BP's Tatics in Cape Vincent Ny

Saturday, August 3, 2013

A Sound Theory

 Cape Vincent ~ 2009 The Wind power Ethics Group commissioned Dr. Paul Schomer, Chairman of the International Organization for Standardization Working Group on Environmental Noise and Chairman of the American National Standards Committee on Noise, to do a critique of the environmental impact statements of BP Alternative Energy and Acciona for two of their wind farm projects and found that they had significantly, and probably deliberately, overestimated ambient background noise in order to be allowed to put more turbines in a smaller area and closer to homes.[1]

Last May The Wind Power Ethics Group and the town of Cape Vincent jointly applied for intervenor funds for the Article 10 process and were awarded $16,855  by the Public Service Commission for acoustic engineer Paul Schomer.[2]

Dr. Schomer's basic charge will be to: 1) review and critique the BP's Preliminary Scoping Statement(PSS) for the Cape Vincent Project; 2) develop a detailed list of noise issues to address along with a recommended approach and methodology for BP to follow in its studies of adverse noise impacts, 3) review Section 6.7 Noise in Town zoning law and comment on the law's efficacy and 4)attend the stipulation phase of the Article 10 process to defend the Town's law and recommendations.[3]

 Additionally, this month Dr. Schomer will be presenting an important paper at the 5th International Conference
on Wind Turbine Noise Denver 28-30 August 2013.
A proposed theory to explain some adverse physiological effects of the infrasonic emissions at some wind farm sites.
July 31, 2013 by Paul D. Schomer, John Erdreich, James Boyle and Pranav Pamidighantam

This paper published by acoustician, Paul Schomer and others is important for a number of reasons.  First, the senior author is a very highly regarded, independent acoustician with no ties to industry and who has no personal agenda.  He is also the Chairman of the Standards Committee of the Acoustical Society of America.  This paper outlines important facts about low frequency noise that will undoubtedly be part of Schomer's intervenor funding report to the New York Public Service Commission in BP's Cape Vincent project application.  Schomer is also providing a hypothesis of why people get sick living near industrial wind turbines and why some have to leave their homes.  There is an even bigger connection to all of this in that BP is considering larger turbines for its latest turbine proposal and Schomer has demonstrated that the worst problems with infrasound and low frequency sound are associated with the larger wind turbines.

For at least four decades there have been reports in scientific literature of people being made ill by low-frequency sound and infrasound. In the last several years there have been an increasing number of such reports with respect to wind turbines, which corresponds, obviously, to their becoming more prevalent. A study in Shirley, WI has lead to interesting findings that include: (1) for major effects, it appears that the source must be at a very low frequency, about 0.8 Hz and below with maximum effects at about 0.2 Hz; (2) the largest, newest wind turbines are moving down in frequency into this range; (3) the symptoms of motion sickness and wind turbine acoustic emissions "sickness" are very similar; (4) and it appears that the same organs in the inner ear, the otoliths may be central to both conditions. Given that the same organs may produce the same symptoms, one explanation is that the wind turbine acoustic emissions may, in fact, induce motion sickness in those prone to this affliction. Finally, It is shown that the probability that sensitivity to motion sickness and sensitivity to wind turbine acoustic emissions are unrelated is less than 2 in 1,000,000.[4]



Anonymous said...

BP and the Article 10 process may have stepped into a hornet's nest with a proposal for industrial wind development in Cape Vincent. What Schomer is describing, people getting sick from wind turbine noise, was validated by him and a number of other acoustic scientists including David Hessler, BP's noise consultant. Until now the wind industry got away with murder discounting these problems as the ravings of a few anti-wind wackos, most notably Dr. Nina Pierpont. What Schomer's paper and recent reports will also accomplish is the complete vindication of Pierpont's early insights, work and recommendations. Schomer goes on to say it is no longer up to communities to make the case that wind turbines are a threat to health and well-being of people, but now it is up to BP and others to explain how they are going to protect people who may be sensitive to motion sickness and wind turbine infrasound. BP should also describe how they will compensate those people they force out of their homes. Furthermore, BP should tell us how they can continue to justify the use of the biggest turbines when they are also the biggest health threat to our community.

Anonymous said...