30/10/12 Wind farm rules

Dear Editor,

 New empirical research, just published, shows clearly that the guidelines, known as ETSU,  in determining an acceptable distance between wind turbines and human dwellings, are "not fit for purpose".  Researchers, such as  Cox, Unwin, and Sherwin, give a large number of reasons in their assessment of this problem but concentrate on turbine noise impact. One area of considerable importance is that ETSU allows developers to ignore the impact of low frequency sound and infrasound. Other research from sleep expert, Dr.Hanning, and from all over the world, shows clearly that exposure to these types of sound cause neurological problems to residents. So it is not surprising that people who live near the existing wind farm near Gwyddgrug have, for several years, been experiencing  sleeplessness and a variety of allied problems, despite the fact that the developers kept to ETSU guidelines in the placing of their wind turbines.

.

 On the 20th November, Carmarthen Council will have to decide  whether or not to give planning permission to a proposed 21 giant turbines at Bryn Llywelyn, close by the existing wind farm mentioned above. The developers, RES, have used ETSU guidelines in the positioning of these potential new turbines (much bigger than the existing ones) so it is very possible  that even more people will have their health undermined, should permission be given. Not to mention many other problems such as reduced property values and a negative impact on tourism.

I'm probably naive but I always assumed that government's main role is to look after the well being of its citizens; perhaps that role doesn't apply to countryside dwellers. In fact, both the British and the Welsh governments have, in the recent past, refused to order a review of ETSU, despite their own research( via DEFRA) pointing out the problems arising from these guidelines. Need I say more?

In this letter, I have entered in  italics those words removed by the editors of the Carmarthen Journal.

10/10/12 Destroyed in Seconds

On the evening of 24 August, the Quest TV channel broadcast an item called 'Destroyed in Seconds'. It showed a wind turbine in Denmark being literally blown apart,very rapidly indeed. Apparantly, in responding to a sudden wind squall, this turbine was unable to turn itself off due to a failure of its braking system. Large chunks of debris were flung into the air and passed over the roof of a house way beyond the 400 metre safety radius, according to the resident; luckily nobody was hurt because there was a few minute's notice before the event.
This incident has implications for the current Bryn Llwelyn proposal to place turbines near the Mountain Road leading from Llanllwni. RES, has stated that nobody has ever been hurt by the normal operation of a wind farm but in real life, abnormal things happen including lightning strikes, ice build up, blade or bearing failure as well as extreme weather. There have been a numberof these instances in recent times all over Europe as well as in the U.K., sometimes leading to unquenchable fires.
In this local case, if granted peremission, there would be 2 giant turbines 250 and 300 metres from the Mountain Road on its windward  side so that any passing traffic or parked tourists in the area would be put at extreme risk from turbine failure. Worse still, there is no proposal to fence off any of the planned 21 giant turbines from the public or grazing animals so the risk of injury would be widespread to put it mildly! All this despite the fact that guidelines from a well known wind turbine supplier organisation in their Wind Turbine Mechanical Operating and Maintenance Manual state "Do not stay within a radius of 400 metres from the turbines unless it is necessary".
It is clera to me that, for a number of reasons, if we really needto have these giant industrial machines despoiling our countryside, they should be placed at least 2 kilometres from any human occupation and the turbines themselves should be surrounded by fencing at least 750 metres away. Anything less than these measures would be a clear breach of public health and safety - it seems that RES have not heard of the precautionary principle!