Wind Turbine

Information Package

Regarding Saskatoon Tall Wind Turbine Project

Prepared by

Saskatoon Wind Turbine Coalition

www.saskatoonwindturbine.com

info@saskatoonwindturbine.com

Friday, December-20-11

Version 4

CONTENTS

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 1

Saskatoon Light and Power Wind Assessment states: .......................................................................................... 1

Saskatoon Light and Power Proposal to Council states: ........................................................................................ 1

Why the Saskatoon Wind Turbine must NOT Go Ahead ............................................................................................... 2

1. Health Impacts Not Understood. ...................................................................................................................... 2

2. Unanswered Questions. ................................................................................................................................... 2

3. New Study Showing Link Between LFN and Health Symptoms. ....................................................................... 2

4. Economics are Unclear. .................................................................................................................................... 2

5. City Health Reports Rebuked. ........................................................................................................................... 3

6. Wind Power Not Properly Represented. .......................................................................................................... 3

7. Environmentalists, Scientists and Others Opposed. ......................................................................................... 3

8. Health and Safety Guarantee? ......................................................................................................................... 3

9. Genuine Fear Among Residents. ...................................................................................................................... 3

10. Low Frequency Noise and Valley Road. ....................................................................................................... 4

11. Genuine Fear Among Residents. .................................................................................................................. 4

12. Claims About Health Effects. ........................................................................................................................ 4

13. No Economic Feasibility Study. .................................................................................................................... 4

Expectations of City Council and the Mayor of Saskatoon ............................................................................................ 5

Guidelines for Actions of the City Council ................................................................................................................. 5

Recent Quotes from Mayor Atchison ........................................................................................................................ 5

Tax Payer’s Money (Financial) ....................................................................................................................................... 6

Procedure and Public Awareness .................................................................................................................................. 6

Public Health and Safety ................................................................................................................................................ 7

Health Reports (Regarding Health Issues from Low Frequency Noise) ..................................................................... 7

One has to ask the questions: ................................................................................................................................... 8

Rebuke of Saskatoon Light & Power Health Reports ................................................................................................. 8

Health Symptoms ...................................................................................................................................................... 9

Simple Public Safety ................................................................................................................................................. 10

Some Pictures of Various Wind Turbine Disasters and IMPACTS ............................................................................ 11

Fear in the Community ............................................................................................................................................ 12

There is the fear of health ................................................................................................................................... 12

There is the fear of safety .................................................................................................................................... 12

Health and Safety Summary .................................................................................................................................... 12

Supporting Arguments and Concerns .......................................................................................................................... 13

Argument from Saskatoon Developer, Engineer and Environmentalist .................................................................. 13

Letter from a Saskatoon Physicist/Mathematician ................................................................................................. 13

Letter from a Saskatoon Professional Engineer ....................................................................................................... 14

Something To Consider About Low Frequency Noise and Health ............................................................................... 15

Renewal Energy Approval Suggesting LFN Should Be Monitored: .......................................................................... 15

CANWEA Opposing Low Frequency Noise Monitoring: ........................................................................................... 15

Appendix A - Public Participation and Awareness ........................................................................................................ A

Public Participation Spectrum .................................................................................................................................... i

Appendix B – Wind Turbine Size Comparison .............................................................................................................. B

Wind Turbine - Size Comparison Chart ....................................................................................................................... i

Appendix C – Wind Assessment Versus Proposal To Council ........................................................................................C

Saskatoon Light and Power Wind Assessment ........................................................................................................... i

Saskatoon Light and Power Proposal to Council ........................................................................................................ i

1 | P a g e

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Saskatoon Wind Turbine Coalition has prepared this brief document to fill in some of the gaps that exist in the

information that was presented to the councillors of the City of Saskatoon.

It is the belief of the SWTC that councillors approved the tall wind turbine project without a complete and well-

rounded compilation of information. The SWTC believes that the project was simply presented as a Green solution

that will make money for the City of Saskatoon.

“A Green solution that will make the City of Saskatoon money.”

Who would not approve such a proposition? It seems like a clear cut and resounding YES.

