How Wind Turbines Work

Wind is a form of solar energy. Winds are caused by the uneven heating of the
atmosphere by the sun, the irregularities of the earth's surface, and rotation of the
earth. Wind flow patterns are modified by the earth's terrain, bodies of water, and
vegetation. Humans use this wind flow, or motion energy, for many purposes:
sailing, flying a kite, and even generating electricity.
The terms wind energy or wind power describe the process by which the wind is
used to generate mechanical power or electricity. Wind turbines convert the kinetic
energy in the wind into mechanical power. This mechanical power can be used for
specific tasks (such as grinding grain or pumping water) or a generator can convert
this mechanical power into electricity.
So how do wind turbines make electricity? Simply stated, a wind turbine works the
opposite of a fan. Instead of using electricity to make wind, like a fan, wind turbines
use wind to make electricity. The wind turns the blades, which spin a shaft, which
connects to a generator and makes electricity. Take a look inside a wind turbine to
see the various parts. View the wind turbine animation to see how a wind turbine
works.
This aerial view of a wind power plant shows how a group of wind turbines can
make electricity for the utility grid. The electricity is sent through transmission and
distribution lines to homes, businesses, schools, and so on.

Learn more about wind energy technology:

Types of Wind Turbines
Sizes of Wind Turbines
Inside the Wind Turbine
Many wind farms have sprung up in the Midwest in recent years, generating power
for utilities. Farmers benefit by receiving land lease payments from wind energy
project developers.
Types of Wind Turbines
Modern wind turbines fall into two basic groups: the horizontal-axis variety, as
shown in the photo, and the vertical-axis design, like the eggbeater-style Darrieus
model, named after its French inventor.
Horizontal-axis wind turbines typically either have two or three blades. These three-
bladed wind turbines are operated "upwind," with the blades facing into the wind.

GE Wind Energy's 3.6 megawatt wind turbine is one of the largest prototypes ever
erected. Larger wind turbines are more efficient and cost effective.
Sizes of Wind Turbines
Utility-scale turbines range in size from 100 kilowatts to as large as several
megawatts. Larger turbines are grouped together into wind farms, which provide
bulk power to the electrical grid.
Single small turbines, below 100 kilowatts, are used for homes, telecommunications
dishes, or water pumping. Small turbines are sometimes used in connection with
diesel generators, batteries, and photovoltaic systems. These systems are called
hybrid wind systems and are typically used in remote, off-grid locations, where a
connection to the utility grid is not available.
Inside the Wind Turbine
Anemometer:
Measures the wind speed and transmits wind speed data to the controller.

Blades:
Most turbines have either two or three blades. Wind blowing over the blades causes
the blades to "lift" and rotate.

Brake:
A disc brake, which can be applied mechanically, electrically, or hydraulically to
stop the rotor in emergencies.

Controller:
The controller starts up the machine at wind speeds of about 8 to 16 miles per hour
(mph) and shuts off the machine at about 55 mph. Turbines do not operate at wind
speeds above about 55 mph because they might be damaged by the high winds.

Gear box:
Gears connect the low-speed shaft to the high-speed shaft and increase the
rotational speeds from about 30 to 60 rotations per minute (rpm) to about 1000 to
1800 rpm, the rotational speed required by most generators to produce electricity.
The gear box is a costly (and heavy) part of the wind turbine and engineers are
exploring "direct-drive" generators that operate at lower rotational speeds and
don't need gear boxes.

Generator:
Usually an off-the-shelf induction generator that produces 60-cycle AC electricity.
High-speed shaft:
Drives the generator.

Low-speed shaft:
The rotor turns the low-speed shaft at about 30 to 60 rotations per minute.

Nacelle:
The nacelle sits atop the tower and contains the gear box, low- and high-speed
shafts, generator, controller, and brake. Some nacelles are large enough for a
helicopter to land on.

Pitch:
Blades are turned, or pitched, out of the wind to control the rotor speed and keep
the rotor from turning in winds that are too high or too low to produce electricity.

Rotor:
The blades and the hub together are called the rotor.

Tower:
Towers are made from tubular steel (shown here), concrete, or steel lattice. Because
wind speed increases with height, taller towers enable turbines to capture more
energy and generate more electricity.

Wind direction:
This is an "upwind" turbine, so-called because it operates facing into the wind.
Other turbines are designed to run "downwind," facing away from the wind.

Wind vane:
Measures wind direction and communicates with the yaw drive to orient the turbine
properly with respect to the wind.

Yaw drive:
Upwind turbines face into the wind; the yaw drive is used to keep the rotor facing
into the wind as the wind direction changes. Downwind turbines don't require a yaw
drive, the wind blows the rotor downwind.

Yaw motor:
Powers the yaw drive.

Advantages and Disadvantages of Wind Energy

Wind energy offers many advantages, which explains why it's the fastest-growing energy
source in the world. Research efforts are aimed at addressing the challenges to greater use
of wind energy.

Advantages
Wind energy is fueled by the wind, so it's a clean fuel source. Wind energy doesn't pollute
the air like power plants that rely on combustion of fossil fuels, such as coal or natural
gas. Wind turbines don't produce atmospheric emissions that cause acid rain or
greenhouse gasses. Wind energy is a domestic source of energy, produced in the United
States. The nation's wind supply is abundant. Wind energy relies on the renewable power
of the wind, which can't be used up. Wind is actually a form of solar energy; winds are
caused by the heating of the atmosphere by the sun, the rotation of the earth, and the
earth's surface irregularities. Wind energy is one of the lowest-priced renewable energy
technologies available today, costing between 4 and 6 cents per kilowatt-hour, depending
upon the wind resource and project financing of the particular project. Wind turbines can
be built on farms or ranches, thus benefiting the economy in rural areas, where most of
the best wind sites are found. Farmers and ranchers can continue to work the land
because the wind turbines use only a fraction of the land. Wind power plant owners make
rent payments to the farmer or rancher for the use of the land.

