Noise from wind farms has been known of for decades. The first wind farm that I saw, at Carland Cross, was erected in the 80's and was shut down soon after being put up because of noise complaints. There followed a lengthy period of modification to the turbines, and pay-offs to those worst affected, before the turbines were up and running again.

Wind farm developers know full well there are potential noise problems. They also know full well that they can use the current method of assessment to their advantage. They usually can't really be bothered with complaints after the turbines are up and running, because 9 times out of 10 the complainants can't do anything more than complain. The chances of a wind farm being forced to shut down because of low frequency noise complaints is low - if it does look as if one or two locals might just go so far as to take them to court they'll just pay them off.

There's big money to be made, and the wind farm developers know that current noise legislation it isn't really adequate in terms of protecting nearby residents from the low frequency noise their turbines will make. They can always claim that they've followed the rules though, so the noise problem isn't their "fault", unless a group get together and are canny enough to use other means to prove nuisance.

Joiner: the BWEA claimed it renamed because it now encompasses non-wind renewables, eg marine.

Hmmm. (Sorry Ed, that smiley was to Damon's post about the ex-BWEA.)

Something I've also found is an increasing discontent amongst people who are passionately pushing for changes to the UK energy philosophy and who generally follow the AECB line of putting our money where it has the greatest positive impact and the least harm, but who find that signing on to local "sustainable" groups they find themselves implicitly committed to onshore wind and shouted down when it comes to deciding what "local" policies to pursue if they suggest a local wind farm scheme might not be such a good idea after all, that perhaps such a scheme should be considered more closely given the growing concerns over noise and actual effectiveness. One retired schoolteacher said that she'd been appalled by the aggressive reaction she'd got when she'd asked such a question at her first meeting of such a group.

I do believe there is a link between the psychological effect on sound and what people can see. I my base his upon my daily interaction with customers and them having a demo ( hifi av shop/dealer ). I have yet had a customer who is prepared to listen to a selection of speakers or the connected equipment blind. The fear of the unknown maybe? Is what I have just wrote at all relevant hmmm.....

The science of sound should be looked at and the way it is presented to people. I do struggle to believe that people would be so nieve to think that something like a wind turbine would create no noise. Additionally the companies installing them should not able to state as such.

I don't want to go off subject, but maybe some people just simply don't like the change that infringes on what they have become accustomed too? I know of plenty of people appealing against new house builds in the country side near me for nothing more than it will ruin their view. If one person can live there why can another not?

The building of large turbines near residential sites is probably not in any residents best interest from a sound point of view at least as visually they cannt keep you awake. But at what point or number does this become irrelevant? For example there are the people who complaining about off shore wind turbines not far from me, it cannt be the noise, but visual I guess.

Do people just have a noise issue or is it actually a lot more than this? Do they choose the noise issue as this is probably the only point the can argue on in court? Would peoples issues go away if from the revenue a proportion went directly into the local parish community, I know we could do with more bus shelters, trees planting, flowers reduced parish council tax bill. I did speak to a local mp about this who informed me this went on allot in Germany which helps to appease the community, win win?

I hope my rambling is kind of on subject as I rarely join in on these discussions, i take joy in reading all the interesting comments and guides and hints that people post.

One way to test the effects noise may be to see if any livestock are effected by it, pigs would be interesting specimens to work with as they are physically similar to us but unaffected by the social constructs we surround ourselves with.

Just to share...

Some more useful links from recent research - the first couple of these get referenced in planning documents as defining best practice:

JOR3-CT95-0091 Development of a Wind farm Noise Propagation Prediction Model,
Bass J H, Bullmore A J, and Sloth E, Final Report for EU Contract JOR3-CT95-0051, 1998.
http://cordis.europa.eu/documents/documentlibrary/47698071EN6.pdf

Prediction and assessment of wind turbine noise – agreement about relevant factors for noise
assessment from wind energy projects. D Bowdler, AJ Bullmore, RA Davis, MD Hayes, M
Jiggins, G Leventhall, AR McKenzie. Institute of Acoustics, Acoustics Bulletin, Vol 34, No 2
March/April 2009
http://sulgravepc.wikispaces.com/file/view/IOA_Paper_Assesment+of+TURBINE_NOISE.pdf

Evans, T., and Cooper, J, 2012, Comparison of Predicted and Measured Wind Farm Noise Levels and Implications for Assessments of New Wind Farms - Acoustics Australia, Vol. 40, No. 1, April 2012
http://www.acoustics.asn.au/journal/2012/2012_40_1_Evans.pdf

Wondollek, M., 2009, Sound from wind turbines in forest areas (thesis)
http://www.utn.uu.se/sts/cms/filarea/0901_wondollek.pdf

Posted By: CWattersNormally goes to into a tightly controlled scheme to make sure locals can't use the money to pay for noise monitoring equipment or mount a nusiance action

You old cynic

You are correct, I believe there is normally a payment paid to the local councils, but not to the actual parish councils pocket where the turbines reside in. And the parish is where I guess the problems actually are.
For example my local parish would like to build a skate park I believe for the children to hangout at, which the local children have asked for. But the parish council doesn't have the money in the budget, the local council won't pay even though they will have received monies from the wind turbines. And we might as well forget the district council as they are so out of touch it's not worth talking about.
I wonder how the village where I live could transform based on those sort of annual payments. That's a lot of new bus shelters and seats for people to sit on rather than stand in the rain and wind! (oh yeh thats why I end up using my car in adverse weather rather than the bus or my preferred cycle)
Anyway that's enough of me moaning about wanting more bus stop shelters!!!

Posted By: renewablejohnWell despite the contents of this thread I have finally pushed the button to apply for planning permission on two 250kw wind turbines on the farm. I will keep you all informed on the planning process but I am not optimistic having already taken 8 years just to secure permission on an agricultural building.

Good luck. Although it may not allways seem like it I do support them in the right places.

Posted By: englishjohnFor example my local parish would like to build a skate park I believe for the children to hangout at, which the local children have asked for. But the parish council doesn't have the money in the budget, the local council won't pay even though they will have received monies from the wind turbines.

FWIW, our district council did build a simple structure for skateboarding, so it may be a matter of effective politicking. But surely the parish council sets its precept, so if the parish really does want a skatepark, the council could set the precept accordingly and still hope to get re-elected.

JS, Carland Cross was a very early turbine and technology has moved on. You now have noise reducing controls on machines. Carland Cross had kW turbines installed but science shows that AM is more of an issue with larger rotor diameter turbines in the region of 80mtrs not the Carland Cross 34mtrs. Turbines have improved but that is not to say that issues do not still arise these days.
I still say that all companies are not the same. I agree RES did the industry no favours at all.

Joiner-

We certainly have plenty of wind. I am fed up of replacing polytunnel plastic and tin roofs peeled off buildings like a tin opener due to the wind. Maybe using the wind as an asset instead of a liability might give me a more positive attitude. I could have gone for one 500kw instead of 2 x 250kw but I am sure that would result in higher noise levels. Could soon have some fun here as 3 proposals have gone in for private 500kw turbines all within 1 mile of each other on sensitive moorland. Hope it does not spoil it for me.

I liked her when the programme started, but by the end could happily have poked her in the eye!

I thought something like that must be happening as I saw that RES were saying they expected to start building the Den Brook wind farm in early 2013.

Given all that has gone before I cannot see how a variation can be allowed. I've read the research that RES have commissioned into measuring AM and was not impressed by it overall. They basically claim that using the definitions of AM from the Den Brook conditions means that AM is detectable almost everywhere - even with no wind turbines present. But they fail to put forward any explanation of why this might be so.