In the Saskatoon Light and Power Wind Assessment, the wind rating was given a rating of 2 on a scale of 1 to 7. It

was referred to as “marginal” in the report. Despite this, Saskatoon Light and Power referred to the landfill as a

rich wind resource in the proposal put before council.

SASKATOON LIGHT AND POWER WIND ASSESSMENT STATES:

“The site, therefore, would be considered marginal for supporting wind power

generation.”

SASKATOON LIGHT AND POWER PROPOSAL TO COUNCIL STATES:

“…the Saskatoon Landfill as this site offers a rich wind resource…”

What you will find in this document is compelling and factual information that should have been included in the

Saskatoon Light & Power reports. If the mayor and councillors had this information before making their decision,

we feel confident that there is absolutely no way that the wind turbine component of the green energy park would

have been approved.

The SWTC has always taken a position on three (3) key points about the wind turbine project:

1. Tax Payer’s Money (the financial argument)

2. Procedure and Public Awareness (over 75% of the people approached on the petition had not heard of

the wind turbine project).

3. Public Health and Safety (the most important aspect, and the most neglected)

A brief, concise and factual summary of the above points is contained in this document.

“The City of Saskatoon has made an error … it can be corrected before becoming a mistake”

2 | P a g e

WHY THE SASKATOON WIND TURBINE MUST NOT GO AHEAD

1. HEALTH IMPACTS NOT UNDERSTOOD. There are real and not fully understood health impacts

surrounding wind turbines. Around the world, a percentage of the people living within 2KM of wind

turbines are becoming ill with the same types of symptoms. Parts of Australia are imposing a 5KM setback

distance, why has Saskatoon Light and Power not considered that? The possible benefit to Saskatoon and

the earth offered by the proposed wind turbine cannot outweigh the possible negative impacts to human

health.

SL&P will try to make the case that 'no studies prove health problems'. That may be true but, NO STUDIES

PROVE THAT WTG's ARE SAFE EITHER! The only thing that is known on this is that there is a great

deal unknown and that which has been stated is embroiled in controversy. In fact there is too much

controversy to ignore. (Think of: 'tobacco is safe', 'asbestos is a miracle insulator', 'there is no such thing

as post traumatic stress disorder'. What's next? We thought wind turbines were safe - sorry about

that.). OUR City should not be taking risks with it's citizens just to show themselves as 'green'.

2. UNANSWERED QUESTIONS. Saskatoon Light and Power still has not (or cannot) answer the following

questions.

a) Can Saskatoon Light and Power guarantee that Saskatoon employees and residents will not experience the

same adverse health effects that hundreds of people around the world are reporting once large wind

turbines are erected near them?

b) Does Saskatoon Light and Power Agree that there are in fact hundreds of reported cases around the world

indicating that residents near large wind turbines are experience adverse health effects?

c) Why is the City unable to provide the expertise for the authors of the Sound and Shadow Flicker

Report? Two names appeared on the report initially (before the names were removed by the City) of which

one was supposed to be a Professional Engineer. That may now be in doubt. SL&P is now checking if both

are actually engineers-in-training.

d) Why was the sound study done in A-weighted sound when that scale arbitrarily removes measurements

from the low frequencies? Low frequencies (also called infrasound) are thought to be the primary cause of

problems associated with WTG's in adjacent populated areas. SL&P may produce reports that deny the

effects of infrasound. The opposite of infrasound is ultrasound (inaudible high frequencies). If ultrasound

exists and has effect then so must infrasound. How many parents first saw their baby with ultrasound?

3. NEW STUDY SHOWING LINK BETWEEN LFN AND HEALTH SYMPTOMS. On the 14th

December,

2011 the “The Bruce McPherson Infrasound and Low Frequency Noise Study”

(http://bit.ly/McPhersonStudy) was released and it demonstrates a link between wind turbine noise and

adverse health effects. The study was commissioned by Bruce McPherson after being concerned about

residents in his community becoming ill after the installation of wind turbines.

4. ECONOMICS ARE UNCLEAR. The economics cannot be proven as a failure due to the fact that

Saskatoon Light and Power does not know all of their costs, but Saskatoon Light and Power has admitted

the economics are tight. The landfill is NOT a “rich wind resource” as written in the proposal to council on

the 11th

of October 2011.