Disadvantages
Wind power must compete with conventional generation sources on a cost basis.
Depending on how energetic a wind site is, the wind farm may or may not be cost
competitive. Even though the cost of wind power has decreased dramatically in the past
10 years, the technology requires a higher initial investment than fossil-fueled generators.
The major challenge to using wind as a source of power is that the wind is intermittent
and it does not always blow when electricity is needed. Wind energy cannot be stored
(unless batteries are used); and not all winds can be harnessed to meet the timing of
electricity demands. Good wind sites are often located in remote locations, far from
cities where the electricity is needed. Wind resource development may compete with
other uses for the land and those alternative uses may be more highly valued than
electricity generation. Although wind power plants have relatively little impact on the
environment compared to other conventional power plants, there is some concern over
the noise produced by the rotor blades, aesthetic (visual) impacts, and sometimes birds
have been killed by flying into the rotors. Most of these problems have been resolved or
greatly reduced through technological development or by properly sitting wind plants.

Select board updated on local wind farm

 By NATHAN LAMB | Milton Independent Staff Writer
mireporter@mac.com

Plans for a wind farm on the ridge of Georgia Mountain appear to be picking up steam
and it could be a reality as early as 2010, according to representatives from the Georgia
Mountain Community Wind Project. Having just entered the design phase, current specs
call for two or three 400-foot-high wind turbines on the mountaintop, said project
consultant Martha Staskus in an update to the Milton Select board on May 5. While
details may change during environmental and wildlife permitting, she said recent results
of a year-long feasibility study have sparked interest from both the proponents and
renewable energy boosters. “We think that it would produce enough power to serve
approximately 60 percent of Milton's residential…usage, based on the last census” she
said. The update was largely informative and was treated as a courtesy by the Select
board; as a utility project regulated by the state public service board, the project is
expected to be exempt from local review. If things become operational, the electricity
would be distributed through existing vendors---and Staskus claimed strong demand for
that output, noting the state's recently legislated goal of producing 25% of Vermont's
energy through renewable and in-state resources by 2025. Given the circumstance,
Staskus said the project is likely to be viewed favorably at the state level, and could reap
some tax benefits for the town, though no specifics were mentioned. In any event,
consultants projected that 18 state and federal permits would be required, and that process
is expected to run through 2009. The wind farm is being sought by the Georgia-based
Harrison family. They contacted town when they began monitoring wind conditions on
the mountain in late 2006, and were returning now as part of an outreach effort for the
undertaking, said family patriarch Jim Harrison. Having met with neighbors of the project
in recent weeks, Harrison said they're looking to engage the community, adding they plan
to visit the Georgia and Fairfax Select boards as well. To date, most neighbors were
concerned about upgrades to the cell phone access road, said his consultants.
From a visual standpoint, Staskus presented several models of what the flat white
turbines could look like from around town. The photo illustrations assumed turbine
“hubs” some 262 feet high, with rotors 231 feet in diameter, though Staskus cautioned
those figures and Illustrations were still subject to change.
“These are very early assessments,” she said. “We're just trying to get a handle on what a
400 foot high turbine would look like from the Landscape of Milton.” The consultants
ended by asking the Select board to pass along public feedback about the project, and
they got some immediate comments from Selectwoman Diana Hoyt Palm.
She acknowledged the wind power is an often controversial issue, and thanked the group
for visiting when it wasn't required of them. “Personally I want to say Selectwoman
Diana Hoyt Palm. She acknowledged the wind power is an often controversial issue, and
thanked the group for visiting when it wasn't required of them. “Personally I want to say
this is a fantastic idea,” she said. “I support wind power, despite what some people say is
a ‘view' issue.” Afterwards, Harrison said it's too early to tell if neighbors will take
objection to the project, but added renewable energy is the right way to go, given
depletion of fossil fuels, pollution, and a host of related issues. “It's the right thing to do,
given the nature of the world and where things are going,” he said. “I really think that, if
people can do things that matter, they should.”

Wind turbines on horizon locally

Written By Michelle Monroe
Thursday, August 14, 2008

Georgia family develops multi-million-dollar project

GEORGIA — In late 2009 residents here and in surrounding towns may see wind
turbines along Georgia Mountain.

Jim Harrison and his family, owners of Harrison Concrete, have proposed the
construction of 400-foot-tall wind towers on 700 acres the family owns on the
southeastern summit of Georgia Mountain in Milton, along the Chittenden and Franklin
County line.

Harrison said his reason for undertaking the project is the need for renewable energy,
describing the project as a “way a small family can make a difference.”

Less than a half-mile of ridgeline is windy enough to support the installation of mega-
watt scale wind turbines, according to materials provided by Steve Bourgeois, CEO of
Strategic Initiatives for Business, who is advising the family on the project.

However, several companies have expressed interest in supplying turbines for the
project, creating a range of possibilities for the final project depending on what is
economically and environmentally feasible.

The most likely scenario is for either three or four turbines. If four were built three would
be on the Harrison land in Chittenden County and one would be on leased land in
Franklin County. Wind generation would be 4.5 megawatts with three towers and 6
megawatts with four, according to Bourgeois.

