BP's Tatics in Cape Vincent Ny

Sunday, August 30, 2009


Independent Breakthrough research supports Dr. Piermont’s theory behind Wind Turbine syndrome.

At the heart of Dr Pierpont's findings is that humans are affected by low-frequency noise and vibrations from wind turbines through their ear bones, rather like fish and other amphibians. That humans have the same sensitivity as fish is based on new discoveries made by scientists at Manchester University and New South Wales last year. 

This, she claims, overturns the medical orthodoxy of the past 70 years on which acousticians working for wind farms are using to base their noise measurements. "It has been gospel among acousticians for years that if a person can't hear a sound, it's too weak for it to be detected or registered by any other part of the body," she said. "But this is no longer true. Humans can hear through the bones. This is amazing. It would be heretical if it hadn't been shown in a well-conducted experiment."

Are Wind farms a Health Risk?

Are Wind farms a Health Risk? US Scientist Identifies 'Wind Turbine Syndrome' | NukeFree.org

Noise and vibration coming from large turbines are behind an increase in heart disease, migraine, panic attacks and other health problems, according to research by an American doctor

by Margareto Pagano
Living too close to wind turbines can cause heart disease, tinnitus, vertigo, panic attacks, migraines and sleep deprivation, according to groundbreaking research to be published later this year by an American doctor.
Until now, the Government and the wind companies have denied any health risks associated with the powerful noises and vibrations emitted by wind turbines.

 Continue reading via this link

Lewis County Struggles With Big Budget Woes

You can add Lewis County to the list of New York counties that are having big budget problems.
Not only is Lewis County dealing with a decrease in sales tax revenue and a lack of information about how much state aid it will receive, it’s also dealing with the loss of a major money maker.

The Maple Ridge Wind Farm has paid the county up to $2.1 million annually.

However, Maple Ridge recently lost its certification as part of the state’s Empire Development Zone, which means it lost critical tax breaks and other business incentives.

 Continue reading via this link


Thursday, August 27, 2009

“Hell on earth” (Australia) ~ COMPLIMENTS OF ~ ACCIONA ~ ~ Wind Turbine Syndrome - :Nina Pierpont’s Research

“Hell on earth” (Australia) - Wind Turbine Syndrome - Nina Pierpont’s Research

“Abolute shocking! I can’t tell you how miserable I feel! . . . We’re sick. And we’re getting sicker by the day!”


This Video is a real eye opener

FOR 35 years, Noel and Janine Dean lived on a small western Victorian farm, where they raised crops, cattle and three children.
Three months ago the first of 128 turbines started turning and almost instantly Mr Dean became sick. He started waking with headaches, initially dull but, over time, sharp and debilitating.

US doctor Nina Pierpont has coined the term "wind-turbine syndrome" for a raft of symptoms, including insomnia, headaches, dizziness, nausea and depression, experienced by people living in close proximity to wind farms. The problems are said to be caused by constant exposure to low-frequency vibrations and inaudible sound pressure, as well as the constant flicker of light generated by the spinning blades.Continue...

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

A blot on the landscape? - The Whig Standard - Ontario, CA

A blot on the landscape?

It's a classic summer morning in Kingston -- the typical summer morning with clear blue skies, brilliant sunshine and a tantalizing sparkle off the water in the harbour. As I pen this missive I'm watching the eastern sun reflect off the Wolfe Island wind turbines. Sadly, the island, in appearance, seems more of an industrial wasteland rather than one of nature's more tranquil settings.
The presence of these overwhelming techno-energy giants brings to mind a science fiction novel by H. G. Wells. Seeing the wind turbines conjures up images of invading space creatures from his work War of the Worlds, with the turbines reaching like tentacles upward to the sky. They certainly tower above the natural treeline.

