Posted by: WCFN | December 12, 2014

Renewable energy kills 900 jobs

Alcoa to close two plants in Spain
High cost of energy to blame

Alcoa plant in Avilés

“Alcoa’s Spanish power costs could lead to closures” (unless subsidies are granted)
See the article: Spanish power costs

A Spanish news media puts it this way: “El cierre de Alcoa en España levanta a la industria contra el alto coste de la energía”
Translation: the closure of Alcoa in Spain causes the industrial sector to stand up against the high cost of energy.

In the article we read: “[Alcoa] ha anunciado un despido colectivo que supone, de hecho, el cierre de dos de sus seis fábricas en España, la de Avilés (Asturias) y A Coruña.”
Translation: [Alcoa] has announced a cut in its workforce which means, effectively, the closure of two of its six plants (in Spain), those of Avilés (Asturias) and La Coruña [Galicia].”

Workers protest - Alcoa

Read more:
El cierre de Alcoa en España

Our comments:
The protests were shown on Spanish television last night, and mentioned in the regional newspaper La Voz de Galicia But as usual, the Spanish media WON’T mention the high cost of renewable energy, responsible for this new fiasco… Obfuscation reigns supreme, and the blame will be put on the usual culprits: multinational corporations, energy companies, capitalism…

Alcoa has closed other plants in Australia and Italy: countries with costly renewable energy can’t compete with China’s expanding aluminum industry, fuelled by cheap, abundant coal energy. See: Reuters on Alcoa Australia


Note: if an ad appears below, it’s from WordPress, not from WCFN. WordPress is free of charge, but publicity is how they recoup their costs. We regret that our budget does not permit us to afford an ad-free webpage.

Posted by: WCFN | November 8, 2014

Wind farms and torture

torture 6

Wind farms: criminal charges for torture?

Public Statement from the Waubra Foundation:

Public Officials At Risk of Criminal Charges for Torture, by Ignoring Prolonged Sleep Deprivation from Environmental Noise


All public officials involved in the investigation, assessment and regulation of environmental noise, or in giving authoritative advice on that matter, are at personal risk of being charged with a serious criminal offence under Australian law, based on international human rights covenants and conventions, if their actions and decisions lead to, or are complicit in, prolonged sleep deprivation for residents in excessive noise impacted communities. (1)

[Our comment: it goes without saying that this applies not only to Australian public officials, but to those of other countries that have adopted international human rights covenants and conventions.]

Prolonged Sleep Deprivation Confirmed As A Method Of Torture

The UN Committee Against Torture (UN CAT) has explicitly identified prolonged sleep deprivation as a method of torture. The Committee had this to say about the impact of prolonged sleep deprivation:

The Committee against Torture (CAT) has noted that sleep deprivation used for prolonged periods constitutes a breach of the CAT, and is primarily used to break down the will of the detainee. Sleep deprivation can cause impaired memory and cognitive functioning, decreased short term memory, speech impairment, hallucinations, psychosis, lowered immunity, headaches, high blood pressure, cardiovascular disease, stress, anxiety and depression. (2)

The Physicians for Human Rights also consider sleep deprivation as well as sensory bombardment with noise to be methods of torture, and list the clinical evidence of the harm to physical and mental health, and the legal precedents to support this opinion in their document “Leave No Marks”. (3)

We therefore bring to the attention of all public officials, including elected officials and public servants, that if they are complicit in allowing torture and cruel inhuman and degrading treatment to occur, or to continue, this behaviour is punishable with criminal offences, under the provisions of the UN Convention Against Torture, to which Australia is a signatory.

torture 2

Article 4 of the UN Convention Against Torture and Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment states:

    • Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law. The same shall apply to an attempt to commit torture and to an act by any person which constitutes complicity or participation in torture.
    • Each State Party shall make these offences punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account their grave nature. (18)”

[Our comment: most countries have enacted international human rights covenants and conventions. It behooves everyone concerned by sleep disruption issues at wind farms to check the applicable legislation in their respective countries regarding human rights and torture, and complain to the public officials involved in the approval of wind farms which are known to cause this form of torture. And no, the word is not too strong. We know a number of windfarm neighbours who have contemplated suicide and may some day act upon it. Others, no doubt, already have, but this is something their families may not be willing to speak about.]

There is no legal excuse for any public official to allow torture to occur, not even “following orders”.
[Our comment: this point is really important, and windfarm victims should consult it with their lawyers.]

torture 4

[The Waubra Foundation concludes:]
Legal action may be initiated at any time in the future against individuals who have authorized, participated in or advised activities constituting torture.

