If I remember correctly Mike Sigwood of MAS has already published a paper showing how the Den Brook AM condition can be applied...by actually applying it to real world wind farm noise data! I do hope the locals have the funds to defend the planning condition.

and another one..

http://eplanning.east-ayrshire.gov.uk/online/caseFile.do?category=application&caseNo=11%2F0782%2FPP

http://eplanning.east-ayrshire.gov.uk/online/files/D41D0F25C34DF6008BF6DA897B86F35C/pdf/document-121031.pdf

Turbine 210 within 868 meters
Turbine 211 within 873 meters
Turbine 212 within 869 meters
Turbine 214 within 652 meters

snip

....the property at High Overmuir has been rendered uninhabitable and has consequently been vacant for a long time period. The wind farm operation and close proximity of wind turbines has in effect, blighted the property at High Overmuir for both residential and for agricultural use.

Anyone like to hazard a guess as to the level of accuracy sound meters, approved to the highest international standard, are? Or the level of accuracy of the calibration devices that are used to set those meters and approved to the same international standard?

Don't google it first please - I'd really like to know what people's off-the-cuff assumptions might be.

Level of accuracy as described by plus or minus x.x dB.

Posted By: tedDon't google it first please - I'd really like to know what people's off-the-cuff assumptions might be.

Level of accuracy as described by plus or minus x.x dB.

OK. I'll guess at 0.001 dB. Now I'll google it!

The Welsh Ass. Government petitions committee, following those submissions about wind farm noise, have recommended a minimum separation distance from a turbine (size? not sure) to a dwelling to be 500m. Not sure this will make much actual difference because I think that the wind farm developers use this distance as a minimum anyway. So that's achieved a lot then.

JSH- I think that a 3dB(A) increase in sound is the smallest step change that we can discern and that a 6dB(A) increase is perceived as doubling the loudness. You are right about the (A) weighting being representing the approximate response of the human ear - that human ear being US soldiers. So it might be a bit different for you if you're a 50 something woman! Not you personally JH.

If that 1500m separation distance was written into the Welsh planning guidance, how applicable could it be made to the situation in England, or indeed in the UK as a whole? Do Welsh precedents carry any weight in English planning law?

Swot.

Sorry about the misinformation, getting all my figures wrong today; 1500m not 500, 1 not 3, 3 not 6. I should pay more attention - it must be that noisy turbine outside!

Planners should take a "precautionary approach" to the health effects of wind farms says Australia NHMRC...

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/caution-backed-on-wind-turbine-health-link/story-e6frg8y6-1226375601690

Selected extracts..

"A NATIONAL Health and Medical Research Council recommendation for caution when considering wind-farm developments was appropriate pending a thorough investigation of possible adverse effects of turbines on residents, the chairman of a NHMRC review has said. "

"There is currently no published scientific evidence to positively link wind turbines with adverse health effects," it says.

"While there is currently no evidence linking these phenomena with adverse health effects, the evidence is limited. Therefore it is recommended that relevant authorities take a precautionary approach and continue to monitor research outcomes."

"The Australian reported on Monday that Queensland Health's director of environmental health, David Sellars, recommended a "precautionary approach" be taken to approval of the proposed $500 million Mount Emerald wind farm near Walkamin on the Atherton Tablelands. "Queensland Health recommended wind-farm planning applications be carefully considered, given there is a growing body of evidence to suggest there may be adverse health effects associated with the noise generated by wind farms," Mr Sellers said in a letter to the Tablelands Regional Council"

Anyone know what this story is about? Just H&S over blown or ??

http://news.stv.tv/scotland/98843-wind-turbine-operations-suspended-at-16-schools-over-safety-fears/

Wind turbine operations suspended at 16 schools over safety fears

Wind turbine operations have been suspended at 16 schools across the Highlands after parents raised concerns over safety.

Highland Council says the turbines have been stopped as a "precautionary measure" while a review is carried out.

The local authority commissioned an evaluation of wind turbine installation at their schools, after concerns were raised by some parents and councillors.

Following the initial report from the Building Research Establishment (BRE), the decision was made to temporarily suspend operations at all 16 schools.

The turbines are located at three secondary schools and 13 primary schools across the Highland region.

Steven Barron, housing and property director, said: "There has been a great deal of interest and some concern about the planning and installation of wind turbines on school sites.

"Following representations from elected members and the public, the council commenced a review of the risk assessment process and the installations of wind turbines at council schools.

"Based on initial feedback from BRE and taking account of the council’s own enhanced risk assessment tool, the decision has been taken to suspend operation of the turbines which are sited in or adjacent to school sites.

"This is a precautionary measure which will allow time for proper consideration of the findings of the BRE reports when we receive them over the next few weeks.

There is no such thing as climate change either, and if there is then it certainly isn't caused by human activity.

An extra 20% height may significantly increase your generation, which may be worth the money anyway...

Rgds

Damon

Posted By: renewablejohnFor the extra 6 mtrs the consultants are wanting an additional £2500 fee for planning surely it does not make that amount of difference.

If the turbine does not have a manufactures option for the 36 mtr tower then all the calcs. will probably have to be done to prove the tower will take the load. The standard option should have all the necessary data with the unit - step away from the manufacture's standard and the cash registers will start to ring in the planning office.

Posted By: Peter_in_Hungary

Posted By: renewablejohnFor the extra 6 mtrs the consultants are wanting an additional £2500 fee for planning surely it does not make that amount of difference.

If the turbine does not have a manufactures option for the 36 mtr tower then all the calcs. will probably have to be done to prove the tower will take the load. The standard option should have all the necessary data with the unit - step away from the manufacture's standard and the cash registers will start to ring in the planning office.

Its a standard manufacturers option which they use on island locations and is used for turbine erection without the need of a crane

<blockquote>For the extra 6 mtrs the consultants are wanting an additional £2500 fee for planning surely it does not make that amount of difference.</blockquote>

Your council has some freedom specify the level of detail that has to be included in the EIA. It's quite possible this is based on the height of the turbine. So the extra cost might not be down to the consultant you have hired, he might just be doing what the planners tell him.