3 | P a g e

5. CITY HEALTH REPORTS REBUKED. Finally, on the 8th of December 2011, Saskatoon Light and Power

posted two reports on the City of Saskatoon website indicating that there are no adverse health effects.

Unfortunately, both reports have been refuted and one report is sponsored by the wind industry, and this

is a violation of the best practices of the World Health Organization.

The City Reports are Here

The Rebuttal to CANWEA Report is Here (First City of Saskatoon Health Report)

The Rebuttal to the Ontario Report is Here (Second City of Saskatoon Health Report)

NOTE: Saskatoon Light and Power has simply downloaded and posted these reports. There have not been any independant

or Saskatoon specific health studies for humans

6. WIND POWER NOT PROPERLY REPRESENTED. In the Saskatoon Wind Assessment Report, the wind

power rating is given a two (2) on a scale of 1 to 7 and is classified as "marginal". The marginal rating is

just above Class 1 (The lowest class. Or as stated by Saskatoon Express writer Tammy Robert (Dec.12)

"The wind-turbine project is classified as a 2 on the scale of 1 - 7 - "marginal" for supporting wind-power

generation, and one step above pointless.) . The proposal to proceed with the Tall Wind Turbine that was

submitted to council on the 11th of October 2011 states the following:

"Approval is now being requested to proceed with the construction of the tall wind turbine

located at the Saskatoon Landfill as this site offers a rich wind resource " - Saskatoon Light and

Power.

When approached on this matter in a private meeting held on the 14th of December 2011, Saskatoon

Light and Power appeared unprepared and could only tell us that they would look into the matter and

clarify. Saskatoon Light and Power needs to explain why they were in error by representing the wind

resource as rich when it is actually marginal. It is important to note that this is not a MINOR issue!

7. ENVIRONMENTALISTS, SCIENTISTS AND OTHERS OPPOSED. Nearby residents, residents

throughout the city, local environmentalists, engineers and scientists do not think that the wind turbine is

smart or necessary.

8. HEALTH AND SAFETY GUARANTEE? Saskatoon Light and Power has not been able to answer the

question, “What are you going to tell Councillors when they ask if Saskatoon Light and Power can

guarantee that there will be no adverse health effects to people nearby the wind turbine?”

9. GENUINE FEAR AMONG RESIDENTS. There is a genuine fear about the wind turbine project, it is not

fabricated or superficial. We have talked to many individuals that are considering uprooting and

relocating their families because it is not worth the risk to live next to the wind turbine.

4 | P a g e

10. LOW FREQUENCY NOISE AND VALLEY ROAD. Saskatoon Light and Power has gone on the record

stating that concerns regarding Low Frequency Noise end at Valley road (meaning a 350m radius around

the turbine). However, the sound study did not even examine low frequency noise.

11. GENUINE FEAR AMONG RESIDENTS. Saskatoon Light and Power has gone on the record

guaranteeing that no one will ever hear the turbine.

“no one will ever hear this turbine”

- The Star Phoenix, 5 November 2011

Despite this bold guarantee there are NO SOUND REQUIREMENTS specified in the Request For Proposal

(RFP)! The RFP does specify that contractors can include sound data if they wish.

12. CLAIMS ABOUT HEALTH EFFECTS. Saskatoon Light and Power has gone on the record making

statements about health symptoms and effects.

“Saskatoon Light and Power has stated conclusively that there are no public health concerns from

wind turbines with appropriate setback, and that symptoms of dizziness and nausea are caused

by shadowflicker, not noise, which is only an issue when the turbines are much closer.”

There are many studies to indicate otherwise. It is the feeling of the SWTC that Saskatoon Light and Power

should not be making bold medical claims such as this.

13. NO ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDY. No economic feasibility report was ever done before

recommending the project to council. Instead, a simple spreadsheet was created to project costs out for

a 20 year period. The spreadsheet includes guesses made by persons without experience in WTG's on the

expected costs and revenues (annual maintenance, operation, repair, decommissioning, insurance and on

and on including the actual life expected from the machinery).

