A growing storm about possible health issues linked to wind turbines must not be allowed to blow our renewables programme off track, says Bob Towse, head of technical and safety at the HVCA.
The issue about nuisance noise from wind turbines refuses to go away. UK housing minister John Healey has announced plans to relax planning laws to make it easier for building owners to erect wind turbines close to their properties.

Currently only 25% of applications to erect turbines get the immediate go ahead from planning authorities. More do get through on appeal but a very large number of wind projects are blocked successfully by local residents. Aesthetic issues can be a concern but, in the majority of cases, it is noise that troubles the objectors.

Many protestors have produced 'evidence' that noise from wind turbines is not just a nuisance but can also cause ill health. Lack of sleep, stress and even internal organ damage have been cited as serious health issues for those living within hearing distance of a turbine or wind farm.
However, one of the world's foremost acoustic engineering experts has rubbished such claims. He believes that noise annoyance is being used as an excuse to spread alarm and increase opposition to wind power.

Former Institute of Acoustics president Geoff Leventhall told a recent meeting of the CIBSE/ASHRAE Group at London South Bank University that turbines can cause 'annoyance', which could be linked to stress, but that there was no evidence to suggest noise from wind farms was directly linked to physical health problems.

Professor Leventhall has been involved as an expert witness in a number of legal cases where 'victims' have made claims about harm caused by low frequency infrasound waves from wind turbines. In one case in the US, the claimant said infrasound caused vibrations in the human diaphragm sending confusing signals to internal organs.

'This is simply not true,' said Leventhall. 'Some people have set out to create alarm by saying that infrasound is dangerous and can cause something called 'Wind Turbine Syndrome'. The symptoms of this are psychological rather than physiological.'

To avoid creating annoyance, wind turbines should be placed at a sensible distance from homes, he added. He said the rule of thumb was the distance of the turbine from the nearest inhabitation should be four times its height.

Most UK planners currently insist on a distance of 400m to 500m between houses and turbines, which should be perfectly adequate, according to the professor.
Noise is clearly an issue here but it is important to keep the argument on a sound scientific footing and not be distracted by vested interests set on disrupting our ability to generate much needed power from renewable sources.

More on-site renewable developments are set to go ahead under the housing minister's plans, which are now the subject of a three month consultation process, but noise levels will be restricted to a maximum of 45dBA. Wind turbines up to 15m in height would be permitted in industrial parks and in remote areas where they would not disturb residents.

This sounds eminently sensible and any relaxation of planning restrictions must not compromise the quality of life of residents. However, equally, we must not allow scare stories based on questionable evidence to skew the argument and restrict our ability to meet our future energy needs through a mixture of renewable sources, including wind.