The industry standard for cost is $2.5 million per mega watt of capacity, Bourgeois said.
Applying that standard the cost for the project would be $11.25 million to $15 million.

Generally one megawatt of capacity can supply the electricity for 430 homes for a year,
according to John Zimmerman, of Vermont Energy Research Associates, an advisor on
the project.

The turbines would generate enough electricity to power roughly 60 percent of the homes
in Milton, Bourgeois said. Negotiations are still ongoing with various utilities interested
in purchasing the power.

“The technology is improving, it seems, weekly,” Bourgeois said. By the time the project
is through the permitting process the turbines actually placed on the mountain may
generate more electricity than is being projected now.

A study of wind speed in the proposed building area is now in its second year and
environmental impact studies looking at the impact of the project on wildlife have begun.

The project already has received approval from the Federal Aviation Administration and
the Dept. of Homeland Security, Harrison said.

All of the outstanding permits will come from the state, Janet Harrison explained. An Act
250 permit is not required.

There are no residences located within a half-mile of the project, which Harrison said is
the rule of thumb for how close others have to be to the project to hear the turbines.
Bourgeois said the towers sound much like the hum of a refrigerator, and are about as
loud.

An existing gravel road located 2.5 miles from downtown Milton would have to be
upgraded and extended for the project. A single cable will carry power from the turbines
down the mountain and will be placed on poles the same size as those alongside most
roadways Janet said.

The Harrisons are “making it as aesthetically pleasing as they can,” Bourgeois said.

The project has been presented to select boards in Milton, Georgia, Fairfax and Westford,
where it has received a good response Janet Harrison said. The towers would be visible to
residents living in those towns.

The Harrison’s son, Kevin, said the family has not received a lot of feedback either way.

“We’re just a local family trying to make the future better,” their daughter Kathy Harrison
said.

Others involved in the project include Cross Consulting Engineers, and Steve Terry of
Addison Consulting LLC, a retired Green Mountain Power executive.
“Gearboxes have been failing in wind turbines since the early 1990s. Barely a turbine
make has escaped. The problem reached epidemic proportions with a massive series
failure of gearboxes in NEG Micon machines. At the time, the NEG Micon brand was the
most sold wind turbine in the world. The disaster brought the company to its knees ; It
was taken over by Vestas, the world’s largest wind turbine manufacturer, which still is
challenged by gearbox and rotor failures.

As previously noted, a large number of gearboxes have had to be replaced “in large
numbers.” Der Spiegel reports that the German Insurance Association is none too
happy…

“In addition to generators and gearboxes, rotor blades also often display defects,” a report
on the technical shortcomings of wind turbines claims. The insurance companies are
complaining of problems ranging from those caused by improper storage to dangerous
cracks and fractures… The frail turbines coming off the assembly lines at some
manufacturers threaten to damage an industry that for years has been hailed as a wild
success.
At Spiegel Online, Simone Kaiser and Michael relay a concern about installed wind
turbines:

After the industry’s recent boom years, wind power providers and experts are now
concerned. The facilities may not be as reliable and durable as producers claim. Indeed,
with thousands of mishaps, breakdowns and accidents having been reported in recent
years, the difficulties seem to be mounting. Gearboxes hiding inside the casings perched
on top of the towering masts have short shelf lives, often crapping out before even five
years is up. In some cases, fractures form along the rotors, or even in the foundation, after
only limited operation. Short circuits or overheated propellers have been known to cause
fires. All this despite manufacturers’ promises that the turbines would last at least 20
years

Fatigue Expertise when and where you need it

Blowing in the wind
Renewable energy is a hot topic today and especially wind turbines. A day hardly passes
without some news of a new wind turbine installation being approved, or not! But one of
the major issues for wind turbines is fatigue failure which also hits the headlines. Last
month a wind turbine blade failed in Sheffield, England.

You can read the story here

… and indeed there are other instances of wind turbine failure on the internet – see this
dramatic wind turbine failure for example, where the brakes failed on the wind turbine -
not exactly fatigue but linked. It demonstrates the need to consider all the possible load
scenarios that might occur.

Now I am not trying to scare you but the problem of fatigue can bite without any
warning.
Catastrophic Turbine Failure At Vermont Wind Farm Raises Doubt
Turbine #10 at the Searsburg wind energy facility in Searsburg, Vermont experienced a
catastrophic failure when one of the blades came in contact with the turbine's tower
causing it to buckle during high winds. This turbine's 28-ton nacelle and 3-blade rotor
assembly crashed to the ground scattering debris several hundred feet from the structure.
Approximately 20-gallons of heavy oil spilled from the unit when its fluid reservoirs
were damaged. The 11-turbine Searsburg facility was brought online in 1997 and
according to preconstruction documents, the Zond Z-P40-FS turbines had an expected
lifespan of 30-years[1].

Industrial Wind Action (IWA) Group's executive director, Lisa Linowes, was not
surprised by the failure. "The Searsburg towers are located at an elevation of nearly 3000-
feet in some of the harshest weather conditions in New England. Performance issues and
blade failures have plagued this project for some time, " she said pointing to incidences in
May 2006[2] and again in May 2008[3].
While the eleven-year old Searsburg turbines are failing, newer models have not
improved the safety record. "Wind developers today tout life expectancies of industrial
wind turbines that exceed 20 years," Linowes said, "but the fact remains that estimates of
the functional lifespan of modern utility-scale wind turbines are speculative and cannot
be substantiated since so far very few have been operating for ten years."
Unfortunately, unless a person or property is damaged in a turbine failure, there is no
obligation for the owner of an industrial wind turbine to report the incident. Information
on the number and types of failures is sparse and poorly reported, and thus this vital data
is not adequately incorporated into estimates of turbine longevity. The Searsburg failure
occurred on September 15th.