Continue reading via this link

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

Wolfe Island Wind

Amherst Island Wind Information

The following letter was written to the Kingston Whig-Standard, dated July 15,
2009, written by David R. MacDonald, whom I do not know. Although proponents
will be quick to dismiss it as “simply subjective” it is a well-written
description of what a large number (probably a majority) of people see when they
look at Wolfe Island. I am reposting it here in its entirety because the Whig-
Standard doesn’t archive letters like this.
It's a classic summer morning in Kingston -- the typical summer morning with
clear blue skies, brilliant sunshine and a tantalizing sparkle off the water in
the harbour. As I pen this missive I'm watching the eastern sun reflect off the
Wolfe Island wind turbines. Sadly, the island, in appearance, seems more of an
industrial wasteland rather than one of nature's more tranquil settings.
The presence of these overwhelming techno-energy giants brings to mind a science
fiction novel by H. G. Wells. Seeing the wind turbines conjures up images of
invading space creatures from his work War of the Worlds, with the turbines
reaching like tentacles upward to the sky. They certainly tower above the
natural treeline.
It's hard to see anything else. When I look towards the water, I don't see the
natural beauty of Kingston's harbour anymore. I don't see Garden Island, Simcoe
Island or even Wolfe Island, as my vision is drawn to these massive propellers
waiting in rest or whirling away, depending on the breeze. If the daytime view
isn't bad enough, the blinking red warning lights on the towers at night light
up the sky like a runway at Pearson International Airport.
What got me thinking of our harbour's beauty was not only the view from my
window but also two photographs that appeared in the Whig-Standard. Both were of
boats plying the waters of Kingston Harbour. The first was our beloved tall
ship, St. Lawrence II, and the other was a wee Optimist sailing dinghy. What
struck me was that my eye was not drawn to the beauty of the vessel in each
photo but rather to the towering wind turbines in the background. I just found
it sad.
I am of mixed emotions as to whether these turbines are a source of pride for
the local communities. Fair enough that this was a decision for the residents of
Wolfe Island, as they own the property where these towering giants sit, but
their decision has also affected the lives of those in Kingston and our
neighbours to the south in northern New York State.
I've yet to encounter anyone who finds the wind turbines an attractive addition
to the already beautiful landscape. In fact, most simply whisper about the
project, as saying anything negative is tantamount to heresy. Dissenting
opinions are shouted down as anti-progress, anti-change or anti-environment. For
the most part, this isn't the case. Everyone's entitled to his or her opinion,
and what I'm finding is that for better or worse, the folks I speak with on this
side of the harbour don't think the turbines are attractive.
I don't know why the islanders voted to have the wind farm developed on their
lands. That was their decision alone. Perhaps it was visceral in nature -- a
longing to facilitate change in the world and reduce our carbine footprint
through the development of alternative energy sources. The sacrifice of lands
and natural beauty today could be well worth the protection of future
generations. Alternatively, it's also possible the rise of these massive
turbines was the result of a cash grab by those suffering from our flagging
economy and seeing a sure bet for income. Who knows for certain?
I just can't seem to get excited by the wind farm and its whirling turbines.
It's not that I'm against reducing our carbon footprint or searching for
alternatives to fossil fuels. Rather, my concern is that the largest of the
islands in the Thousand Islands region of the St. Lawrence River, one of
creation's most beautiful vistas, has effectively been turned into a 30,000-acre
money-producing platform. Let's not lose sight of the fact that the only reasons
the company that built the wind turbines came to Wolfe Island were the
consistent winds and the desire for profits. The equations are quite simple: For
the landowners, the more turbines on their property, the more money in their
pockets; and for the corporation driving the project, megawatts equal megadollars.
I've heard the term NIMBY (Not in my backyard) used all too often to describe
those folks who oppose this and other wind projects. Shamefully, even our
premier and local MPP have resorted to using this acronym for those whose
opinions are differing from their own. I suppose our premier really doesn't need
to be concerned, since if you live in Toronto you can't see the view in
Kingston. Likewise for Canadian Hydro Developers Inc.'s corporate officers in
Hopefully, when all the Wolfe Island whirlygigs are finally spinning freely they
will be a welcome addition to the natural beauty for which the eastern end of
Lake Ontario has always been known. At the moment however, I have my doubts.
David R. MacDonald Kingston
The Whig-Standard allows online comments and this letter attracted its share.
Most of them were unremarkable; however the following anonymous letter was wellwritten,
obviously by someone who has been closely following the Wolfe Island
I might add that Wolfe Island residents never "voted" for these turbines. The
wind project was negotiated in secret by the Mayor, Jim Vanden Hoek and
facilitated by a council of five: two had land lease options receiving thousands
of dollars from the company throughout the process. They re-zoned the island to
accept intensive industrial development before any environmental assessment was
presented to residents: in direct contradiction to the promises they made when
elected and in fear that the company would sue the municipality under the OMB if
the proposal was rejected.
The By-law to industrialize Wolfe Island passed in 2006 with two votes (Howe
Island councillors only voted and the Mayor abstained!). The development you see
wasn't the choice of Wolfe Island residents but was made by a lame duck council
with money from the company in the majority of their pockets.
All with the blessing and assistance of MPP John Gerretsen.
With no environmental assessment and no site plans made public (though the
council and landowners knew months before any disclosure), islanders were
shocked in March 2007 to discover that the small-scale, community-based
development proposed and promoted was in fact an 88 tower (two monitoring towers
were added) monstrosity. Landowners signed up with the company were well aware
of the number and intensity -- but that was kept secret from the public until
March 2007. By then, all the contracts were signed and sealed.
Wolfe Islanders never voted for this development. Many, myself among them,
promoted a community-based, small scale and environmentally sustainable wind
What you see now, is a project that was sought out by a council with personal
financial dealings with the company and supported by landowners who signed away
their own rights (and I would suggest personal responsibility) to alert their
neighbours, some of whom have lost their ability to sever and build on their own
land because their neighbour's turbines are too close.
Many of the landowners, on the company's behalf if not behest, participated in a
quiet yet menacing campaign of intimidation, including letters sent to community
members accusing anyone in opposition to the development as being "hypocrites"
and "against farmers." Men stood at public meetings in formation, arms crossed,
faces red with barely contained rage, en masse by the busload -- paid for by the
company -- whenever a controversy was suspected that might be cause for delay or
even public reflection.
Now with their bags of 30 silver pieces, they are quick to defend themselves
with the tiresome accusations of NIMBYism and the oft heard dismissal: "the pros
outweigh the cons."
It would be more accurate for them to say; "the pros for me measured in dollars,
outweigh the cons for you measured in your health, rights and quality of life".
The island's familial and social networks have been re-written by profiteering
Calgary carpetbaggers. Sadly too many were taken in.
And to respond to those who would suggest that the only alternative to this
massive industrial development in the most important bird migration and habitat
internationally and globally is a carbon smoke stack -- not one environmental
group supporting wind energy development (Sierra Club, Suzuki Foundation,
Audubon Society, Nature Canada to name a few) has defended or promoted the
imposition of large-scale development on Wolfe Island. Their silence is