Remember that SL&P has already been quoted as stating that 'the economics on this one are tight'.

Remember that revenue is predicted based on marginal wind resource. Remember that long term

projections are extremely sensitive to the quality and accuracy of the input variables. Should we be

putting $5,000,000.00 and population health at risk based on guesses?

5 | P a g e

EXPECTATIONS OF CITY COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR OF SASKATOON

GUIDELINES FOR ACTIONS OF THE CITY COUNCIL

All of the actions of City Council must be for one or more of the purposes set out in The Cities Act, which

are as follows:

1. To provide good government;

2. To provide services, facilities and other things that, in the opinion of Council, are necessary and

desirable for all or part of the city;

3. To develop and maintain a safe and viable community;

4. To foster economic, social and environmental well-being; and

5. To provide wise stewardship of public assets.

City Council is required to carry out its business in a way which ensures that it is accountable to the

people who elects it and is responsible for encouraging and enabling public participation in the

government process.

RECENT QUOTES FROM MAYOR ATCHISON

“Value for taxpayer dollars is also about learning from past mistakes. Sometimes we've

been penny wise and pound foolish”

It is the belief of the Saskatoon Wind Turbine Coalition that this project is another “pound foolish”

project. Green is important, but it has to be smart Green. Anyone who has looked into Green initiatives

knows that there is not an immediate economic return and in some cases, there is never a return other

than hoping that your efforts are helping the planet against pollution. The proposed wind turbine project

is a classic example of trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

“... the will to create a better quality of life for everyone in Saskatoon - to make every

neighborhood of the city better ...”

There is no doubt that the proposed wind turbine project will degrade the quality of life for residents and

employees nearby the landfill project.

6 | P a g e

TAX PAYER’S MONEY (FINANCIAL)

Below are several points regarding the projects financial feasibility, but we are not going to dwell on the financials

as they are completely unknown and Saskatoon Light & Power keeps repeating that the numbers are “factored in”

and they are waiting for the RFPs.

a) The financial sensitivity report created by Saskatoon Light & Power (by an engineer) is incomplete, relies

on unsubstantiated numbers (the quotes are not in yet), and makes several assumptions for which the

reasons or background information have not been published.

b) Saskatoon Light & Power has gone on record stating, “The financials on this project are tight.”

c) The financial success of a wind turbine is directly linked to its ability to produce electricity. The landfill site

has a wind power rating of 2 on a scale of 1 to 7. The wind assessment study classifies the landfill site as

“marginal”. One can assume that the profit (if any) would be marginal.

d) The City of Saskatoon has not cited or included in the financial feasibility comparable “single turbine”

installations at a location with a power rating of 2 that have proven to be profitable.

e) The SWTC is meeting with Saskatoon Light & Power on the 14th

of December and any additional

information provided at that time will be included in this report.

PROCEDURE AND PUBLIC AWARENESS

Below are several points regarding the public awareness efforts of Saskatoon Light & Power.

a) It is evident that public awareness was carried out extremely poorly. The simple fact that over three

quarters of the people approached on the petition were not even aware of the turbine project.

b) Another compelling example is the fact that the SWTC contacted the landfill workers union, they too were

unaware that the project was moving ahead.

c) There is a document put together by the Canadian Wind Energy Association (CANWEA) to help the wind

industry in dealing with the public when carrying out a wind energy project. Excerpts from the document

are included in Appendix A. You will see upon quick review of these clearly laid out guidelines that

Saskatoon Light & Power did not even come close to what is considered best practice in the industry.

d) Saskatoon Light & Power has made the guarantee, “No resident will ever hear the turbine” and yet it is

not a specific requirement of the RFP. Who can actually make a guarantee like that?

e) Saskatoon Light & Power has made the statement that there are no Low Frequency Noise concerns

beyond Valley Road. How can he make such a statement? Where is the proof? Others beg to differ.

f) Saskatoon Light & Power has gone on record stating that nausea and dizziness are because of shadow

flicker, not because of sound. Saskatoon Light & Power is not recognized medical organization and it does

not take much looking to see that many doctors have stated that both nausea and dizziness can be

symptoms of low frequency sound.