"What's more ominous," Linowes said, "is that reports of turbine failures in the United
States are increasing. These failures include blade throws, oil leaks, fires, and collapse."
IWA attributes the increase in reporting to the fact that the machines are more visible,
being erected close to where people live, and also due to the growing interest in wind
energy development. In the last year alone, IWA has tracked catastrophic failures in
Idaho, Minnesota, California, New York, Pennsylvania and elsewhere, raising concerns
about public safety.

While weather conditions and climate are taking a toll on the machines, reports from the
industry indicate the rush to erect industrial wind turbines is being accomplished at the
expense of quality assurance and safe installation practices. Business Week published a
report[4] in August 2007, which found, "The facilities may not be as reliable and durable
as producers claim. Indeed, with thousands of mishaps, breakdowns and accidents having
been reported in recent years, the difficulties seem to be mounting." A report this year
found that turbine owners were not conducting regularly scheduled maintenance
necessary to ensure the mechanical towers remain in good operating condition. An
informal survey of approximately seventy-five wind farm operators in the United States
found as many as sixty-percent were behind in their maintenance procedures[5].

"Public safety should be paramount when siting industrial wind turbines," Linowes said,
adding "there's a perception that the 400-foot structures can safely be erected merely a
few hundred feet from property lines, public areas and rights-of-way." She pointed to a
private high school in Massachusetts[6] as an example where a massive turbine was
installed just feet from the school's driveway. Barrington, Rhode Island is deliberating on
the location of an even larger turbine that will stand within 200-feet of the public high
school building[7], although that turbine might be relocated in response to parents and
residents raising concerns over noise and safety. In both cases, the turbines exceed the
size of the destroyed Searsburg tower.
Manufacturers recommend a safety zone with a radius of at least 1300 feet from a wind
turbine, and that children be prohibited from standing or playing near the structures[8].
"Green energy should not override common sense," Linowes said.

http://www.rfcafe.com/miscellany/cool-videos/cool-video-archive-7.htm video

Fallen wind turbine in N.Y. Note signs of the forest fire. (Michael Fellion,
www.windaction.org)

Few details are out, but apparently a 1.5-megawatt wind turbine at an upstate New York
wind farm collapsed last Friday, setting off a forest fire.

Sewer Commissioners warn: Wind Turbine Placement Dangerous and Illegal

By Dan Sapir
Editor, Kingston Observer
Published Sep 4, 2008

If you ask the Sewer Commission how they feel about wind turbines, they would
probably say, "great", but ask them how they relish the idea of placing such a structure
hovering over the sewer plant and you will get a different answer.

On August 27 the Commission wrote a four page letter to the Green Committee
essentially tearing apart every aspect of the turbine, its placement and its financials. That
correspondence outlines how the height of the turbine violates Kingston’s own by-laws
and places the sewer plant directly under its fall zone "rendering it inoperable for an
indefinite period of time. Such an accident could cause harm to the operators of the plant
and displace the entire sewer district, including the entire length of Route 3A from the
Plymouth town line to the Duxbury town line and side streets." The Commission
questions the ability to insure a turbine at a location that does not meet minimum setback
requirements.

Sewer Chairman Elaine Fiore said that members of the Commission have attended
numerous Green Committee meetings where their basic questions have not been address.
Fiore said that that Green Committee Chair Brian Spires continually says that such
answers are forthcoming. Fiore does not want to see the Town investing any more grant
money for a bad plan. Other issues described by the Commission letter address what is
known as Ice Throw which occurs when ice accumulates on the blades and can fall when
still or moving. They fear the result of lightening strikes, power surges and fire.

Wind Power Accident Pictures (539 KB)

The Commission claims that the noise and rhythmic thumping of the turbine can cause
health issues of homes living within up to 1.3 miles away and feel a 1.5 mile distance
from homes could work. They also note that NSTAR must always be able to maintain
access to the turbine for electrical reasons and the Commission will "not permit unlimited
access to a private company or anyone other than emergency personnel employed by the
Town of Kingston."

The Sewer Commission will once again take their concerns to the Green Committee
when they meet again later in September.

Text of Sewer Commission’s Letter

The Board of Sewer Commissioners is writing to voice our concerns over the proposed
location for the proposed wind turbine being researched by your committee. We feel that
there is significant evidence to support our concerns and ask that you consider an
alternative site for this project for the following reasons.

· Fall Zone – All published information, including the Feasibility Study of June 11, 2008,
states that wind turbine siting laws and recommendations require setbacks that take into
consideration the potential for a worst case scenario to occur, such as turbine collapse or
blade fracture during operation. This proposed site would violate our own by-law which
states that the turbine would have to be located at least 1.5 times the height of the blade
tip. The proposed turbine would be located about 100 to 125 feet away from the
Wastewater Treatment Facility. Clearly, this is too close to our facility and the Transfer
Station. A worst case scenario could potentially place the fall zone directly on top of the
Wastewater Treatment Facility, rendering it inoperable for an indefinite period of time.
Such an accident could cause harm to the operators of the plant and displace the entire
sewer district, including the entire length of Route 3A from the Plymouth town line to the
Duxbury town line and side streets, at great liability to the Town of Kingston. The close
proximity to the MBTA line and the proposed new Cranberry Road, new highway ramp
and Route 3 is an added liability. Blade fracture during operation and/or complete failure
of the turbine could send debris flying hundreds or even thousands of feet from the site.
Wind turbines must carry Liability Insurance. We anticipate that it will be difficult for the
Town to obtain insurance that will sufficiently cover operating a turbine located at the
proposed site, not to mention a worst case scenario, given the fact that the location does
not even meet minimum setback requirements.