This project is already a posterchild for how not to develop wind energy

Monday, August 24, 2009

Lake Ontario Waterkeeper Ontario’s big windy gamble

Lake Ontario Waterkeeper

In Canada, the green rush has recently encountered some significant turbulence.
The province is betting on wind power, and critics are lining up
all across the country, new wind farm developments are meeting with stiff resistance from local residents, concerned not just about the aesthetics of the giant turbines, but what opponents claim is a growing body of evidence of adverse health effects.In Canada, the green rush has recently encountered some significant turbulence.

A federal subsidy of one cent per kWh generated—which in real terms means a two-MW turbine currently earns its owner about $61,000 a year from Ottawa—did not have its funding extended in the last budget, and will come to an end this fall.

title link
to full article

Sunday, August 23, 2009

Wind turbines still a health concern for group ACCIONA IN ACTION ~ OR ACCIONA ~ INACTION ?

Pugwash windfarm: Wind turbines still a health concern for group


For Sandy MacLeod and a group of 11 neighbours living in the Ripley industrial wind turbine project, it’s been a very long 18 months. They just want the healthy home environment they had enjoyed for some three to 32 years returned.

“We just want it to be over,” said MacLeod.

 Title link to continue reading

Saturday, August 22, 2009

Watertown Daily Times | Now you see them, now you don't, now you see them

 How many times can a man turn his head, and pretend that he just doesn't see, The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind, the answer is blowing in the wind.
AUG. 21, 2009: Like Brigadoon, they suddenly appear out of nowhere. Well, actually they appear out of Canada. And it’s not just once a year — it is several times a week.

The wind turbines on Wolfe Island in the St. Lawrence River are 27 to 32 miles away from Thompson Park in Watertown. But there they are, big as life when the sun goes down and the air is clear.

  continue reading via this link

*Watertown Daily Times | Transmission lines plan requires state approval

 Comments on this project must be submitted in writing to the Contact Person no later than Aug 28, 2009.

DEC permit application notice: www.dec.ny.gov/enb/20090729_reg6.html#622280058700002

CAPE VINCENT — In addition local approval and state and federal permits, the proposed St. Lawrence Wind Farm will need an act of the state Legislature to run a transmission line to a substation outside of Chaumont.

According to developer Acciona Wind Energy USA LLC's supplemental draft environmental impact statement, the preferred route for a transmission line from the 53-turbine facility runs 9 miles from a substation on Swamp Road in the project area to a National Grid substation on County Route 179 in the town of Lyme.

  Continue reading via this link


The music in this video is intended to give the feeling of the constant disruption caused by living too close to wind turbines that are 40 stories tall.

Feel free to turn off the sound if it starts to drive you crazy.
Residents in this wind farm don't have that option.

The setbacks are not adequate enough to protect residents from noise, shadow-flicker and other problems associated with poorly sited industrial wind turbines.

Safe setbacks are the issue here.
Cape Vincent's proposed setbacks are not just inadequate, they are dangerous.

Farmers flee as turbines trigger despair

Farmers flee as turbines trigger despair | The Australian

FOR 35 years, Noel and Janine Dean lived on a small western Victorian farm, where they raised crops, cattle and three children.

They planned to spend the rest of their lives on that lush, green plot of land, but that would change three years ago, when an executive driving a red BMW approached the gates of their property, wound down his window and asked: "You got anything against wind farms?"

"As long as they're not noisy I don't," replied Mr Dean, who had no objection to his Waubra neighbours -- most of them struggling farmers -- earning tens of thousands of dollars a year leasing their pastures to Spanish-based renewable energy company Acciona.
Title link to full article

Friday, August 21, 2009


In Fond du Lac County, Wisconsin, there are some who are happy hosting industrial wind turbines, there are some who regret it, and some who had no choice in the matter when developers were allowed ...

Thursday, August 20, 2009

Green wash or just plain hog wash?

Greenpeace uses scare tactics to push their
“WE as a pressure group have to emotionalize issues”

Gerd Leipold, the outgoing leader of Greenpeace, admitted that his organization's recent claim that the Arctic Ice will disappear by 2030 was "a mistake." Greenpeace said in a July 15 press release that there will be an ice-free Arctic by 2030 because of global warming. BBC reporter Stephen Sackur on the "Hardtalk" program pressed Leipold until he admitted the claim was wrong.

The claim stems from a July 15 Greenpeace press release entitled “Urgent Action Needed As Arctic Ice Melts,” in which it is stated that global warming will lead to an ice-free Arctic by 2030.

Copenhagen passes wind moratorium

Watertown Daily Times | Copenhagen passes wind moratorium
Mayor Kenneth R. Clarke said he expects the moratorium to last about a year while the board develops a law that "protects people in the village."

Mr. Clarke also addressed the board, saying the proposed 45 decibel noise level is too high. That level was reduced by the town from 55 decibels in a previous draft.

"At 50 to 55, where it was, someone should go to jail for it," he said.