7 | P a g e

PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY

Absolutely and without a doubt, public health and safety has to be the number one issue when considering a

project such as this. One has to ask,

“Why were Public Health and Safety after-thoughts with this project?”

HEALTH REPORTS (REGARDING HEALTH ISSUES FROM LOW FREQUENCY NOISE)

“It is important to note that one of Saskatoon Light and Power’s reports is condemned by

the World Health Organization and both have been rebuked upon peer review”

It was not until the 8th

of December 2011 that Saskatoon Light & Power posted up two documents on the City

website addressing the issues being raised by concerned citizens. It is also important to note that one of the

reports was commissioned by the wind industry (that is similar to relying on a report commissioned by Big

Tobacco explaining why cigarette smoking is safe).

Even if you do not take into consideration that this report has been refuted by several doctors, simply read it

through. The doctors who wrote the report state quite clearly that they suspect that the symptoms

(sleeplessness, nausea, dizziness, tinnitus, etc.) may be psychological because people are stressed out about

living near the turbine. EVEN IF that is the only reason, is that not enough to change the location of an

unnecessary, pilot project turbine?

The second report was done for Ontario and it is clear that there are many issues in Ontario with wind energy.

Take a moment to visit the following website and see how many communities in Ontario are up in arms

against improperly placed wind power.

http://ontario-wind-resistance.org/

It is also important to review the hundreds of video testimonies of individuals negatively impacted by wind

turbines that are placed too close to people.

http://windturbinesyndrome.com/videos.html

A quick primer on Wind Turbine Syndrome (or more generally, illness from Low Frequency Noise)

http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/img/WTSguide.pdf

8 | P a g e

ONE HAS TO ASK THE QUESTIONS:

“Is this single wind turbine, with tight financials and marginal production worth the

potential health issues? What if Wind Turbine Syndrome is true, just like smoking ended up

causing cancer? What if some residents around the turbine get sick?”

REBUKE OF SASKATOON LIGHT & POWER HEALTH REPORTS

The SWTC presents detailed reports rebuking the wind industry funded literature review and Ontario’s Chief

Medical Officer of Health’s literature review on the effects of wind turbines on human health. These documents

have also been sent to members of Council to ensure they can reach an informed decision. Both of these analyses

strongly demonstrate the failings of the reports Saskatoon Light and Power is claiming state no adverse health

effects will result from constructing their tall wind turbine.

This is a serious issue and it is shocking that Saskatoon Light and Power is relying on industry funded science,

something the world health organization has condemned, and a thoroughly criticized report from Ontario's Chief

Medical Officer of Health to try to defend the proposed tall wind turbine for Saskatoon. The bottom line is these

reports are hardly scientific, the project isn't safe, it isn't smart, and a growing portion of residents and councillors

are shocked at what they are learning.

The analysis of each report was prepared by the Society for Wind Vigilance, a international organization of

renowned medical professionals and peer reviewed scientists. The Society is Chaired by Dr. Robert McMurtry,

Canada’s former Deputy Minister of Public Health, a former special advisor to the Romanow Commission on the

future of healthcare in Canada and 2011 Order of Canada recipient.

Analysis of – Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects – An Expert Panel Review – December 2009

http://bit.ly/CANWEAhealth

Analysis – The Potential Health Impact of Wind Turbines (Chief Medical Officer of Health (CMOH) Ontario Report) –

May 2010

http://bit.ly/ONhealth

9 | P a g e

HEALTH SYMPTOMS

Below is a list of the symptoms that people experience when living near wind turbines.

� sleep disturbance

� headache

� tinnitus (pronounced “tin-uh-tus”: ringing or buzzing in the ears)

� ear pressure

� dizziness (a general term that includes vertigo, lightheadedness,

sensation of almost fainting, etc.)