· Ice Throw – In icing conditions a turbine should have safety mechanisms in place to
shut it down. However, even when the blades are not in motion, chunks of ice will fall
from the blades to the ground below and could be thrown a significant distance
depending on wind conditions. If the blades are in motion, ice can be thrown for great
distances. The June 11, 2008 report suggests that access to the immediate area would
have to be carefully managed until the ice has melted. Access to the Wastewater
Treatment Facility must be maintained 24 hours a day. We cannot limit access to the
grounds below the proposed site. Ice throw creates a very real hazard to the employees
that are required to be outside daily. In addition, limiting access to the Transfer Station
would inconvenience the public by the forced closing of the area and would displace the
employees of that facility as well. The close proximity to the proposed new Cranberry
Road and highway ramp would also pose additional risk for motorists. The June 11, 2008
report concludes that there is a potential risk to vehicles and people.

· Power Surges, Lightning Strikes and Fire – Wind Turbines cause irregularities in
power supply as wind speeds change. When the wind gusts it causes power surges.
People living near turbine installations have had to replace small appliances and stove
elements, etcetera, due to power surges. Lightning strikes have also been noticed to
increase in the area surrounding turbines causing damage to TV sets and computers, even
though they had surge protectors in use. We must assume that such problems could also
occur with the equipment required to maintain the proper operation of the Wastewater
Treatment Facility, posing a potential violation of our discharge permit and health hazard
to the sewer customers should a complete shutdown of the sewer system occur. Should
lightning strike the turbine tower, there is the potential to ignite approximately 200
gallons of hydraulic fuel contained within the nacelle, causing a severe fire hazard to the
Wastewater Treatment Facility. In most cases the fire cannot be fought with fire apparatus
due to the height of the nacelle and must be left to burn itself out. Should a fire occur it
could also render the turbine controls inoperable making it susceptible to catastrophic
failure (falling over).

· Noise and Health Hazard – There is a great deal of information published stating that
noise generated by wind turbines can have a very real negative impact on the health or
residents living up to 1.2 miles or further away. The rhythmic thumping sound creates a
low pitched sound and causes disruption in sleep even when the windows are closed. The
low frequency sound created by the turbine travels through walls and other obstacles
causing reverberation within the home. Such noise can cause sleep deprivation, dizziness
and loss of balance in people, especially those with hearing damage. It also causes
anxiety and depression. These health problems are magnified in the elderly. Those living
within 1/2 mile (2640 ft.) are likely to experience very bothersome levels of noise. This
annoyance continues to distances of 1 mile or more. There are documented cases of
people abandoning homes due to the low frequency noise generated by nearby wind
turbines. It is recommended that wind turbines should not be built within 1.5 miles of any
homes. The June 11, 2008 report estimates the closest residence to be about 790 feet from
the proposed turbine site. This is far less than the previously noted distance. We expect
the same impact on health would occur if a turbine were located at the proposed turbine
site and could have an effect on our staff as well as those working at the Transfer Station.
The June 11, 2008 report states there are potential noise related issues that arise from the
proximity of the proposed location to residences. There will be perceptible noise and
visual impacts on the surrounding community.

· Flicker – Turbine blades cast a moving shadow across landscapes and homes causing a
strobe effect. People with a history of migraines, vertigo and motion sickness are
susceptible to adverse health effects. The strobe effect can also provoke seizures in
people that suffer from epilepsy.

· Turbulence and Wind Shear – The June 11, 2008 report documents significant wind
shear and turbulence for the proposed wind turbine site. Such conditions cause higher
levels of mechanical strain on the wind turbines blades and drive train causing fatigue
and potentially decreasing the life expectancy of the turbine. It also poses a greater risk of
blade fracture or complete turbine failure.

· Distortion of Electromagnetic Waves – The June 11, 2008 report studied local radio,
cellular and microwave transmitters and receivers. It states nowhere if a study has been
done to determine if the proposed turbine would interfere with the communications
systems in use at the Wastewater Treatment Facility and pumping stations.

· Power Requirements – The June 11, 2008 report states that interconnection of a 2.0
MW turbine could be interconnected to the Wastewater Treatment Facility with minimal
facility and distribution upgrades. A medium voltage cable or overhead line will need to
be constructed and a new 1.5 to 2.0 Megavolt-ampere step-down transformer (13.8 kV to
480 V) will need to be installed at the turbine site. It states nowhere in the report whether
this can actually be constructed without interfering with the operation of the plant. The
report states that electricity production from a wind turbine should coincide as much as
possible with electricity usage at the Wastewater Treatment Facility. It also states that
with the expansion it would save 90.4 % or $289,469.00 in avoided energy costs. Nobody
has been able to provide us with any information that can estimate our actual savings,
although the report suggests we would be able to offset all costs at the Wastewater
Treatment Facility. We also pose the question of how does an Enterprise Fund benefit
from a project that is paid for by the tax payers? We ask that your committee seek
assistance from the appropriate Town boards to help you obtain information regarding the
financial impact this proposed project will have on the Town’s tax rate and the savings it
would generate for the Town and the Wastewater Enterprise Fund.

