WORLD RENOWNED EXPERT ISSUES DIRE WARNINGS TO RESIDENTS OF ONTARIO

January 19, 2009

Picton, Ontario, January 15, 2009

200 Picton area residents braved frigid temperatures Thursday night to hear about the serious health risks associated with Industrial Wind Turbines.

Dr. Magda Havas Ph.D., Associate Professor of Environmental and Resource Studies at Peterborough’s Trent University and one of the world’s leading research experts in the areas of electromagnetic pollution, radio frequency radiation, ground current and dirty electricity delivered alarming warnings about the dangers to human and animal health, posed by Industrial Wind Turbines.

Dr. Havas was the featured speaker in Picton. Havas identified two significant problem areas that pose substantive threats to the health of those living or working in proximity to wind turbine developments – Infrasound or Low Frequency Sound emitted by the turbines themselves and both Dirty Electricity and stray voltage related to the electricity produced by turbines.

The human body feels and reacts to sound waves that we cannot hear. These waves, in the low end of the sound spectrum (under 20 Hz), are well documented to cause nausea, joint pain, insomnia, depression, agitation, increased blood pressure and possible heart problems. It is also a major cause of Vibroacoustic Disease which can lead to vision problems, digestive problems, cardiovascular problems, and circulatory difficulties.

Since infrasound can carry over very long distances, Dr. Havas says that the jury is still out on how far away from people Industrial Wind Turbines should be located. She quoted the French Academy of Medicine guidelines which call for a minimum setback of 1.5 kilometers and Dr. Nina Pierpont of New York State, who has done comprehensive research into turbine related illnesses, who calls for a minimum of 2 kilometers.

But Dr. Havas was quick to point out that infrasound is not the only danger to local residents posed by wind turbines. She is particularly concerned about the impacts of “Dirty Electricity” also a byproduct of Wind Turbines in Ontario, “… the worst part of it is that it could all be eliminated with proper design and care”, Havas said. “However, there is a cost involved….do you think that they will spend the money necessary to correct a problem that they refuse to admit even exists?”

Some of the symptoms created by Dirty Electricity in the home resemble those caused by infrasound. They include nausea, sleep disorders, headaches, dizziness, tinnitus and irregular heart beat. Havas has done important research into this area and studies have identified substantially increased rates of cancers, increased blood sugar among some diabetics, skin sensitivities, and other equally disturbing conditions.

Havas’ presentation followed that of Bill Palmer a Professional Engineer with experience in risk assessment and public safety. Palmer identified the fact that Hydro One has setback guidelines to protect their critical Hydro lines from possible turbine damage but the Ontario Government has put no setbacks in place to protect people. “Hydro requires a setback of 500 meters from their most important lines – to protect against mechanical damage from a turbine collapse or blade failure”, Palmer said. “Unfortunately, no such guidelines are in place for public safety to protect people traveling on roadways, in their fields adjacent to a turbine, or in their homes…..There are no guidelines in place to protect citizens from these same mechanical risks that Hydro One has setbacks for. He went on to show how the calculation of the setback required for noise from wind turbines needed to take into consideration the change in wind profile at night, the cyclic nature of wind turbine noise, and the low frequency component of wind turbine noise.”.

Moderator, Dr. Robert McMurtry, founding Assistant Deputy Minister of the Population and Public Health Branch of Health Canada and special advisor to Roy Romanow during the Romanow Commission, expressed concern about the lack of public protection in place. He agreed with Palmer and Havas that Industrial Wind Turbine developments must be controlled and that the current Public Health Guidelines concerning setback distances must be reassessed. Even the recommended setback distances of 2km may not be appropriate – epidemiological studies are necessary to set the record straight.

In addition, government has a responsibility to ensure public protection from dirty electricity by establishing guidelines prohibiting ground current from Industrial Wind Turbines.

For more information contact:
Beth Harrington
Media Relations
Wind Concerns Ontario
647 588-8647
416 481-6424

Entry Filed under: Uncategorized. .

22 Comments Add your own

  • 1. erinzdad  |  January 25, 2009 at 3:02 am

    Let’s not forget about the birds as well. Wind generation takes a heavy daily toll on the lives of thousands of birds in the US alone.

    Why don’t the environmental groups like the Sierra club address these issues? They are not really for the environment that’s why. They are ALL about political power period! They give the word hypocrite a bad name.

    This from USA Today:

    “…windmills (in California) have been chopping up tens of thousands of birds that fly into them, including golden eagles, red-tailed hawks, burrowing owls and other raptors.”

    Read the full article here: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-01-04-windmills-usat_x.htm

  • 2. Emma  |  January 25, 2009 at 3:07 am

    Good to know!