� vertigo (clinically, vertigo refers to the sensation of spinning, or the

room moving)

� nausea

� visual blurring

� tachycardia (rapid heart rate)

� irritability

� problems with concentration and memory

� panic episodes associated with sensations of internal pulsation or

quivering, which arise while awake or asleep

10 | P a g e

SIMPLE PUBLIC SAFETY

Most wind turbines are located in rural areas so the following items are not as big of a concern. The proposed

Saskatoon wind turbine is located in an area that will be surrounded by residents, employees, landfill workers

and thousands of commuters on the new south bridge freeway. When discussing the wind turbine project, did

Saskatoon Light & Power go into detail about some of the following issues?

SWTC Realizes that many of these incidents are low probability, but

no turbine means zero probability…

a) One of the most common failures with wind turbines is blade failure. If a blade fails, debris from the blade can travel

over 500m. The blades of a wind turbine like the one Saskatoon is getting, weigh in excess of 10,000 KG. There are

landfill workers below the turbine all day, there are residents who frequent the landfill (sometimes with children)

throughout the day, there is estimated to be 30,000 cars per day on the new south freeway/bridge traveling within

350m of the turbine.

b) Another common failure with wind turbines is fire in the turbine housing. Turbine fires cannot be fought because they

are 80m off of the ground. Has Saskatoon Light & Power clearly explained how they have planned for potential fires in

the turbine housing and how to ensure safety of those below?

c) It is possible for wind turbine towers to collapse. The City of Saskatoon has requested that the contractor who erects

the turbine us a floating disc foundation. There are documented cases of these floating foundations uprooting and

the turbine towers toppling to the ground.

d) If you go to the dump right now and want to drive up to the proposed turbine site, you must wear a hard hat, steel

toed boots and visible clothing. What is the city going to require of people going to the landfill once the tall wind

turbine is erected? There will be a massive spinning fan above the heads of everyone at the landfill.

e) In the RFP for the turbine, Saskatoon Light & Power states the following:

“The wind tower and turbine and tower will be located 350 meters from a new freeway

extension and bridge in the City of Saskatoon (the "Circle Drive South Project").

Commuters on the freeway will have a clear, close and unobstructed view of the tower

and turbine. Traffic modelling indicates that the Circle Drive South Project will carry

approximately 30,000 vehicles per day which is equivalent to nearly one million people

every single month viewing the successful project”

Is it possible that this most impressive landmark might cause distraction to freeway drivers? Is it fair to say that a 400

foot wind turbine would be the most impressive thing to distract anyone driving on a Saskatoon freeway?

f) The landfill examples that Saskatoon is modeling this project after are no longer active. Those other landfills are

capped, closed and do not have hundreds of residents and employees under the turbine throughout the day.

Many incidents can be found here: http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/fullaccidents.pdf

11 | P a g e

SOME PICTURES OF VARIOUS WIND TURBINE DISASTERS AND IMPACTS

12 | P a g e

FEAR IN THE COMMUNITY

In addition to the very real safety issues (hundreds documented) and health issues (again, hundreds

documented worldwide), there is the issue of fear in the community.

Would a responsible municipal government implement any project in a city if they knew that the residents

were going to be living daily with genuine fears? These fears are founded upon real life examples throughout

the world wherein people are experiencing health issues when living within 2KM of wind turbines.

THERE IS THE FEAR OF HEALTH. Worldwide there are documented cases of people experiencing serious

health issues when living near and around wind turbines. It is true that not all people near turbines are

affected, however, every person has the same civil rights and that means that even if one person is affected,

the project should be scrapped.

THERE IS THE FEAR OF SAFETY. There have been dozens of cases around the globe where turbines have

toppled, blades have fallen off and are hurled hundreds of kilometers and turbine houses catch fire and the

burning wreckage falls to the ground. The saving grace for most of these accidents is that the turbines have

been located out in the middle of nowhere. The proposed wind turbine in Saskatoon will be surrounded by

hundreds of people on a daily basis.

HEALTH AND SAFETY SUMMARY

There is no question that there are many health and safety concerns, including fear. It is not necessary to over-

analyze the project as these issues are very real and they affect human beings, not bats and not birds,

humans.

It is a shame that Saskatoon Light & Power did not approach the project from a human and social aspect

rather than a technical aspect, but that is what they did. There is no doubt that Saskatoon Light and Power will

champion the fact that they have already spent $580,000.00 on this project, but that is not what matters.