Read more: Prolonged sleep deprivation = torture, says the UN

[Our comment: viewed from another angle, windfarm victims are being experimented upon without their informed consent, which is against the provisions of the Nuremberg code. Curt Devlin gave a powerful talk at Falmouth about this: VIDEO: experimenting on windfarm neighbours .]


1) – (1) Information about the variety of sources of environmental night time noise including coal mines, gas fired power stations, gas fired power stations, CSG field compressors and wind turbines is detailed here:

2) –
Original source for this quote is at:

3) –
This document can also be sourced from the Physicians for Human Rights website library at:

18) –


Note: if an ad appears below, it’s from WordPress, not from WCFN. WordPress is free of charge, but publicity is how they recoup their costs. We regret that our budget does not allow us to afford an ad-free webpage.

Posted by: WCFN | October 20, 2014

Infrasound in the news

Note: Infrasound & Low Frequency Noise is often referred to as “ILFN”

infrasound -
Simulation of infrasound waves propagating in the atmosphere
Source: BGR


Health Board: wind turbines are a hazard to human health

October 17th, 2014
GLENMORE, WISCONSIN, USA: “This week the Brown County Health Board went on record declaring that wind turbines “are a human health hazard“.

Folks living in the Glenmore area near the Shirley Wind Project have been saying this for years though, and now they have the health department on their side. By state statute wind turbines can be within 1250 feet of a home. The Brown County Board of Health says that’s too close for comfort.”

Read more: windfarm a health hazard  — don’t miss the video

The wording of the motion was as follows:

To Declare The Industrial Wind Turbines In The Town Of Glenmore, Brown County. WI. A Human Health Hazard For All People (Residents, Workers, Visitors, And Sensitive Passersby) Who Are Exposed To Infrasound/Low Frequency Noise And Other Emissions Potentially Harmful To Human Health.”

Read more: ILFN potentially harmful

wind turbine effects on the inner ear


Windfarm victims worldwide will feel vincicated by this:

In Plympton Wyoming, Ontario, Canada, complaints from windfarm victims “will lead to investigations and hefty fines. This is the first bylaw directly referencing ILFN and demanding fines of between $500 to $10,000 per day, and which may be, the bylaw states, in excess of $100,000.

The bylaw references charging fees to developers if ILFN causes residents problems. Common effects are, from chronic unrelenting noise: sleep disorders, hormone level disruption, increased risk of disease, diabetes, hypertension, depression, heart arrhythmias, and possibly even cancer.”

Read more: a groundbreaking Wind Turbine Noise bylaw

BACK IN 2013, STEPHEN AMBROSE, Board Certified Member of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering and a Full Member of the Acoustical Society of America, testified in front of the Vermont Senate Natural Resources Committee:

Regulatory boards are now unable to protect public health and wellbeing because the wind turbine industry has substituted their own measurement and assessment procedures through international committees.

The wind turbine acoustic standards differ dramatically from other noise sources. Wind turbines are evaluated using A- weighted sound levels by removing all low frequency and infrasound from consideration. A-weighting lowers infrasound levels by 50 dB at 20 Hz and 70 dB at 10 Hz. This promotes false statements that wind turbines do not produce infrasound.

“I have measured infrasound using a sound level meter and a microbarograph. I have experienced the adverse health effects caused by infrasound. Again, I felt miserable with a headache, nausea, loss of cognitive ability, sleep interference and interruption.

“I felt better when only a few miles away from the wind turbines’ influence.”

“I recommend that anyone who thinks wind turbines are good acoustic neighbors to do what I did. Go to a wind turbine site, live as a neighbor, and sleep in their bed when the wind blows strong.

Read more: Testimony from an acoustician with 35 years’ experience


This is just the concluding paragraph, but there is plenty more:

A compliant project may still cause damage to neighbours for numerous reasons:

- first, the standard only refers to dBA and thereby omits reference to ILFN;

- secondly, even with regard to audible noise, the standard refers to a maximum of 40 dBA outdoors, whereas every other form of industrial or other noise in country and city is limited to 35 dBA maximum. There is no technical basis for such an aberration, and it is clearly, (intended or not), discriminatory;

- thirdly, in quiet rural environments, even 35 dBA will be intrusive and loud, if the background level is below 25dBA, which is not uncommon.