Wednesday, August 19, 2009


Initiative and Referendum – This proposal would amend the State Constitution to allow for direct initiative and referendum, whereby measures are placed on the ballot at the November general election for a popular vote after a certain number of signatures are collected.

We need to limit taxes, cap spending, stop wasteful, expensive mandates and regulations and give more power to the people to make real change and real reforms.

Tuesday, August 18, 2009

Tom Reinbeck proposes reolution 33 to discontinue the law to regulate wind towers

The Cape Vincent Town Board wants to discontinue the process of amending the Zoning Law to regulate Wind Towers

CAPE VINCENT The Story of How Wind Turbines Became Utilities

April, 2009


A friend sent me this; it is a good chronological progression of the events that unfolded in Cape Vincent.
These events ultimately led to the wind turbines being designated as utilities. This is the Truth and there is documentation to support it. Additionally the planning board and Town board in Cape Vincent are self serving liars, the planning board of Cape Vincent isn’t even following its own comprehensive plan. A comprehensive plan is a means to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the people in the community and give due consideration to the needs of the people in the region of which the community is a part.



Nov. 8, 2006 Planning Board meeting:

Planning Board Chairman, Mr.Edsall and the planning board (PB) are asked the critical question that sparks the controversy.

“Is a wind farm an acceptable site plan review use in the agricultural district?”

Is this question asked by Acciona? The minutes aren’t clear.
The Planning board chairman, Mr. Edsall asks his board for a vote on the question. They vote 5-0 yes. (With 3 conflicted votes) Note that the question is NOT are wind turbines a utility.
That is where the confusion starts. The question is about a wind farm being a proper site plan review use. This is a very important point.

The Problem:

There is no discussion on why a wind farm is acceptable as a site plan use in the AG district by the PB. They give NO rational as to why it is allowed or under what category it might fall. There are 12 site plan review uses allowed in the AG district. A wind farm is not listed as a use. Utilities, light industrial, and commercial ARE listed uses, but the planning board never says which use a wind farm is. They just say it is acceptable and move on.

So they must have had some reason in their heads. They never clearly define why wind turbines are allowed and why. Did they think that they are a utility because that is what the wind company told them? And that was what SLW listed on their permit application?

There is also the problem that it is out of the jurisdiction of the PB to make this determination or answer this question.
NY Town Law does not give the PB the power to interpret zoning law.
That is for the Zoning Enforcement Officer Alan Wood, and if there is a question it goes to the Zoning Board of Appeals. So even though everyone blames WPEG, it is the planning board that screwed up 1st.


WPEG challenges the planning board’s decision before the CV Zoning Board of Appeal.

It is critical to understand that… WPEG did not challenge whether turbines are utilities. They only asked for a determination, that if a wind farm is an acceptable site plan review use, which use is it, because wind farms are not listed?

The problem starts here because


WPEG never said a word about utilities…it was SLW who defined turbines as utilities. Then WPEG challenged that as well, saying a wind farm is not a utility as defined by Cape Vincent’s zoning law. This is important…how did WPEG get blamed for turbines being utilities if they were fighting that turbines are not utilities…this makes no sense at all.

It is also very important to note that SLW’s application for a permit, and site plan review that was turned in to the town, also says their wind farm should be considered a utility.

WPEG didn’t write that on their application for them. The important thing is that even if WPEG didn’t challenge the PB decision these projects would have moved forward as utilities ANYHOW because that is what SLW put on their application. If nobody challenged it, it would have moved forward as a utility anyhow.

Now the other thing that is being lied about is they are saying WPEG is at fault for killing the 2006 wind law.

At the end of this post, I have included the minutes of an Aug 2006 meeting where [ Supervisor Reinbeck stated that on behalf of the board, he will request the planning board to adopt our proposed wind tower regulations as a guideline during their site plan review process]. So that is a lie too.
Also at the bottom of this post, is a letter from Richard Edsall: June 14, 2006. We propose that the town board abandon its efforts to amend the current zoning law.

Why does Reinbeck start a wind law committee, spend $20,000 on the law, and spend 5 months on it, when he knows he can’t pass it anyhow because of the conflicts of interest on his board? The answer is because he never wanted a wind law to begin with unless it was very weak and favored the wind company.

The wind law was finished in Jan…it is now almost May.
He is not going to pass a wind law because he and Edsall and the board and the lease holders do not want one.

No matter what they say, they want turbines as utilities so they can put as many of them in as possible and as close to the river and lake as possible!!!! THEY ARE LIARS!!!!
But to do this and create a public diversion they will blame WPEG for all the points above.

You have to have something for cover when you recklessly waste $20,000 of tax payer money.

Thomas K Reinbeck says the Jefferson County Planning Board is out of line

Cape Vincent Town Supervisor Thomas K Reinbeck says the Jefferson County Planning Board is out of line

Cape Vincent Town Board member Don Mason

Cape Vincent Town Board member Don Mason giving his version of a commercial for the wind companies. He holds a contract with one of the developers in the town.

Sunday, August 16, 2009

Wind Turbine Syndrome Part 1 & 2

Dr. Nissenbaum discusses Wind Turbine Syndrome. He talks about the many negative health affects that appear to be caused by living too close to wind turbines

Monday, August 10, 2009

Wind turbine syndrome news report

Wind farms: Is there a hidden health hazard? Dr. Nina Pierpont began seeing patients in her clinic suffering from many debilitating symptoms and found a common thread among them: All lived near a new wind farm. Now, she's written a book about the condition.