What matters are the citizens of Saskatoon, the residents near the site, the employees around and on the site,

the public that frequents the landfill and the thousands of people travelling on the new freeway.

When you and the other councillors announce that the decision to go ahead with the wind turbine has been

reversed because of health concerns, there will not be a strong argument against it, how can there be? The

people of Saskatoon will be understanding and thankful.

SWTC recently asked the question, “What are you going to say when the City Councillors ask if Saskatoon Light

and Power can Guarantee that no one near the wind turbine will experience adverse health effects?”

Saskatoon Light and Power did not answer the question and stated that they had to do some work and come

back with a good answer for that question.

The City of Saskatoon has made an error and can correct it before it becomes a mistake.

13 | P a g e

SUPPORTING ARGUMENTS AND CONCERNS

In this section of the document, we have included letters and arguments from individuals in the community

who are not directly part of the SWTC, but agree with the position of the SWTC and the fact that the current

wind turbine project is a bad one.

ARGUMENT FROM SASKATOON DEVELOPER, ENGINEER AND ENVIRONMENTALIST

LETTER FROM A SASKATOON PHYSICIST/MATHEMATICIAN

Here's where I think I'm ending up on this issue…I want to see a very successful demonstration project: successful in energy production, financial performance and social engagement so that it can help pave the way to more policy that encourages investment into energy efficiency and renewable production.

I see the city doing a horrible job of listening to the Montgomery neighbourhood and, if the project chaps the ass of everyone within sight of the turbine, nobody (city, environmentalists, residents, councillors) wins in the end. So my hope is that we can focus on the end goal, and if that means delaying the project, downsizing it, relocating it or whatever it takes to get the neighbourhood on side, it would be the best decision. In my simple view, if 200 people are pissed about the turbine before it even gets built, it will create an ongoing liability and source of anger that will infect any future city discussions about green energy, and that's not what we want to happen.

One thing that I can say with certainty is this – statistical correlation is not proof. Back in the day, one of the world’s best

statisticians was hired by big tobacco to go on the record and say that the correlation between smoking and cancer is not proof that

smoking causes cancer. There’s a saying in statistics: “Correlation does not imply causation.” The big tobacco argument was this –

even though the data between smoking and cancer is linked, you can’t say smoking caused cancer. It could very well be that people

who develop lung cancer start smoking in order to establish some kind of relief from the illness i.e. lung cancer gives people the

urge to smoke. Of course, this was back in the day before they had good proof. Until they found the biological mechanism through

which cigarette smoke causes cancer, the big tobacco argument held. All a correlation does is state whether or not two variables

move together. Proof only comes by knowing the direct cause.

I was actually discussing this whole thing the other day at work and one of our directors made an interesting comment. He said that

he becomes physically ill whenever he has to look at a monitor that’s set at 80 Hz – he can see it flickering. I had never heard of that

before. I certainly have no problem and, I suspect, most others don’t either. He’s extra sensitive to visual stimuli. How do we prove

that? I don’t think we can. We just have to take his word for it. It’s not much different with this. Unless you can physically measure

what’s happening in a person’s brain while they are being made sick by Low Frequency Noise, you will never have scientific proof. In

this case, however, I don’t believe that you need it.

The fact remains that the majority of the neighborhood do not want this turbine installed near them. Unless there is a compelling

socio-economic reason to install it, it MUST go away. Unless this turbine is necessary to sustain the power grid for the next ten

years, they MUST listen to the community. This isn’t like the railroad or the Queen Elizabeth power station. This is just some pilot

project, isn’t it?

14 | P a g e

LETTER FROM A SASKATOON PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER

On the surface, I don’t see how these promises can be made. At the very least, there is not enough solid evidence out

there to state facts like these. Everything seems to be controversial and open to interpretation.

It bothers me that these things are being said in this manner.