· Access to Turbine – The June 11, 2008 report states that NSTAR must have access to
the disconnect switch at all times in order to potentially disconnect the DG facility should
it be responsible for interference in the power system. Where would this disconnect
switch be located? Who is considered the interconnected customer, the Wastewater
Treatment Facility or the Town of Kingston? Access to the turbine site must be outside of
the restricted access fence surrounding the Wastewater Treatment Facility. The Sewer
Commissioners will not permit unlimited access to a private company or anyone other
than emergency personnel employed by the Town of Kingston.

· Construction – The June 11, 2008 report suggests that construction of a turbine on the
proposed site will not interfere with the current Wastewater Treatment Facility or its
proposed expansion. There is a significant amount of underground and above ground
structures existing and proposed for this site that cannot be relocated. We are very
concerned that vibration caused from driving the turbine support structures into the
ground would cause damage to the plant and the underground conveyance systems. They
cannot be shut down and damage to any of the underground conveyance lines would
result in wastewater being released. The construction of the turbine tower requires a large
amount of space for lay down of the components. Access to the Wastewater Treatment
Facility grounds cannot be restricted at any time. Our access road around the facility must
be maintained at all times.

· Public Awareness – The June 11, 2008 report states that the Green Committee should
perform extensive community outreach efforts such as an abutters survey, mailing letters
and or informational brochures to residents and conducting community meetings to
inform residents of project updates. The Sewer Commissioners attended one public
meeting held at the Kingston Intermediate School on March 25, 2008, which presented
information about other types of energy generating options that are less beneficial to the
environment than wind energy. There was not enough information provided regarding the
proposed Kingston project and questions from those in attendance could not be answered.
Adequate information, both pro and con, some of which is mentioned in this letter, should
be provided to the public in order for residents to make an informed decision.

Based on our careful examination of information provided to us by the Green Committee

as well as research we have done on wind turbines, the Board of Sewer Commissioners
finds significant hazards associated with the proposed project and we cannot support the
construction of a wind turbine on the Wastewater Treatment Facility site. We recommend
researching alternatives sites for this project.

The Dangers of Wind Power

As wind turbines multiply around the globe, the number of dangerous accidents is
also climbing, causing critics to question overall safety

It came without warning. A sudden gust of wind ripped the tip off of the rotor blade with
a loud bang. The heavy, 10-meter (32 foot) fragment spun through the air, and crashed
into a field some 200 meters away.

The wind turbine, which is 100 meters (328 feet) tall, broke apart in early November
2006 in the region of Oldenburg in northern Germany—and the consequences of the
event are only now becoming apparent. Startled by the accident, the local building
authority ordered the examination of six other wind turbines of the same model.

The results, which finally came in this summer, alarmed District Administrator Frank
Eger. He immediately alerted the state government of Lower Saxony, writing that he had
shut down four turbines due to safety concerns. It was already the second incident in his
district, he wrote, adding that turbines of this type could pose a threat across the country.
The expert evaluation had discovered possible manufacturing defects and irregularities.

Mishaps, Breakdowns and Accidents

After the industry's recent boom years, wind power providers and experts are now
concerned. The facilities may not be as reliable and durable as producers claim. Indeed,
with thousands of mishaps, breakdowns and accidents having been reported in recent
years, the difficulties seem to be mounting. Gearboxes hiding inside the casings perched
on top of the towering masts have short shelf lives, often crapping out before even five
years is up. In some cases, fractures form along the rotors, or even in the foundation, after
only limited operation. Short circuits or overheated propellers have been known to cause
fires. All this despite manufacturers' promises that the turbines would last at least 20
years.

Gearboxes have already had to be replaced "in large numbers," the German Insurance
Association is now complaining. "In addition to generators and gearboxes, rotor blades
also often display defects," a report on the technical shortcomings of wind turbines
claims. The insurance companies are complaining of problems ranging from those caused
by improper storage to dangerous cracks and fractures.

The frail turbines coming off the assembly lines at some manufacturers threaten to
damage an industry that for years has been hailed as a wild success. As recently as the
end of July, the German Wind Energy Association (BWE) crowed that business had once
again hit record levels. The wind power industry expanded by a solid 40 percent in 2006,
according to the BWE, and it now provides work for 74,000 people.

Germany, moreover, is the global leader when it comes to wind power: More than 19,000
windmills now dot the countryside—more than in any other country. Green power has
become a point of pride in Germany in recent years, and Environment Minister Sigmar
Gabriel would now like to construct vast new wind farms along the country's North Sea
and Baltic Sea coasts.

No Time for Testing

Generous government subsidies have transformed wind power into a billion-euro industry
within just a few years. Because energy providers have to purchase wind power at set
prices, everyone, it seems, wants in.

But it is precisely the industry's prodigious success that is leading to its technological
shortcomings. "Many companies have sold an endless number of units," complains
engineer Manfred Perkun, until recently a claims adjuster for R+V Insurance. "It hardly
leaves any time for testing prototypes."

Wind power expert Martin Stöckl knows the problems all too well. The Bavarian travels
some 80,000 kilometers (49,710 miles) across Germany every year, but he is only rarely
able to help the wind farmers. It is not just the rotors that, due to enormous worldwide
demand, take forever to deliver, but simple replacement parts are likewise nowhere to be
found. "You often have to wait 18 months for a new rotor mount, which means the
turbine stands still for that long," says Stöckl.