Sunday, August 9, 2009

Background sound measurements and analysis in the vicinity of Cape Vincent, NY

Background sound measurements and analysis in the vicinity of Cape Vincent, NY
May 11, 2009 by Paul Schomer, Ph.D., P.E.
Paul D. Schomer of Schomer & Associates Inc., was invited by the residents of Cape Vincent, NY to evaluate the pre-construction noise studies conducted Hessler and Associates. Dr. Schomer is chairman of the International Organization for Standardization working group on environmental noise and chairman of the American National Standards committee on noise, among other leadership roles in noise measurement. His findings contradict the studies done by Hessler Associates Inc. The executive summary of his report is reproduced on this page. His full report can be accessed by clicking on the link below.


Executive Summary

The acoustic consulting engineering firm Hessler Associates, Inc., Haymarket, Virginia produced two sound level assessment reports for two wind projects proposed for Cape Vincent, New York: the first report in 2007 for BP and the second report in 2009 for AES-Acciona.

Because there were concerns early on among local citizens that the BP report was misleading, the Wind Power Ethics Group (WPEG) contracted with Schomer and Associates, Champaign, Illinois to conduct an independent background sound survey of Cape Vincent. Hessler's BP study for the Cape Vincent Wind Power Facility appears to have selected the noisiest sites, the noisiest time of year, and the noisiest positions at each measurement site. Collectively, these choices resulted in a substantial overestimate of the a-weighted ambient sound level, 45-50 dB according to Hessler.

This study was designed to address a number of flaws noted in Hessler's BP study. First, a summer survey was planned so it would not coincide with the emergence of vocal adult insects (e.g., fall crickets and cicadas on August 1). Two monitoring sites were selected within the Town of Cape Vincent. One site was a rural residence and the other a small dairy farm. At each of these sites, two sound level meters and a single small weather station were run for one week of continuous data collection. At each site one meter was set up close to the house or farm building and a road. This site was called the "Hessler" position, because it was typical of sites selected by Hessler for his studies in Cape Vincent. The other position was called the
Community position and it was located back away from the noise influences of roads, houses and farm operations. The Community position also reflected guidelines adopted by the Cape Vincent Planning Board whereby sound levels were to be measured at the property lines, not residences.

The analysis of the spectral (frequency) content of the sound showed that much of the difference in sound levels between Hessler's study and this study was attributable to insect noise, sounds near 5000 Hz. Hessler failed to remove insect sound from his data and recalculate A-weighted sound levels, even though he previously (2006) recommended this procedure to other scientists and engineers in a professional journal publication. Had he followed his own advice, ambient sound levels would have been more comparable to the results in this study.

Furthermore, and more importantly, wind turbine sound spectra are low frequency and midfrequency phenomena; therefore, higher frequency insect noise will not mask wind turbine sounds. So even if insect noise was present year round instead of for a few weeks it should still not be included in the ambient because it provides little or no masking of the wind turbine sound.

Other examples of Hessler's misleading choices include arbitrarily discarding sound data from one of his sites because the levels were too low. Remarkably, the levels at that site were more comparable to this study. Also, Hessler described position 3 in the BP study as "representative of a typical residence along NYS Rte 12E." However, he failed to show that the trailer in the photograph was a field office for a construction company installing a new Town of Cape Vincent water district. Furthermore, at the back of the trailer, out of view, was a marshalling yard for trucks, supplies and heavy equipment. The choice of this site and suggesting it is a typical residence was very misleading.

The accurate measurement of spectrally-relevant ambient sound is important because these levels are used by wind developers to assess wind turbine noise impacts on nearby, nonparticipating residents. Local Cape Vincent Planning Board guidelines suggest these impacts should not exceed 5 dB above the A-weighted ambient at the property lines of non-participating residents. New York State noise assessment policy states any new sound that exceed 6 dB above the A-weighted ambient should undergo a detailed assessment and the developer is required to mitigate any excessive noise. Therefore, using an inaccurate, elevated A-weighted ambient level, such as 47 dB, allows wind developers to place wind turbines much closer to non-participating residents in such a way that the A-weighted wind turbine noise level will be 52 dB (e.g., 5 dB above Hessler's elevated ambient level). A much more accurate and typical ambient level is 30 dB, which is an average of both "Hessler" and Community positions during daytime, evening and nighttime periods from this study. Using 30 dB as a typical A-weighted ambient level would then require wind developers to plan a wind farm where predicted noise at non-participating property lines would not exceed 35 dB, or 5 dB above this study's A-weighted ambient level. In summary, to adequately protect rural residents that are not participants in proposed wind farms it is essential to have accurate, unbiased assessments of ambient sounds.

In conclusion:

1. The Hessler position at a measurement site systematically and significantly yields higher sound levels than does the Community position.

2. The sound levels measured in this study show Cape Vincent to be a quiet rural area, much as depicted by the data for Hessler's position 4.

3. Measurements, such as those conducted at Hessler's position 3, are not indicative of the noise environment of typical residences in the Cape Vincent area.

4. Failure to remove insect noise in Hessler's study violated his own recommended survey and analytical techniques and substantially misrepresented typical ambient sound levels.