I have completed reading through the RFP and the thing most obviously missing is any requirement to meet a sound

threshold. The SRC study is not mentioned. No international standard is required. Instead it suggests that bidders MAY

include sound data with their submission. MAY and MUST are not even close to the same thing. There is a review and

recommendation format included to guide the proponents in the value of each part of their submission. Technical

criteria is weighted 20% of the total. Presumably sound/noise/vibration are among that 20% in addition to the actual

turbine components and installation and everything else that qualifies as technical. I am left wondering how the

selection will be made if no minimum standard is set or if sound data does not accompany the submission (MAY include).

I have asked Saskatoon Light & Power repeatedly what noise criteria is used. He has not answered. As of last night,

Saskatoon Light & Power sent me an e-mail that says he will no longer respond to my questions unless I funnel them

through the Wind Turbine Coalition. I have been trying to remain neutral through this so that I can try to translate

information as impartially as possible.

I have been trying to get comment on:

1. What requirements do the proponents need to meet or exceed for noise and how do they know and report this?

2. Who authored the SRC sound report and what is their expertise?

3. Who provided the financial input into the spreadsheet economic analysis?

As far as ‘The Low Frequency Noise ends at Valley Road’ I would like that to come from the acoustics expert that

authored the SRC report. I am not an acoustics expert but I am a mechanical engineer who uses acoustics in practice.

From my small knowledge, low frequency sound is less attenuated in air than high frequencies. That should make it

more likely to travel further. Also, I am aware or criticism in using dBA as the sound scale for this type of application.

dBA is a weighted scale that mixes all frequencies together then derates the low frequencies. Those are the same

frequencies of concern with this project.

If ‘No one in Montgomery will ever hear the wind turbine’ why is there not a strong requirement in the RFP for this?

Also, I had heard from a number of people that had been told that once the RFP is issued and as long as it closed at or

below it’s budget, that it must be awarded. This is not even close to being true and I hope that this is not being said by

anyone from the City. I can find numerous clauses in the document that state to the proponents that the RFP can be

cancelled at any time or not awarded without prejudice and without penalty.

15 | P a g e

SOMETHING TO CONSIDER ABOUT LOW FREQUENCY NOISE AND HEALTH

As you have read in the health reports posted to City website by Saskatoon Light & Power, those reports try to

explain why wind turbines do not cause health effects. What they are saying is that there is not any concrete proof

that the wind turbines cause health effects. Both documents acknowledge that there are a lot of people reporting

health problems near turbines.

One of the strongest arguments for the health problems is low frequency noise.

The governing body for wind turbines implemented in Canada is the REA (Renewable Energy Approval).

Due to concerns about low frequency noise, the REA was proposing that wind farm operators and wind turbine

manufacturers monitor low frequency noise.

RENEWAL ENERGY APPROVAL SUGGESTING LFN SHOULD BE MONITORED:

"Going forward, the Ministry of the Environment will develop the science to monitor

and measure low frequency noise, as currently there are no established and

accepted protocols. In the future, wind farm operators may be required, through

conditions of the Renewable Energy Approval, to monitor and address perceptible

low frequency noise once acceptable protocols for doing so have been established"

CANWEA OPPOSING LOW FREQUENCY NOISE MONITORING:

Comments submitted to the Ministry of Environment by Robert Hornung,

President of the industrial lobby group the Canadian Wind Energy

Association (CanWEA) stated: “…CanWEA submits that the proposed

requirement for infrasound or low frequency noise monitoring as a

condition of the REA [Renewable Energy Approval] be removed.”"

Why would a CANWEA make such a request? Most turbine towers already have hundreds of alarms and sensors.

WHY NOT ADD MONITORING DEVICES FOR LOW FREQUENCY NOISE?

….something to think about

A

APPENDIX A - PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND AWARENESS

i

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION SPECTRUM (WHAT THE CITY SHOULD HAVE DONE)

B

APPENDIX B – WIND TURBINE SIZE COMPARISON

i

WIND TURBINE - SIZE COMPARISON CHART (ACTUAL SCALE)

C

APPENDIX C – WIND ASSESSMENT VERSUS PROPOSAL TO COUNCIL

i

SASKATOON LIGHT AND POWER WIND ASSESSMENT

SASKATOON LIGHT AND POWER PROPOSAL TO COUNCIL