FALMOUTH WIND TURBINES THREE STRIKES YOUR OUT

FALMOUTH WIND TURBINE ANOTHER SMOKING GUN DIRTY SECRET

Folks, You all know by now the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center was the original owner of Falmouth Wind 1. The semi quasi state agency was desperate to sell the turbine as it could not even be sold at auction.

The MassCEC had to bribe the Town of Falmouth with one million dollars and today is helping pay the town litigation fees.

We know now that according to an April 2 , 2013 memo from the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center they admitted “mistakes” in the preliminary noise tests for Falmouth Wind 1. It took three years for the agency to admit the mistake. This is a secret

We know the town hid a noise warning letter from Vestas wind company that the turbine generated 110 decibels of noise. This is 6 decibels higher than the original studies. This is a secret.

Prior to selling Falmouth Wind 1 to the Town of Falmouth the MassCEC always warned of two distinct types of noise from wind turbines. The warnings were because a scientist Neil Kelly in 1985 prepared a study for the U.S. Department of Energy Contract No. DE-AC02-83CH-10093. The study established the acoustic noise sources .
That noise was called infra sound and referenced as human annoyance in that 1985 study.

The federal and state governments have known about wind turbine infra sound for over thirty years. Human annoyance and infrasound and low frequency are all synonymous.

Prior to the Falmouth installation residents in other towns were up in arms over the noise warning about two distinct types of noise, “regulatory” and “human annoyance” from the turbine study in Marion, Rochester and Mattapoisett.
The Massachusetts Clean Energy Center gave up trying to place wind turbines in these towns. There are no commercial megawatt turbines in any of the three towns. The MassCEC gave up and moved on to Falmouth.

The Massachusetts Clean Energy Center was still stuck with the Vestas V 82 commercial wind turbines and the problematic warnings of two distinct types of noise, “regulatory” and “human annoyance” or what is called “infra sound” from the 1985 Department of Energy Contract study.

The Massachusetts Clean Energy Center tasked with a commercial wind renewable energy goal of 2000 megawatts of wind power by the year 2020 made a catastrophic “ mistake. “

The “mistake” was to drop the noise warning of two distinct types of noise, “regulatory” and “human annoyance aka infra sound” from the Falmouth feasibility studies. No one in Falmouth was ever warned about the two types of noise.

To date no one has ever confronted the MassCEC about why they dropped the warnings to two distinct types of noise !

Falmouth is ground zero for poorly placed wind turbines in Massachusetts. The state as of today has only placed 100 megawatts of commercial wind turbines as a result of the Falmouth turbines. Commercial wind has ground to almost a halt in Massachusetts.

The Massachusetts Clean Energy Center made the decision to take the health and property rights of a few citizens for the greater good. The decision to drop the warning equates to assault and battery on the environment.

Now we have three strikes or three sets of hidden documents. The August 2010 Vestas noise warning, April 2, 2013 admission of acoustic noise mistakes in the original studies and now noise warnings intentionally removed from the Falmouth feasibility study. Safety took a back seat in Falmouth.

Folks when this goes to court in front of a jury three strikes and your out ! Taxpayers need to confront your representatives. Don’t be afraid of them. You voted them in to represent you not a state agenda. 

Here are the noise warnings from noise studies prior to Falmouth
Noise considerations generally take two forms, state regulatory compliance and nuisance levels at nearby residences:

A. ”Regulatory compliance”: Massachusetts state regulations do not allow a rise of 10 dB or greater above background levels at a property boundary (Massachusetts Air Pollution Control Regulations, Regulation 310 CMR 7.10). This sound level is very unlikely to be a reached incase at the sites we examined.

B.”Human annoyance”: Aside from Massachusetts regulations, residences must also be taken into consideration. Any eventual turbine would be sited such that it would be inaudible or minimally audible at the nearest residences. Today known as “ Infra Sound”

Here is the :
FALMOUTH INFRA SOUND STUDY
Noise Control Engineering, LLC (NCE)- February 27, 2015

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Noise Control Engineering, LLC (NCE) was retained by Senie & Associates P.C. to evaluate the acoustic impact at the home of Neil and Betsy Andersen at 211 Blacksmith Shop Road, East Falmouth, Massachusetts.

The goal of the evaluation was to determine if the three nearby wind turbines were detectable within the interior of the home.

These wind turbines are all Vestas, model V82 at 1.65 megawatts.

Two wind turbines are owned by the Town of Falmouth; known as “Wind #1” and “Wind #2”. The third turbine is privately owned by Notus Clean Energy and referred to as the “Notus” turbine.

Wind #1 is the closest to the Andersen home at a nominal distance of 1,385 feet. The other two wind turbines are more than double that distance.

Soon after the first wind turbine was operational, complaints were filed by the Andersens and other neighbors. In the following years, evaluations of audible sound were performed by various organizations including NCE, consultants for the Town, consultants for Notus, and even the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MADEP). Various results were reported with some evaluations showing compliance and some showing non-compliance.

The study reported herein differed in a number of ways from previous evaluations performed by NCE and others. The major difference is that the primary measurements reported here is infrasound.

Briefly, infrasound is sound pressure levels with frequency below 20 hertz which is generally considered an inaudible frequency range. Another difference is that measurements were taken both inside and outside the home.

All previous tests were performed at exterior locations due to the fact that State regulations and local ordinance were only applicable at outdoor locations.

The methods used herein allowed for the collection of infrasonic sound pressure levels within the inside of the Andersen residence. Inspection of this data shows that there is a readily identifiable acoustic signature that is attributable to the Wind #1 Turbine, and to slightly lessor extent the Wind #2 turbine both inside and outside the Andersen home.

These results are similar to results from other international researchers with references given in the report.

Based on our experience, NCE can unequivocally state that the infrasonic signature captured inside the Andersen residence with the wind turbines operational is 100% attributable to one or both of the Town’s Wind Turbines.

CONCLUSIONS

The methods used herein allowed for the collection of infrasonic sound pressure levels within the inside of the Andersen residence.

As shown in Figure 6, there is a readily identifiable acoustic signature that can be definitively attributable to Wind #1 and possibly Wind #2 located outside the Andersen home.

To NCE’s knowledge, this is the first time such measurements have been performed and reported with respect to the Falmouth wind turbines.

However, this is not the first time such measurements have been performed, and other researchers have collected low frequency infrasonic acoustic signatures at other wind turbine sites in Wisconsin and Australia (references 11, 12).

As reported in these other studies, the same blade passage rate infrasound and harmonic shown inside the Andersen home have been identified.

Given NCE’s signature analysis and the dramatic change in this acoustic signature when the wind turbine(s) are shut down, NCE can unequivocally state that the infrasonic signature captured inside the Andersen residence is 100% attributable to either one or both of the Town of Falmouth Wind Turbines.

To put the conclusions more commonly, this study finds that the wind turbine(s) produce acoustic emissions which are “acoustically trespassing” into the Andersen home.

http://www.windaction.org/posts/42443-infrasound-measurements-of-falmouth-wind-turbines-wind-1-and-wind-2#.VmNjs7grLIV