5. In assessing potential noise impacts from wind turbine development, rather than using 45-50 dB A-weighted levels as suggested by Hessler, a more accurate level would be 30 dB, which is the average value for the daytime, evening and nighttime L90 sound levels observed at both the "Hessler" and Community positions for sites A and B in this study. Arguably, the level should be down at 20 to 25 dB, since an A-weighted L90 of 20 dB occurs during the quietest nighttime hours, and the A-weighted L90 for the whole 9-hour night is 25 dB.

Link here to read Mr.Schomer's complete report

Thursday, August 6, 2009

Lack of Ability or Lack of Character?

PANDORA'S BOX OF ROCKS: Lack of Ability or Lack of Character?

In light of all the Wind turbine issues in the news lately, I thought I would revisit an old post, Dedicated to Darrel Aubertine and his Twisted Turbine Tales.

Is this an example of using political power for personal gain?


What made Cape Vincent great will be gone

Watertown Daily Times | What made Cape Vincent great will be gone


Cape Vincent is where I grew up, and has always been my favorite place. I don't think I am alone in this sentiment. However, the proposed wind farm will certainly ruin the reason that Cape Vincent is so sacred and unique to people. More importantly, our future generations will never experience the natural beauty that this area is known for. It will be changed to an industrial nightmare. Many will not want to live or retire here as a result, and hence the legacy of families that settled and built this town will be lost forever. I have tried to remain neutral regarding the turbines, but there comes a time when you have to stand up for your rights.

Why do our town officials value the wind companies more than the citizens they represent? Furthermore, it's hard to understand why so many people are indifferent about the issue. Many people say, "I don't care one way or another because I won't see them from my house or from the village. They won't affect me." To me this translated to I don't care what happens to my neighbors or my community.

People in this town used to care about the well-being of their neighbors. Why has this changed so much? It's time more people started standing up for what is right for this town. What will Cape Vincent gain aside from some easy money? Since when was easy money a good thing, anyway? Times are tough, but that doesn't give people the right to do things that will adversely affect their neighbors' health, happiness, and land values.

The town as a whole needs more time before a decision is made that will forever change Cape Vincent for everyone. A one-year moratorium is not a lot to ask of our town officials. This would give us time to work together instead of against one another. If you are indifferent on the issue, think about how it will affect the whole town, not just yourself. Do we really want Cape Vincent to look and sound like Wolfe Island?

Jeffrey Alan Merchant

Cape Vincent

Wednesday, August 5, 2009

Jefferson County Department of Planning Letter To Thomas K. Rienbeck~ Supervisor Town of Cape Vincent

When the Town Council introduced the moratorium idea July 9, it said it would protect the two districts which were never intended for wind power development.

The riverfront district runs north of Route 12E, east of the village and to County Route 6 west of the village.

The lakefront district lies west of County Route 6, north of Mud Creek.
The Jefferson County Planning board sent this letter to Tom Reinbeck August 04 2009
As part of the county Planning Board's comments, members reminded the town the state Department of State has said municipalities must make a valid argument for enacting any moratorium
The county planning board recommended a town wide moratorium
An approval of a moratorium with different boundaries acts only as a recommendation to the town.

Watertown Daily Times | Cape ZBA declares wind turbine illegal

Watertown Daily Times | Cape ZBA declares wind turbine illegal


CAPE VINCENT — Personal wind turbines taller than 35 feet are illegal, the town's Zoning Board of Appeals decided Monday.

The ZBA voted unanimously at its monthly meeting that Roger D. Alexander's 92-foot-tall residential wind turbine is in violation of the town's zoning law.

Continue reading here

Tuesday, August 4, 2009

Watertown Daily Times | Transmission lines plan requires state approval :Map of combined wind projects proposed for Cape Vincent

Map of combined wind projects proposed for Cape Vincent

http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20090804/NEWS03/308049990 Watertown Daily Times | Transmission lines plan requires state approval

Transmission lines plan requires state approval
ST. LAWRENCE WIND FARM: Preferred route would run through land controlled by DEC

CAPE VINCENT — In addition local approval and state and federal permits, the proposed St. Lawrence Wind Farm will need an act of the state Legislature to run a transmission line to a substation outside of Chaumont.

According to developer Acciona Wind Energy USA LLC's supplemental draft environmental impact statement, the preferred route for a transmission line from the 53-turbine facility runs 9 miles from a substation on Swamp Road in the project area to a National Grid substation on County Route 179 in the town of Lyme.
Link here to continue reading

The application is available for the public to review at the Cape Vincent Public Library, 157 N. Real St., Cape Vincent. DEC will accept comments on the application until Aug. 28.

