living 500m (1500ft) and more from (windturbine) parks have reacted strongly to the noise; (and) residents up to 1,900m (5.700ft) distanceexpressed annoyance, particularly at night (30).


46/84

46

The evidence strongly supports those who complain of adverse health effects when livingnear wind turbines. Their symptoms parallel those found in areas of research into thephysiologic and medical impact of noise on people. Over a prolonged period of time noisedelivered with a pulsating character such as low frequency noise, infrasound, and shadow flickerpose health risks when developers site wind turbines too close to homes. Numerous studies are

cited in the research Noise Radiation from Wind Turbines Installed Near Homes: Effect onHealth. (28)

Figure 21While there are a number of proponents that infrasound is a serious problem with

industrial wind turbines, the industry remains unconvinced. As an example, one of the threemajor themes to come out of the Wind Turbine Noise 2011 Conference held this April in Romeis that while infrasound continues to pose a problem, it is in need of further research[http://www.windturbinenoise2011.org/].

Infrasound continues as a problem in public perception, but there has been no

evidence to back this up, despite new studies in how the ear responds to

infrasound.

For additional research on this topic, a number of peer-reviewed papers were presented.A sampling of the papers presented this year include:

1. Why turbine noise annoys. Bowdler D (UK)2. Description of wind turbine noise by hearing related parameters. Brambilla G and

Gallo V (Italy)3. A note on the debate about health effects from low frequency noise (LFN) from

modern large wind turbines. Hessler GF (USA)4. Wind turbine noise and morning blood pressure. Laurie S and Hanning C (Australia)5. Adverse health effects of industrial wind turbines. Nissenbaum M, Arimini J and

Hanning C (USA)6. Responses of the inner ear to infrasound. Salt AN (USA)7. The audibility of low frequency wind turbine noise. Swinbanks MA (UK)8. Perception of noise from large wind turbines. von Hunerbein S, King A, Hargreaves J,

Moorhouse A, Plack C and Pedersen TH (UK)9. An overview of residential health effects in relation to wind turbine noise. van den

Berg F (The Netherlands)


47/84

47

Chapter 6

Electronic & Electromagnetic Interference,Stray Voltage AKAGround Current

Electronic & Electromagnetic Interference

The following excerpt from the Bethany study will serve as a general guide on the issueof electromagnetic interference. That study rightly took a position that in this area they woulduse general references to the issue. To be Town specific would be difficult and possiblymeaningless therefore the full excerpt follows:

Upon notice from the Quebec Ministry of the Environment of a proposed 70 turbineCWECS facility in Murdochville, Quebec, the Canadian Broadcasting Company (CBC)conducted pre- and post-wind turbine television interference studies including satellite pickup[A:E.9]. The wind turbine configuration in this situation included 90 meter towers with non-

metallic blades 40 meters long.

The CBC has two television stations in Murdochville: Channel 10 and Channel 21, withboth transmitters located on the outskirts of the town. The CBC performed signal qualitymeasurements before and after the installation of the CWECS facility at 14 locations around theaffected area. Qualitative and quantitative measurements included signal levels, waveformmeasurements, tape recordings and subjective signal quality evaluations. The problems foundwere: Static interference or "ghosting" which occurs when the signals are reflected off theturbine towers. Following turbine construction, an increase in the numbers and severity ofghosting was seen at 11 of the 14 Channel 10 locations and 3 of the 14 Channel 21 locations.The difference in the results between the two channels is attributed to their different antenna

patterns.

Dynamic interference caused by the production of a secondary or interference signalreflected from the rotating turbine blades, seen as a periodic variation in picture brightness orcolor. Dynamic interference was found at all 14 Channel 10 locations and at 4 out of 10evaluated locations for Channel 21. Based on previous studies with NTSC, signals theorysuggests that interference may occur with HDTV. It is expected that HDTV would be less likelyto suffer the static (tower-related) effects but more likely to suffer dynamic (blade spinning)interference which would take the form of frozen frames and pixelation.

Research papers suggest that other wireless and/or broadcast consumer services would

suffer similarly, including cellular and wireless networking services [A:E.2]. Preventativemeasures can reduce or even eliminate these issues, but they must be taken during CWECSproject planning stages. W

town of lyme wind committee environmental may 2011 revisions

Documents