The ear responds to the peaks of sound levels, not the averages. The wind turbine noise standards all refer only to averages, and exclude ILFN, and do not account for the human response, so cannot protect people from predictable serious harm to their health.”

The definitive document on wind turbine noise


Note: if an ad appears below, it’s from WordPress, not from WCFN. WordPress is free of charge, but publicity is how they recoup their costs. We regret that our budget does not allow us to afford an ad-free webpage.

Posted by: WCFN | October 4, 2014

Controversy over LFS study


October 6th, 2014

An inconvenient study draws fire from the wind/climate coalition

On October 1st and 2nd, two leading UK newspapers wrote about a new study from the University of Munich which found a way of measuring the effects of low-frequency sound (LFS) on the inner ear (1). This is an important discovery in that it could lead to progress in the understanding of hearing loss, an impairment that affects millions of people and causes much grief.

One of the most controversial sources of LFS lies in the nacelles of wind turbines and around their huge moving blades. Yet, governments stubbornly refuse to investigate their effects on health, thus protecting the wind industry and unprotecting the citizens. So, with reason, the authors of the press articles titled: “Could living near a wind farm make you DEAF?” and “Living close to wind farms could cause hearing damage”. This is a legitimate way of blowing the whistle, in a world where the wind/climate coalition has successfully blocked official research on LFS emitted by wind turbines since the Kelley studies in 1985-1987.

When health authorities refuse to measure accurately infrasound and low-frequency noise emitted by wind turbines, they are obviously protecting the wind industry. But they are also in breach of the criminal codes of most countries, which contain provisions for doing no harm to people, particularly of a physical nature. There is such a wealth of first hand reports of harm to health, chronic sleep deprivation and home abandonment from rural residents (2); there is such a number of relevant studies (3) that politicians can’t just sit there and deny, deny, and deny that serious harm to human health is occurring. They MUST repeat the experiments of the U. of Munich study (1), but in the field this time, next to wind turbines, using actual LFS pulses emitted by these machines, including infrasound. Length of exposure is key, as windfarm neighbours are submitted to this bombardment 24/7 when the wind is blowing and turbines are operating, and this over many years. Thus, the research should span over one year, minimum, and be conducted at various installations: some brand new, some with 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 years of operation, with victims who have lived there since their inception.

World-renowned ear specialists Alec Salt and Jeffery Lichtenhan wrote last year to the health authorities of the State of Victoria, Australia: “There are a number of false statements in your report. One severe example is “… the available evidence does not support claims that inaudible sounds can have direct physiological effects”.

“Below we have provided citations to six publications from our group where we showed how the ear responds to low-frequency sounds up to 50 dB below the levels that would be heard. The experimental methods that were used are well established in the field of auditory physiology. Three of the below citations were peer-reviewed and published in some of the most well-respected journals in the field of acoustics and hearing science. Our publications, which were clearly neglected or conveniently overlooked, show that inaudible low-frequency sounds do indeed stimulate the ear and produce marked physiological effects”
. (4)

So YES, the above newspapers did the right thing in blowing the whistle on the risk for windfarm neighbours of damage to their inner ears, which can lead to deafness. The risk exists. As a matter of fact, we have a written testimony of such damage reported by a chronically exposed resident from Germany, published here:

The wind/climate coalition reacted strongly, trying to rubbish the articles which could hurt their business. They used superficial arguments, such as the fact that the U. of Munich study does not mention wind farms. Indeed it doesn’t, because it is about research into the physiological impacts of LFS in general: it does not have to list the possible sources of LFS.

The lesson to be learned is that the U. of Munich study has made an important discovery, and that its experiments need now to be repeated in the field, with wind turbines as the source of LFS stimulation.


Mark Duchamp
+34 693 643 736


1) – University of Munich study: Low-frequency sound affects active micromechanics in the human inner ear

2) – The NASA/Kelley research: As early as 1982, authors find that low-frequency noise is the major cause of adverse health effects for residents living near wind and gas turbines.

- Emeritus Professor Colin Hansen et al.: the results show that there is a low-frequency noise problem associated with the Waterloo wind farm

- Testimony of a turbine host: “Whenever we are staying at the new farmhouse and the turbines are operating [2.5 km away] I have trouble getting to sleep at night. Frequently, I wake up in the morning feeling desperately tired, as though I have not slept at all. Often I simply fall asleep from exhaustion but still wake up tired. On numerous occasions I experience a deep, drumming, rumbling sensation in the skull behind my ears which is like pressure and often a pulsating, squeezing sensation at the base of my skull. I also experience irregular heartbeat while I am trying to sleep and while I am relaxing (sitting or reclining) in our house. I did not have any trouble sleeping before the turbines started operating.
Away from that home, I have not ever experienced problems with my heartbeat or with the pressure pulse sensation in my head; and I sleep incredibly well by comparison. My tinnitus comes and goes when I am away from home, but whenever I am living at the new farmhouse it is a constant source of irritation when the turbines are running. Alida does not complain of dizzy spells or head pressure when we are away from home.”