DEC permit application notice: www.dec.ny.gov/enb/20090729_reg6.html#622280058700002

ENB Region 6 Completed Applications 07/29/2009 - NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation

ENB Region 6 Completed Applications 07/29/2009 - NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation

Jefferson County
Applicant:St Lawrence Windpower LLC
165 Jordan Rd
Troy, NY 12180

St Lawrence Windpower LLC
NE-Pleasant Valley Rd / SE-ST Rte 12E / SW-Sand Bay Rd / NW-Mason Rd
Cape Vincent, NY

Application ID:

Permit(s) Applied for:
Article 24 Freshwater Wetlands
Section 401 - Clean Water Act Water Quality Certification

Project is Located:
Jefferson County

Project Description:
Construction of a wind-powered electrical generation facility consisting of 53 wind turbines and supporting infrastructure on approximately 60 acres within an approximate 7,600-acre project development area in the Towns of Cape Vincent and Lyme, Jefferson County. Construction activities will result in a total of approximately 0.33 acres of permanent fill impacts, and 1.95 acres of temporary impacts, to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) jurisdictional wetlands. Eleven overhead power poles will be placed in the adjacent areas of DEC Wetlands CV-1 and U-4, within an existing former railroad bed, as part of the transmission line to the Lyme substation. Project construction activities will also result in 50 linear feet of permanent impacts to USACE-jurisdictional streams. To mitigate permanent impacts to wetlands, adjacent areas and streams that result from project construction, three mitigation measures will be implemented: 1) establishment of 0.7 acres of wetlands (2:1 ratio) from on-site uplands in the project area adjacent to one existing wetland area; 2) restoration of 1.95 acres of wetlands; 3) establishment of a conservation easement of at least one acre of existing forested wetland habitat and associated upland buffer to mitigate the conversion of existing forested wetland habitat to emergent wet meadow habitat resulting from the project activities. A copy of the complete application is available for public review during normal business hours at: Cape Vincent Public Library, 157 North Real Street, Cape Vincent, New York.

Availability of Application Documents:
Filed application documents, and Department draft permits where applicable, are available for inspection during normal business hours at the address of the contact person. To ensure timely service at the time of inspection, it is recommended that an appointment be made with the contact person.

State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Determination:
A draft environmental impact statement has been prepared on this project and is on file.

SEQR Lead Agency: Cape Vincent Town Planning Board

State Historic Preservation Act (SHPA) Determination:
A cultural resources survey has been completed. Based on information provided in the survey report, the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) has determined that the proposed activity will have an impact on registered or eligible archaeological sites or historic structures. The department must consult further with OPRHP before making a final decision regarding the issuance of the permit.

Coastal Management:
This project is not located in a Coastal Management area and is not subject to the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act.

Opportunity for Public Comment:
Comments on this project must be submitted in writing to the Contact Person no later than Aug 28, 2009.

Stephen M Tomasik
NYSDEC Headquarters
625 Broadway
Albany, NY 12233
Transmission lines plan requires state approval
ST. LAWRENCE WIND FARM: Preferred route would run through land controlled by DEC

CAPE VINCENT — In addition local approval and state and federal permits, the proposed St. Lawrence Wind Farm will need an act of the state Legislature to run a transmission line to a substation outside of Chaumont.

According to developer Acciona Wind Energy USA LLC's supplemental draft environmental impact statement, the preferred route for a transmission line from the 53-turbine facility runs 9 miles from a substation on Swamp Road in the project area to a National Grid substation on County Route 179 in the town of Lyme.

 Continue reading via this link


Monday, August 3, 2009

| Why is Shear Wind afraid of Dr. Pierpont?

The News Serving Pictou County Nova Scotia: Letters to the editor | Why is Shear Wind afraid of Dr. Pierpont?


Dr. Nina Pierpont M.D. is a graduate of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. In the abstract to her upcoming book Wind Turbine Syndrome: A Report on a Natural Experiment, one reads:
“This report documents a consistent and often debilitating complex of symptoms … [that] include sleep disturbance, headache, tinnitus, ear pressure, dizziness, vertigo, nausea, visual blurring, tachycardia, irritability, problems with concentration and memory, and panic episodes associated with sensations of internal pulsation or quivering that arise while awake or asleep.
The study is a case series of 10 affected families, with 38 members age one to 75, living 305 m to 1.5 km (1,000 to 4,900 ft) from wind turbines erected since 2004.”
In their November 27, 2008 addendum to their Environmental Assessment registration documents, Shear Wind Inc., in describing Dr. Pierpont’s work, misrepresents the maximum distance from a turbine as only 457 metres instead of 1.5 km; this is more than three times less than what the abstract states. In fact, there are seven homes closer than 1.5 km to turbines in Shear Wind’s Glen Dhu project. For this and five other statements of questionable truthfulness in their addendum, Shear Wind is under a Section 115 investigation by Nova Scotia Environment with a response due July 30, 2009.
Now, in their July newsletter to the community, Shear Wind again seeks to discredit Dr. Pierpont’s work, this time by claiming her view “that people living in proximity to wind farms may suffer from ‘Wind Turbine Syndrome’ … is not supported by scientists.”
Shear Wind cites the Canadian Wind Energy website where links to seven articles authored by these scientists ostensibly support this claim.
It is reasonable to expect that these authors reviewed Dr. Pierpont’s work and criticized her methods or “wind turbine syndrome” itself. However, a thorough reading reveals that five of the articles do not even mention Dr. Pierpont and only one article makes reference to her case series study stating, “One cannot discount the information.”
Shear Wind is again misleading our community. While these authors do in fact “not support” Pierpont’s work, neither do they refute it, as Shear Wind would have us believe.
In contrast, Dr. Joel F. Leher, MD, F.A.C.S., one of the four doctors and scientists who, as referees, have peer reviewed the manuscript for Dr. Pierpont’s upcoming book, states, “This [report] addresses an under-reported facet of Noise Induced Illnesses in a fashion that is detailed in its historical documentation, multi-systemic in its approach and descriptions, and painstakingly and informatively referenced…. [It] opens up the area of low frequency vibration to the medical community….I applaud her.”
Based on the growing body of evidence, doctors, such as Dr. Pierpont, are calling for a minimum 2 km wind turbine setback or construction moratorium until an independent study can assess the full impact of wind turbine noise. However, as long as Shear Wind can create doubt through disinformation, our government and the general public will turn a deaf ear to such reasoned caution and Shear Wind can continue to site turbines based on financial convenience and to recklessly gamble with the health and well being of our rural communities.