  • 3. Jamie  |  January 25, 2009 at 7:07 am

    Over in England some thing has hit one of the propellers on a turbine. Broke it off not sure what hit it possiable ufo

  • 4. freedomfarter  |  January 25, 2009 at 7:26 am

    Look at the turbines on any home and notice how many blades are on it. With no to little wind it still spins. Why is no-one talking about the inefficient design of having three blades on a turbine, the most ineffective design there is.

  • 5. Tyrell Cummins  |  January 25, 2009 at 8:29 am

    only a handfull of do-gooder idiots want this unfeasable crap. they are a deluded bunch of jackasses’

  • 6. John Normanton  |  January 25, 2009 at 8:54 am

    One thing at a time the conversion to wind energy is a good thing. We can clean up the industry latter. Right now we do not need extra costs. It is good to know that people are keeping watch on our safty and I understant their need to let us know.

  • 7. CindL  |  January 25, 2009 at 10:31 am

    Have you heard that plans for a new I-5 bridge over the Columbia River between Washington and Oregon (Vancouver and Portland) include wind turbines actually on the bridge? Planners are telling us that this will generate electricity not to help pay for the project (because they want to make it a toll bridge) but to have some extra power available. After reading your post, however, what a way to adversely affect thousands of people at very close range 24/7.

  • 8. sugamari  |  January 25, 2009 at 10:34 am

    They know. Just like the new light bulbs. They know and we don’t. All is number. And waves and frequency. And now that I found out about the ancient solfeggio (that our tuning standards are of kilter) its all coming together. Whoever these monsters are they are serious and we are ignorant. Poison us first and leave us to pick up the pieces.

  • 9. Fed up  |  January 25, 2009 at 11:06 am

    Okay so Now what?

    What are we supposed to use to generate electricity?
    Coal, Oil, Gas, Nuclear, and now wind is bad..
    Should we go to the dark ages. Or Turn all of Arizona into one big solar panel?

  • 10. Mark Yarbrough  |  January 25, 2009 at 11:45 am

    Any alternative energy solution should be implemented on a small scale, i.e. ‘in the backyard’. Small-scale implementations of anything would be more efficient and have less impact on the environment than large-scale implementations. But of course, any solution to the energy crisis will involve implementations that will profit large corporations, and leave individuals to pay re-occurring monthly fees.

  • 11. rich  |  January 25, 2009 at 12:46 pm

    great informative article !! i never gave it a thought on “sound waves” !!! i have several solar panels on my roof used for lighting purposes. i was also thinking “wind”, but i’ll have to take another look at it.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWyQOh64Qy8&feature=channel_page

    goldieshouse.piczo.com

  • 12. The Smart Pelican  |  January 25, 2009 at 1:21 pm

    Ms. Harrington, you will find all the information and evidence supporting the negative impacts of wind turbines on humans and animals in a secret study that is kept at the EU environmental and health directorate in Brussels.

    You might need to enlist the help of the Canadian authorities to get the study. It won’t be easy since the EU government goons are not to be known to be cooperative and Canadian officials are not really being taken seriously on the international stage either.

    You might have to go there yourself and team up with scientists in Europe who will gladly support you.

    Good luck.

  • 13. reishi diva  |  January 25, 2009 at 1:22 pm

    How about all of the folks who live near power plants that burn coal.. I know of at least 5 children who live near these plants who all have had cancer.. 3 have since passed away. We don’t hear discussions about this form of energy and the detriments that has on people’s health not to mention the pollution it sends out into the environment.

  • 14. This American  |  January 25, 2009 at 2:07 pm

    I would be very cautious that some of this “information” of the so called possible “dangers” associated with wind energy isn’t coming from the competitors of this technology. I don’t think anyone needs to be reminded just how far down the road of criminality those who want to maintain the iron grip of keeping ctizens locked into the current oil/gas/nuclear paradigm have historically gone. Never forget the one thing the small cabal of current energy producers fear and will constantly work against is your ability to be energy independent. Any attempt by citizens to break out of this control grid will be met with the most hostile overt and covert means to keep YOU a slave to the present energy owners. Just keep that constantly in mind when you are met by some new messiah claiming to want to help YOU by installing more and more regulations to keep you from achieving independence.

  • 15. Ken  |  January 25, 2009 at 2:17 pm

    Birds didn’t get chopped up (note the past tense), but they used to perch on poorly designed lattice towers, behind the blades, and launch for prey below, and strike the blades. This has been changed, and windfarms in concerned states watch this closely. Unfortunately, the Altamont is a major flyway, but ths is being regulated strictly now, including mandated shutdowns during migrations. Cell toweres kill millions of birds regularly, nary a peep.

    The more-than-3 blade suggestion above is …. misguided. The current design most efficiently captures the wind. There’s a lot of study that has gone into commerical designs.

