Fearing Reprisal, Turbine Supporters Launch Anonymous Drive

By: Michael C. Bailey
Published: 05/29/12

In the wake of a state report leading to the shutdown of Falmouth’s Wind 1 turbine, several residents are stepping up their efforts to support wind energy development in town—but from the safety of a collective pseudonym: Friends of Falmouth Wind.

The organization recently set up through Change.org an online petition directed to the Falmouth Board of Selectmen, asking the public to “support responsible wind energy” in Falmouth. The Friends of Falmouth Wind launched its petition drive last week, issuing an announcement by e-mail via a Gmail account (falmouthwindfriends@gmail.com), and its Facebook page (www.facebook.com/pages/Friends-of-Falmouth-Wind).

The entire petition reads, “Residents and taxpayers in Falmouth Massachusetts benefit from clean energy and Town revenue produced by the wind turbines, as well as less pollution and climate change.” As of press time, 26 people had signed the petition.

According to its official Facebook page, the group supports the continued operation of the town-owned turbines on Blacksmith Shop Road, East Falmouth, and the consensus-building process undertaken last year by the selectmen.

No one involved with the petition would allow the Enterprise to use their name, although all of them have spoken in public on the issue.

“Falmouth Wind Friends is an ad hoc group of Falmouth residents who have begun to speak out in the public interest in regard to the municipal wind turbines,” said a point person for the group. “We advocate running them, as they were designed to be run.

“While we recognize that some folks in the neighborhood clearly do not like the turbines,” he said, “we feel the need to support the town in factually representing the situation for what it is. Our future plans are to participate in the town’s consensus-building process to bring the political issue, posed by the disapproval by some residents, to a reasonable resolution.”

However, all of the seven founding group members are keeping their identities private “due to legitimate concerns of harassment” by anti-turbine residents.

“I know that it’s kind of unorthodox,” one member said in a telephone interview. “Anonymity never smells good, it doesn’t help a cause, and personally it’s not my preferred method for doing anything.”

Every member of the group has spoken publicly in favor of the town-owned turbines, at Town Meetings and at public hearings held by town boards; as a member of an organization that supports renewable energy; or as a present or former member of a town body that has dealt with the turbine issue.

Another member, who declined to identify himself or his affiliations, told the Enterprise via e-mail that he recently e-mailed the Falmouth Board of Health to air a concern that the board might have violated the state’s Open Meeting Law. At its May 7 meeting, the board of health scheduled an emergency public hearing on the turbines although the topic was not on the board’s May 7 agenda.

The member claimed that his e-mail address was forwarded by a member of the board of health to turbine opponents, who then began to send him “angry e-mails.”

Before that, the Friends member claimed that, while serving on a town committee with a connection to the turbines, he received regular lengthy e-mails from turbine critics. He described those communiqués as “libelous” and said they contained personal attacks on his integrity as a member of the committee. That continuous stream of e-mails led to his decision to resign.

He also claimed he once spoke supportively of the turbines at a public meeting, and was repeatedly berated by another attendee for speaking in favor of the turbines.

The petition drive was launched last week, more than a week after the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection determined that, based on noise sampling conducted on Wind 1 in February and March, the turbine exceeded state noise thresholds.

The DEP’s standard for acceptable wind turbine noise is 10 decibels (dB) above ambient background noise. The measurements were taken between 1 AM and 4 AM, when ambient noise levels are at their lowest.

The group member interviewed by phone pointed out that the same report noted that the highest sound levels recorded during the sampling period was 50.5 dB, which is equivalent to the sound generated by a refrigerator or an air conditioner. Normal human speech is about 60 dB.

That report was one of five studies and news articles included on a fact sheet that went out with the petition drive announcement, and the phone interviewee said the Friends plans to continue disseminating information from “credible, authoritative sources” to counter claims by turbine opponents.

“I hope the content of our message speaks louder than our anonymity,” he said.

8 Responses to "Fearing Reprisal, Turbine Supporters Launch Anonymous Drive"

1. PocassetEE says: 05/29/12
   

   Here are a some points to keep in mind: 1. Falmouth's noise bylaw limits noise to 40 decibels. 2. The World Health Organization's noise limit is 35 decibels for sleeping. 3. At 1,300 feet wind turbine noise has been measured above 40 decibels on several ocassions.
2. markjcool says: 05/30/12
   

   Here are some other points to keep in mind: 1. the sounds generated by a refrigerator or an air conditioner (50.5 dB) and normal human speech (60 dB) emit steady noise signatures with relatively little frequency and octave variation. 2. wind turbines produce erratic emission signatures with great frequency and octave variations. 3. the Falmouth BoH has repeatedly asked the state DEP/DPH for guidance on these and other concerns as far back as March 2011. to date, there has been no response from ANY State Agency or Expert Panel addressing their specific concerns. 4. the most frequently (peer reviewed) cited Scientist in the state's Expert Panel Report (E. Pedersen) has often concluded in many studies - the amplitude-modulated noise from turbines is likely to be at the heart of annoyance and sleep disturbance complaints. 5. the state noise regulation/guidance does not test amplitude-modulated noise.
3. billslycat says: 05/30/12
   