"Sales Top, Service Flop" is the headline on a recent cover story which appeared in the
industry journal Erneuerbare Energien

American resident warns of dangers of wind farms

PUGWASH - Opponents of a proposed wind farm on the Gulf Shore got more fuel for the
fire Friday night. Mark Harris, a pastor from Bridgewater, Maine, spoke Friday night at
the Ground Search and Rescue in Pugwash about how a wind farm in Mars Hill, Maine
has terrorized locals. He bought property in Mars Hill roughly 1200 feet away from the
turbines, but hasn't done anything with it because of how unbearable the sound and
strobing from them is. "Many of the mills we have, on certain days when the wind comes
from a certain direction and the humidity is such and such, it will be all but silent at 1200
feet away where my home site would be. But come back the next day and it'll pound until
you can't tolerate being there and there's no predicting when that will happen," he said.
He said the wind farm has wreaked havoc on the town, with many people now dealing
with health complications allegedly caused by the turbines' sounds and shadows.

PUGWASH - Opponents of a proposed wind farm on the Gulf Shore got more fuel for the
fire Friday night.
Mark Harris, a pastor from Bridgewater, Maine, spoke Friday night at the Ground Search
and Rescue in Pugwash about how a wind farm in Mars Hill, Maine has terrorized locals.
He bought property in Mars Hill roughly 1200 feet away from the turbines, but hasn't
done anything with it because of how unbearable the sound and strobing from them is.

"Many of the mills we have, on certain days when the wind comes from a certain
direction and the humidity is such and such, it will be all but silent at 1200 feet away
where my home site would be. But come back the next day and it'll pound until you can't
tolerate being there and there's no predicting when that will happen," he said.

He said the wind farm has wreaked havoc on the town, with many people now dealing
with health complications allegedly caused by the turbines' sounds and shadows.

"Everyday (residents) deal with the sound. The intolerable levels aren't everyday,
sometimes one or two days a week, sometimes it'll skip a week but the next week it'll be
there for four or five days in a row, and there's no knowing until it happens," he said. "It's
pretty frustrating."

Harris thinks wind turbines being 500 meters away from property, which is currently the
law in Cumberland County, isn't enough. He said turbines would be safe if placed at least
two kilometers away from residences.

"I'm in favor of wind turbines, but they should be appropriately sited," he said. "This
needs to be done in the most responsible way so we keep it in good standing with the
public. I think we need it.

"The placing of them seems to be irresponsible far too often."

Fire damages wind turbine near Garner

By BOB LINK, bob.link@globegazette.com
GARNER — Fire caused major damage to a wind turbine Wednesday morning at the
Hancock County Wind Farm southwest of Garner.
The large compartment holding the gear box and electric components more than 200 feet
above the ground burned and two of the three 77-foot blades broke off, falling to the
ground.
No one was injured and damage was limited to the turbine, according to a spokesman for
Florida Power and Light Energy, of Juno Beach, Fla., owners of the wind farm.
The fire was reported shortly after 8 a.m., according to Hancock County Sheriff Scott
Dodd.
The turbine’s third blade remained connected and was hanging straight down.
The sheriff’s office and Garner Fire Department were at the scene.
The fire started near the rear of the equipment housing compartment and worked its way
toward the blades, according to Garner Fire Chief Terry Jass.
“We pretty much were on standby and when things fell to the ground we put them out,”
he said. “The blades were burning when they fell.”
Ken Engstler of Engstler Construction of Garner was working on a farm near the turbine
when one of his crew members saw smoke coming from the turbine.
“Smoke was rolling out of it,” said Engstler. “So we got in the truck and started heading
up that way.”
He said the fire burned for half an hour to 45-minutes before the blades fell off.
“When the blades fell, there was all kinds of debris flying all over the place,” he said.
Steve Stengel, a spokesman for Florida Power and Light, said the cause of the fire is not
known.
“The damage was isolated to one turbine and the balance of the wind farm remained
operational,” he said.
“The turbines are all connected on different circuits,” he said. “So it is possible that four
or five other turbines were taken out of service because of the fire.”
Stengel said no Florida Power and Light customers would have had service interrupted
by the fire.
Stengel said there are 148 turbines in the 80-square-mile Hancock County Wind Farm.
The wind farm went into operation in 2002.