Kristen Overmyer, M.S.M.E.
Baileys Brook

Wind turbine strobe lights and eerie noises

Strobe lights light up the giant wind turbines at night in Wethersfield, New York. In Fenner, New York, the giant machines make very eerie sounds. Filmed by Ed Sliwinski.

December 21, 2008
Category: Education
Tags: wind energy wind power wind turbines wind turbine noise

Reliance on Wind Power WILL cause BLACKOUTS

www.nofreewind.com These are typical wind plant power output curves. They are from North Dakota, Washington state, and Alberta. As you can clearly see, a wind plant can never replace any traditional power source because very often they produce no power whatsoever. None! Expect a wind plant to go dead at least a couple times per week and the power they do produce is erratic and irregular and very hard to predict. Wind power can never be thought of as an alternative energy, because surely the type of electricity they produce is nothing like our traditional sources of energy. They may be thought of a supplemental, however their benefit to our society should be highly questionable. Relying on wind will cause major blackouts!

Category: Science & Technology
NoFreeWind May 11,2009
Tags: wind plant output ~

Sunday, August 2, 2009


Your electric bill will not be reduced or free because of local wind farms. These companies do not spend 100’s of millions of dollars to build a wind farm and give away the electric for free!

Would you support a tax increase or fee on your electric bill? Well you already pay an increased tax on your bill that is given to the wind companies to build wind farms because wind energy cannot compete without your tax dollars. Look for RPS on the back of your electric bill.

Wind farms will do virtually nothing to reduce CO2 or Global Warming, because large power plants like coal, nuclear, and natural gas are still needed to back up wind power. The wind doesn’t blow all the time and is too variable to produce reliable power.

The noise from the 86 Wolfe Island turbines can be heard in the Village of Cape Vincent and can be heard up to 5 or 6 miles away. Imagine when 148 turbines are right here in your back yard in Cape Vincent. Evidence is starting to show that low frequency noise from turbines can cause health issues.

If all the proposed wind farms for Cape Vincent, Clayton and Lyme are added to the Wolfe Island turbines there will be at least 356, 400 ft. turbine wind turbines near the 1000 Islands.

The City of Los Angeles has about 30 structures as high as an industrial wind turbine. Cape Vincent will end up with 148 structures 400 ft. tall almost overnight.

There is no evidence to indicate your taxes will be reduced or eliminated. At Maple Ridge, the large wind farm near Lowville, NY, residents are saying their taxes did not go down.

6 of your Cape Vincent town officials have conflicts of interest with the wind companies. They or their families have received money and will get more money from the wind companies. The New York State Attorney General has shown interest in investigating local town officials and the local wind companies.

The electricity from local wind farms does not stay in Cape Vincent or will be exclusively used here. The electric produced here goes on the grid and to anywhere there is demand. The demand tends to be in big NY cities like NY City. Again…your electric bill will not be reduced or free because you think the power will stay here.

Unless you sign a specific lease with the wind company you will not be paid money to live near, or if you see a wind turbine in your view.
For more information on wind power facts:


E-mail the Cape Vincent Town Supervisor and ask for a one-year, town wide moratorium on wind energy development:

Write the New York Attorney General about the conflicts of interest in Cape Vincent:

All new technologies carry risk.

The Independent | Leading Articles
a cautionary word

All new technologies carry risk. That is true of benign new technologies as well as the old industrial sort. This paper's report on the potential health hazards of wind turbines, generators of eco-friendly wind power, will be unwelcome for many environmentalists and indeed for the Government, which for entirely creditable reasons is committed to a great increase in their number. But a new book by a New York paediatrician, Dr Nina Pierpont, on which our report is based and which draws on international studies, ought not to be ignored.

This paper is in favour of wind turbines. But Dr Pierpont suggests that the vibrations and low-level subsonic noise that is emitted can cause a range of health problems, including sleep disorders, and may aggravate more serious underlying conditions. She attributes this to the fact that the human ear is far more sensitive to vibrations, not merely audible noise, than we have assumed. And the disruption to the ear's vestibular system – directly linked to our sense of balance – caused by vibrations and low-level noise from turbines is a factor that the British Government has not, so far, taken into account in assessing whether to commission wind farms. For the sake of public reassurance, it should.

Saturday, August 1, 2009

Watertown Daily Times | Woman protests turbine


CAPE VINCENT — A town resident is in a dispute with the town's zoning board over her neighbor's wind turbine, which she believes is too close to her property.

"I want it down," said Mary C. Grogan, a seasonal town resident who lives next to Roger D. Alexander.

Ms. Grogan, County Route 7, said the turbine is too close to her residence and she is worried the turbine will affect her son,who has cerebral palsy.
Continue reading via this link

 Watertown Daily Times | Woman protests turbine