   I wish these anonymous folks would do some reading on wind turbines that can't be sourced to the wind industry. Industrial Wind Turbines do not provide green energy as they require that fossil fuel plants work in tandem with them. Many days, especially the hottest days in summer at peak demand, there is not enough wind to run them. Fossil fuel plants provide over 100% backup at those times, as IWTs require a lot power from the grid for their own systems. And FYI, they cannot use their own power ever. When the wind is moving the blades, wind speed and direction constantly vary, and conventional plants have to ramp up and down constantly, much more than without wind turbines on the grid, to keep pace with demand. And just as your car gets worse mileage in city traffic and puts out more exhaust, so do the fossil fuel plants backing up wind turbines. In that way, and in others, IWTs actually provide dirty energy. In fact, not one coal or gas plant the world over has been decommissioned because of IWTs...and eliminating our dependence on fossil fuels is their stated purpose. Also, many studies have shown that CO2 and pollutants are only slightly reduced, or even increase due to IWTs. http://www.forbes.com/2011/07/19/wind-energy-carbon.html http://www.denverpost.com/headlines/ci_15081808 http://www.clepair.net/IerlandUdo.html http://www.thespec.com/news/ontario/article/610422--cost-of-green-energy-40-higher-than-government-estimates http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2011-07-25/news/bs-ed-wind-farms-20110725_1_wind-turbine-wind-farm-wind-power The wind industry is built on crony capitalism, it is the only way it can exist. Taxpayer money builds them and power companies are mandated to buy wind generated power at much higher rates than conventionally produced power. There is no true benefit, except to wind power companies, politicians and lobbyists.
4. ebibler says: 05/30/12
   

   The factual situation that the Friends of Falmouth Wind choose to ignore or deny is that the wind turbines are HURTING people. In typical fashion, they ignore the problem and say only that "some folks in the neighborhood clearly do not LIKE the turbines." Is this what they really believe: that the central issue here is that "some folks in the neighborhood don't LIKE the wind turbines"? If so, they aren't listening. More likely, they just don't care and they seek to marginalize anyone who has been adversely affected. Not surprisingly, this same group of "Friends" is fully supportive of the sham "consensus building process" that the Town has engineered. They can't seem to comprehend the the victims consider their health and well-being, their quality of life and their property values to be non-negotiable issues and that they are unwilling to allow the "consensus" of citizens in Falmouth to determine an "appropriate" amount of punishment for them to endure. Why do the "Friends" expect the victims to support this approach? Do they think that the victims do not realize how swiftly their concerns will be swept aside in a town whose population is 22,000? Newspapers don't publish anonymous Letters to the Editor for a good reason: namely, because people do and say irresponsible things when they can hide their identities or when they are not willing to put their reputations on the line and stand behind their comments. The Friends of Falmouth Wind should demonstrate the courage of their convictions. They can start by identifying themselves. Then they should clarify if they think that their neighbors are lying about their dire circumstances; or if the "Friends of Falmouth Wind" simply don't care about what they are going through and are willing to inflict such suffering. The "Friends" say that they are acting in the public interest -- but dare not reveal their names. They claim the moral high road even as they declare the virtue of sacrificing their neighbors -- anonymously, of course. This is shameful in every way. Eric Bibler
5. Pragmatist says: 06/01/12
   

   Too bad people have to fear "reprisals" in our fair town. This is not the time or place to discuss the rationale for wind power in the world-the fact is, these turbines were put there to make money for the Town of Falmouth, period. As I understand it, the Town received a large grant to put them there. If they aren't producing power, we have to pay back the grant. Anybody dispute that? Also, when they aren't turning, they aren't making money. If the Board of Health forces the private turbine to shut down (after the Town approved its siting), would not the town be subject to pay for the owner's lost revenue? As a taxpayer, I'm just wondering.
6. Billcarson says: 06/01/12
   