April 13, 2009, 10:40 am

When Lightning Strikes Wind Turbines II
By Kate Galbraith
 Shutterstock
The National Fire Protection Association now includes wind machines in its handbook on
lightning protection. Back in December, a Wyoming rancher described to me the
terrifying fireworks that ensue when a bolt of lightning hits a wind turbine. “It will
explode those blades, and they’ll throw chunks of blade several hundred feet,” said Ralph
Brokaw, whose ranch accommodates both turbines and cows. After I wrote the post, I got
an e-mail message from Kim Loehr of the Lightning Protection Institute. She wrote to tell
me that the National Fire Protection Association has updated its handbook on installing
lightning protection systems to include a new section on wind machines. Due to the
proliferation of wind farms and the increasing heights of the turbines — some of them
more than 250 feet tall — there is, she noted, a rising number of lightning-related
incidents. Now that the thunderstorm season is rolling around (central Texans were roiled
by lightning shows over the weekend), I thought I would share a few pointers. According
to the handbook, wind turbines are particularly complicated to protect because they have
so many different components — including non-conducting composite materials like
glass-reinforced plastic. Any lightning protection system must therefore be sufficiently
comprehensive to take account for all of the parts. “While physical blade damage is the
most expensive and disruptive damage caused by lightning,” the handbook states, “by far
the most common is damage to the control system.” The massive blades will often have a
receptor at the tip, which can channel the lightning into the proper wires and onward to
the ground. Two receptors might be necessary for larger blades. “Protecting wind turbine
blades against lightning is not about avoiding strikes, but attracting them,” states LM
Glasfiber, a global blade manufacturer, on a section of its Web site devoted to lightning.
“This makes it possible to direct the flow of the lightning and ensure that the components
exposed to its effects can withstand the forces involved.” The company says that it meets
certification standards requiring blades to be capable of withstanding 98 percent of
lightning strikes. Without the system, though, it’s not pretty: “A lightning strike on an
unprotected blade can lead to temperature increases of up to 30,000 degrees Celsius, and
result in an explosive expansion of the air within the blade,” LM Glasfiber states.
Many residents living in close proximity to these wind farms find the noise levels
completely intolerable and are infuriated that assurances about noise given in advance
turn out to be valueless. Doctors have suggested that turbine noise, which may be low
key yet disturbing and unpleasant, may link to psychological effects, headaches and
depression. Noise levels cannot be accurately predicted in advance.

Authorities in Spain reported considerable numbers of birds of 13 species secluded

under European Union law have been killed by wind turbines (Wind power monthly
2.2.94). Turbines in California have on average destroyed between 200-300 Red tail
Hawks and up to 60 Golden Eagles every year, whilst it is estimated that 7000
migrating birds a year are killed at other wind turbine sites in Southern California.
(Source -California Energy Commission).

The wind turbine is regulated to generate power at low to moderate wind speeds,
when the production is a trickle. As the wind strengthens and real power becomes
obtainable, they have to be shut down or they may blow over.

The two foremost European wind farms are close to each other in Powys, at
Llandinam and Carno. Between them, they have 159 turbines and cover many
thousands of acres. Jointly they take a year to manufacture less than four days' output
from a solitary 2000 MW conventional power station. Together, they have a
productivity averaging 20 MW (in winter, UK demand peaks at about 53,000 MW.)

Turbines can interrupt TV reception. This was noted in 1994 when the BBC and the
Independent Television Commission recommended the Department of the
Environment to oblige wind farm developers to reinstate reception where wind farms
caused intrusion.

The main unfavorable impact that wind farm expansion is probable to have is on
local economies depending on ‘tourism’. Wind speed sites are frequently positioned
in the areas holding the premium landscapes. Wind developers are consequently
targeting those localities where the sightseer trade consists of visitors seeking
harmony and unspoiled countryside.

One of the most dependable critiques of wind-generation of electricity to date is the

Darmstadt Manifesto on the exploitation of wind energy in Germany. Its main
influence develops from its signatories - over one hundred leading intellectuals in
fields including - Medicine, Mathematics, Electrical Engineering, Physics, Chemistry,
Geography, Mechanical Engineering and Thermodynamic Science, Land
Administration, and Agricultural Science.

Health and safety (apart from noise pollution) is a factor too. Apart from the hazard
of blades becoming disconnected or even disintegrating due to fatigue etc, there is a
real danger that chunks of ice can form on them in wintry conditions and then be
thrown considerable distances when the wind picks up and the blades begin to rotate.
Three of these wind turbine ‘factories’ in the UK were closed for safety reasons in
April 2000 due to metal fatigue.

The RSPB has objected to 76 wind farm proposals (on and offshore) between 2000-
2004 and has raised concerns about a further 129. The RSPB recently objected to a
proposed 234 turbine wind farm on the Isle of Lewis in the Hebrides, on an extremely
fragile and special area for wildlife.

Wind powered electricity is estimated to be two and a half times more costly than
conventional sources. It would not be economic without a massive subsidy. This
comes either from our tax or from the price we pay for electricity. Consumers in
Denmark, which has the highest penetration of wind power in Europe, also pay the
most for their electricity.

Dr Amanda Harry, a local GP who did the research, said: "People demonstrated a
range of symptoms from headaches, migraines, nausea, dizziness, palpitations and
tinnitus to sleep disturbance, stress, anxiety and depression. These symptoms had a
knock-on effect in their daily lives, causing poor concentration, irritability and an
inability to cope."

Similar problems have been found by Dr Bridget Osborne, a doctor in a village in

North Wales, where three turbines were erected in 2002. She has presented a paper to
the Royal College of General Practitioners detailing a "marked" increase in
depression among local people. "There is a public perception that wind power is
'green' and has no detrimental effect on the environment," said Dr Osborne.
"However, these turbines make low-frequency noises that can be as damaging as
high-frequency noises. When wind farm developers do surveys to assess the
suitability of a site they measure the audible range of noise but never the infrasound
measurement - the low-frequency noise that causes vibrations that you can feel
through your feet and chest. This frequency resonates with the human body - their
effect being dependent on body shape. There are those on whom there is virtually no
effect, but others for whom it is incredibly disturbing."
Collecting birds killed by a wind turbine

Are Mr. Pugh and Tattersall (who claims to be 'concerned' about effects on his
neighbors’) actually aware of the above? Will the council or whoever is responsible
be happy to meet any legal claims against them for permitting the installation of wind
turbines that may have adverse effects of other residents. Will they be faced with
protests similar to those undertaken by irate anti-phone mast campaigners afraid of
health risks in the community? Time will tell!