    The local jurisdictions need to be controlled to avoid poor placement of the turbines. Developers don’t care one bit about what they leave behind, whether they are in real estate or wind farms, so you have to make them do it where you want them. The Boards want the extra tax revenue, which they spend, so it is a bribe, and the citizens are on their own.

  • 16. nosydenhamwindfarm  |  January 25, 2009 at 5:44 pm

    We don’t really think wind farms are bad if properly implemented….current regulations result in 400 m setbacks from residences, which is completely insane. UK’s setbacks are currently 800 m and France’s are 1500 m.

    If our government wants to move ahead with this initiative, we want realistic setbacks and a health study to show once and for all what they are doing to us!

    It’s not too much to ask!

  • 17. molly  |  January 25, 2009 at 7:16 pm

    Dr. Nina Pierpoint has done extensive reasearch on wind farms. she is credible and dedicated. Wind farms are taking over the state of Maine. Our Gov, a Clinton democrat changes laws /gets them changed for First Wind. First Wind’s CEO ,Paul Gaynor, used to work for Bechtel. One of it’s big backers is D E Shaw Group. Shaw Group’s general Manager is Larry Summers…known in third world countries for dumping toxic waste. Wind farms have to be away from the general public..so electricty is lost in the transmission. Then said power is only generated when the wind blows. If it blows too hard..the turbines shut down due to possible fire from turbine blade . They are only in it for the tax susidies.

  • 18. curbthelites  |  January 25, 2009 at 7:19 pm

    All of what is written about the sound waves is very much true. It can also cause hearing problems as in Tinnitus (Ringing in the Ears). Our bodies function drastically on electrical impulses from the brain throughout our bodies, not unlike radio waves which can be affected by electro-magnetics, sound waves produce frequencies that affect our brain’s of sending instructions to the body. i.e. using ceiling fans in our bedrooms when we sleep at night. If you use your stereo for surroun sound and after turning off your TV, you leave your surround sound system on producing a high frequency.etc….

  • 19. ddearborn  |  January 26, 2009 at 10:50 am

    What are people thinking here? Compared to either fossil fuels or nucleur power both wind and solar offer present miniscule “pollution” issues. The real “problem” here is that solar and wind power is cheap, renewable, environmentally friendly (compared to current production methods).

    Bottom line people is that there is no money in wind and solar for the elite who currently have us by the throat with fossil fuels.
    cheap, renewable power for the masses is not in the cards, I mean think of the power this would bestow upon the indivual if everyone had their own wind/solar power and were not dependant on the grid?

  • 20. D. Mindock  |  January 28, 2009 at 6:26 am

    If wind power has these problems, then allowing for them in the planning stages makes a lot of sense. Setting them up without due caution would be very costly to health of the people who are too close to the wind turbines. I think the setback distance should be enough to reduce all harmful effects, likely to be more than 2 km, depending on the size and number of the wind towers. Infrasound can travel great distances and is able to penetrate building walls with little attenuation. The problem of bird kill can perhaps be mitigated by ultrasonic sound generators mounted on the top of the towers. Also it may be
    possible to harness wind energy using a vibrating ribbon type of design. (There are lots of ways to
    harness wind energy besides the standard three blade design.) The infrasound problem associated with
    the three blade design would not be a factor. Also the bird kill problem would be non-existant.

  • 21. nosydenhamwindfarm  |  January 28, 2009 at 8:28 pm

    Mindock,
    I could not agree with you more! 400 m from houses seems insane! All they have to do is plan for them better and there would be a lot less of us complaining!

  • 22. john  |  February 2, 2009 at 11:20 pm

    After my children got sick I started to look at my environment. What they were experiencing was strangely alike. Then my son started having seizures. A local farmer Lee Montgomery, famous in these parts for his fight with “HEALTH CANADA” on the stray voltage issue, came by and metered my home for this stray voltage. It (the radiation) was coming right out of the electrical outlet on the walll.and metered a very high rreading, The outlet was right beside my sons head as he slept. Looking out the window he pointed out the heavy wires running to and down the side of the outside wall not one foot from my boy head. The electromagnetic feilds helping to alter his brain.
    Then I got sick, first high pitch noises then more of the signs of radiowave sickness, Cardiac problems then a mini stroke, Dr. thought I was crazy about my suspicions, but then the Tumor and CANCER. Guess what I’m not crazy any more.
    A little research (well really a lot!) I’ve discovered that the cell base station and the electomagnetic feilds they produce are poisoning my home and KILLING me, my family and my neighbours. (two tumors in one home). EMFs are dangerous and should be classified as a dangerous poison. We have to educate with the real information, so we all can be aware of exsposure dangers.
    ….. regards j v v

Leave a Comment

Required

Required, hidden

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Recent Posts

Blogroll

Recent Comments