News 
 State News 
 Agribusiness and General 
 General 
 Wind farms turn neighbours green ... with envy 

Wind farms turn neighbours green ... with envy

24 Jan, 2012 02:28 PM
OPPOSITION to wind farms is based on “mass hysteria” and there is not a shred of evidence globally that wind turbines have adverse health impacts, according to University of Sydney Professor of Public Health Simon Chapman.

Professor Chapman undertook a major review of international literature and said there was absolutely no evidence to support the concept of “wind turbine syndrome” that opponents say causes sleeplessness, headaches and high blood pressure.

But he said people could worry themselves into being ill.

“You can worry yourself sick, of course, that is a well-known phenomenon, you get worried and agitated and have palpitations but the idea the actual turbines cause it, there is no support in the literature at all.”

He said research studies showed complaints tended to be from people who did not have turbines on their land and therefore did not derive any income from them.

“The literature explicitly identifies the variable of envy. If your neighbour has wind turbines they are getting a minimum of $10,000 per turbine and you start to think it is unfair, you think about relative land values, maybe you don’t like the look of them."

He said opposition to wind farms was “hysteria” and people in Europe, where wind farms had been well established for two decades, were perplexed and bemused by the idea wind turbines could have negative health impacts.

“A lot of the reviews talk about infrasound which is sub-audible sound you can’t hear, making you ill. We get a lot of every day infrasound – the sound of our heartbeat in our chest. It’s everywhere.

“You’ve got to take some of these claims with a grain of salt,” he said.

Professor Chapman dismissed claims by NSW Landscape Guardians president Humphrey Price-Jones that reports existed that proved adverse impacts from turbines.

“That is absolute nonsense,” he said.

The NSW Government has insisted it will take a “precautionary approach” to wind farm development despite NSW Health Department there is no evidence of adverse health impacts.

NSW Planning Minister Brad Hazzard, whose office has released draft guidelines on wind farms for public comment, said “the jury is still out on the health impacts from wind farms”.

“When it comes to people’s health – I’ll take a precautionary approach every time,” Mr Hazzard said.

“But in any case my view is consistent with NSW Health’s comments to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure that strong wind farm planning guidelines can minimise impacts on human health.

“It also is consistent with the June 2011 Senate inquiry into the social and economic impacts of wind farms, which found there was a need for further studies into wind farm health impacts and that State noise standards should cover low frequency noise.

“In addition, the National Health and Medical Research Council is also currently looking at this issue and proposing to issue a public statement later this year,” Mr Hazzard said in a statement to The Land.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
If they want to take a precautionary approach to health then what is the NSW government's attitude to new roads? coal mines? etc. I heard that some of these new developments can actually cause tangible, actual, terrible and proven deaths. Should we use a precautionary approach to everything we do in NSW? Bubble wrap everything, mobile phone buy-back schemes? No new cars on the roads? What about plastics?

I can't express my disappointment with the coalition state government enough!

Posted by Bluegum, 24/01/2012 3:36:12 PM, on The Land
"Wind farms turn neighbours green with envy."

Only a university professor could have dreamed up that one.

I have hated the sight of the bloody monstrosities since a tour of the UK in 1982 when I first saw them strung across the hillside of what had been one of the most beautiful river valleys in the world.

They are an ugly looking monument to the failure of professorialism & it is befitting of blind professorial arrogance that they think we envy their ugly ingenuity.

Posted by jock, 24/01/2012 6:28:30 PM, on The Land
What a joke the NSW planning dept' and O'Farrell are!

Denial of Science (and peer reviewed research) is something from the 15th Century!

Get with it, close down your support for the CSG that is going to destroy our food bowl for low impact and clean Renewable Wind Energy.

Just remember, we all get hungry and the soil that feeds us is becoming scarce, not to mention DOUBLE the amount of Salt the MDB in the next decade from CSG - clear to me what we need in NSW.

The Mum on this 7:30 report says it like it is Wind Farm Syndrome - "that's just a myth" http://bit.ly/oualCB

Posted by broken_gate, 24/01/2012 8:14:08 PM, on The Land
There ugly alright. And still don't produce enough electricity. Go nuclear and keep the impact on the surrouding area to a minimum.
Posted by David, 25/01/2012 7:58:38 AM, on The Land
Re Jock's comment: Professor Simon Chapman is saying there is no evidence that will withstand scrutiny that conclusively demonstrates adverse health impacts as a result of wind turbines.

He is not saying people may not have aesthetic issues or that there is no noise from turbines, just that there is no evidence of adverse health impacts.


Posted by Bronwyn Farr, 25/01/2012 8:34:54 AM, on The Land
Chapman's use of such emotive interpretations of other people's motives is both unprofessional and unscientific. But it is entirely consistent with the standard shonkademic MO when delivering ideology-on-demand masquerading as considered opinion based on fact.

The irony is that someone of Chapman's background should stoop to using the standard Tobacco Industry ploy of absent proof. Given the very recent nature of large scale wind turbines, the proper longitudinal studies can't possibly be complete, even if they managed to get the funding.


Posted by Ian Mott, 25/01/2012 12:08:10 PM, on The Land
Simon Chapman is becoming increasingly IRRELEVANT to the health debate.

He shuffles through papers in his office, attacks characters, and misleads the public, and bothers not to even encourage research into the area.

While far too many rural residents are having the health destroyed and being utterly insulted.

Posted by George, 25/01/2012 1:33:37 PM, on The Land
Denmark has 3000 Onshore wind turbines. You can fit Denmark into Victoria 5 times and it has a 50pc larger population.

They do not have these issues. These issues exist in Australia due to the strength of the fossil fuel interests. Over 85pc of the public support wind and solar power and the only serious thing going against the wind is funded by big coal and big oil.


Posted by Matthew Wrght, 25/01/2012 4:05:54 PM, on The Land
RE: Matthew Wright

Denmark doesn't have any issues? That's an interesting claim.

That is why one of the leading accousticians in Denmark has had to speak out publicly and attack the government and industry.

And that is why Vestas last year had lobbied their government to soften its proposed limits on infrasound as its new turbines wouldn't comply.

The Wind industry equates to a legacy of trampling over the health and serenity of populace all in the name of money: a quiet, peaceful environment is another matter.

Posted by George, 26/01/2012 6:57:39 AM, on The Land
Same old brainwashing of people to support an industry which uses carbon credits and backup from coal or gas to supply energy to exist. The turbines are industrial and therefore complexes and have proven to be inefficient and costly. Scotland just raised electricity prices by 10% because it cost 2.6 billion pounds to keep them idle during warm weather. It has cost the UK government 6.5 billion pounds to give the industry carbon credits (RET's). Denmark sells its wind energy to other countries and buys from other countries and the consumer pays for the loss.DO THE RESEARCH.
Posted by genie81, 17/02/2012 10:02:23 AM, on The Land
1 | 2  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES

Most popular articles

Advertisement



The Land







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...