   The MTC should pay to move the turbines it's as simple as that ! PROOF THE TOWN OF FALMOUTH GOT DUPED BY THE MTC - A SEMI QUASI STATE AGENCY It is well documented that the MTC knew of at least two different types of noise : A. Regulatory compliance and B. Human annoyance The following letters,news stories and urls point to why the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative,MTC should pay to move the Falmouth Wind Turbines. The semi quasi state agency was well aware of the noise issues even when GE refused to site a commercial wind turbine in Falmouth The Massachusetts Technology Collaborative,MTC , was the state's economic development agency for renewable energy .It is now called the The Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (MassCEC). The Town of Falmouth and its residents need to take a hard look at how they got the loud commercial wind turbine. A semi-quasi state agency, Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, had been stuck with two 1.65 MW commercial wind turbines in a warehouse in Texas since 2004 at $3500.00 per month rent. The cost of the turbines around 5 million and the rental fees were proving to be a political embarrassment for the renewable energy progress in Massachusetts. The semi-quasi state agency had put the wind turbines on the auction block and was providing the funding and resources for wind studies which included noise studies to install the commercial wind turbines that they were "stuck" with. The state should pay to move the turbines ! http://www.masshightech.com/stories/2008/08/04/weekly7-MTC-puts-mothballed-wind-turbines-on-auction-block.html?action=emailfriendform
7. Billcarson says: 06/01/12
   

   TOWN OF FALMOUTH COMMUNITY WIND PROJECT FEASIBILITY STUDY November 2005 6. OTHER COMMUNITY IMPACTS..Page 38 6.1 VISUAL AND NOISE IMPACT. Page 38 A feasability study was done for the Town of Falmouth in November 2005. It was well documented in section 6 of the report on page 38 about the visual and noise impact. In 2005 it was documented by the Massachusetts semi quasi state agency that there were two types of wind noise A. Regulatory compliance: Massachusetts State regulations and B. Human annoyance: Aside from Massachusetts consideration. Residences must also be taken into consideration. The homes affected by the noise are in the 2005 noise study as well as others. http://www.falmouthmass.us/energy/falmouth%20feasibility%20study_111505.pdf 6.1 Visual and Noise Impact The potential visual and noise impacts of the proposed wind turbine are best considered in the context of where existing dwellings are located in relation to the turbine site. A total of 99 residential properties are located within a half-mile radius of the turbine site. All of these properties lie to the west and south of the site.(See Attachment A for a map of the site). There are 68 properties located to the west of the turbine site. All 68 properties are located on the west side of Route 28 (Rte. 28). Rte. 28 therefore serves as a barrier between these 68 dwellings and the turbine site. Approximately one third of the 68 dwellings are within 500 feet of Rte. 28, and all are within a quarter mile of Rte. 28. The closest dwellings are approximately 1700 feet due west of the proposed turbine site. Sixty-one of the 68 properties are located on one of the following residential streets: Ridgeview Drive; Ambleside Drive; Westmoreland Drive; and Brantwood Road. Seven properties are located to the east of West Falmouth Highway. There are 31 properties to the south of the turbine site. A vast majority of these dwellings are located off of Blacksmith Shop Road, primarily on the south side of the road. A few dwellings are located off of Durham Road and Durfee Drive. The closest dwelling to the south of the proposed turbine site is approximately 1350 feet due south.
8. Billcarson says: 06/01/12
   

   http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2012/05/21/its-not-just-a-falmouth-problem/ filed: May 21, 2012 • Massachusetts, Press releases It’s not just a Falmouth problem: across the state people living near wind turbines complain of noise and health effects Credit: Wind Wise ~ Massachusetts | www.windwisema.org | 21 May 2012 ~~Contrary to the claim of Massachusetts DEP Commissioner Ken Kimmell in a recent Boston Globe article, the noise and adverse health effects produced by a wind turbine in the town of Falmouth are not unique. In fact, wherever wind turbines are constructed too close to homes, people suffer from the noise, the consequent loss of sleep, and other chronic impacts.The Boston Globe reported on May 16, 2012 that one of the two town-owned wind turbines in Falmouth, known as Wind I, is to be shut down temporarily due to excess noise http://www.wind-watch.org/documents/letter-from-vestas-worried-about-regulation-of-low-frequency-noise/ posted: December 16, 2011 • Denmark, Health, Noise Letter from Vestas worried about regulation of low-frequency noise Author: Engel, Ditlev Chief Executive Officer Alsvej 21, DK-8940 Dir. +45 9730 0000, www.vestas. com Dear Karen Ellemann,* Following previous correspondence, I am writing this letter to express my concern regarding the limits for low frequency noise from wind turbines now being proposed. At this point you may have asked yourself why it is that Vestas does not just make changes to the wind turbines so that they produce less noise? The simple answer is that at the moment it is not technically possible to do so, and it requires time and resources because presently we are at the forefront of what is technically possible for our large wind turbines, and they are the most efficient of all. [See Danish news story about subsequent lax rules: Miljøstyrelsen anklages for at fifle med vindmøllestøj] Please see the noise report done for Falmouth : The Bruce McPherson Infrasound and Low Frequency Noise Study: The "smoking gun" of noise reports http://randacoustics.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/The-Bruce-McPherson-ILFN-Study.pdf