- Testimony of Mrs Linke: The first turbines to be turned on at Macarthur were about 6–7 km from the Linke house. After a period overseas prior to the turbines being commissioned Mrs Linke returned home and immediately began feeling pressure in her ears, and began to experience sleep deprivation.
As weeks passed Mrs Linke began to experience quickened heart beat and an inner vibration. Symptoms such as buzzing ears, pressure, tight chest, rapid heart beat and vibration developed and sleep was disturbed. As time passed Mr Linke also began to experience symptoms. The noise from the turbines is described as rumbling, thundering, humming, thudding and roaring and was often heard over the TV.

- etc.

- Waubra Foundation: sleep deprivation and torture: Sleep deprivation (suffered by thousands who live near wind turbines) is used by certain regimes as a form of torture

3) – European Heart Journal: evidence from epidemiologic studies demonstrates that environmental noise is associated with an increased incidence of arterial hypertension, myocardial infarction, and stroke.

- Cherry Tree Wind Farm — Waubra Foundation Statement: Waubra Foundation CEO Sarah Laurie’s statement to the Victorian Civil & Administrative Tribunal hearing is the most comprehensive and up to date report on current research into the adverse health effects experienced by those living and working near industrial wind turbines, January 2013

4) – Dr. Alec Salt, and Dr. Jeffery Lichtenhan: physiological effects of inaudible sound


Note: if an ad appears below, it’s from WordPress, not from WCFN. WordPress is free of charge, but publicity is how they recoup their costs. We regret that our budget does not allow us to afford an ad-free webpage.

Posted by: WCFN | October 2, 2014

Wind turbines and ear damage

Wind farms could cause people living nearby to go deaf, a new study claims.


Excerpts from an article in The Telegraph of Oct. 1st 2014, by Camilla Turner

Living close to wind farms could cause hearing damage

“Published today by the Royal Society in their new journal Open Science, the research was carried out by a team of scientists from the University of Munich.”

“Living close to wind farms may lead to severe hearing damage or even deafness…”

“The physical composition of inner ear was “drastically” altered following exposure to low frequency noise, like that emitted by wind turbines…”

” `We don’t know what happens if you are exposed for longer periods of time, [for example] if you live next to a wind turbine and listen to these sounds for months of years´.

“Wind turbines emit a spectrum of frequencies of noise, which include the low frequency that was used in the research, Dr Drexl explained.

“He said the study `might help to explain some of the symptoms that people who live near wind turbines report, such as sleep disturbance, hearing problems and high blood pressure´.

“Dr Drexl explained how the low frequency noise is not perceived as being “intense or disturbing” simply because most of the time humans cannot hear it.

” `The lower the frequency the you less you can hear it, and if it is very low you can’t hear it at all.

” `People think if you can’t hear it then it is not a problem. But it is entering your inner ear even though it is not entering your consciousness.´ “

Read more: The Telegraph


Note: if an ad appears below, it’s from WordPress, not from WCFN. WordPress is free of charge, but publicity is how they recoup their costs. We regret that our budget does not allow us to afford an ad-free webpage.

Posted by: WCFN | September 18, 2014

Wind farms: corrupt research

Biology professor blows the whistle on wind farms

The biggest danger: corrupt research


Infrasound and other problems recognized

In an interview published in Truthout, Dr Patricia Mora casts doubts about the way in which environmental studies are conducted.

What happens is absolute corruption. I have to admit that generally there are “agreements” behind closed doors between the consultants or research centers and the government offices before the studies are conducted. They fill out forms with copied information (and sometimes badly copied), lies or half truths in order to divert attention from the real project while at the same time complying with requirements on paper. Unfortunately, consultants sometimes take advantage of high unemployment and hire inexperienced people or unemployed career professionals without proper titles. Sometimes the consultants even coerce them into modifying the data.

“Research centers, pressured by a lack of funding, accept these studies. It is well known that scientists recognized by CONACYT (National Counsel on Science and Technology) accept gifts from these companies, given that they need money to buy equipment for their laboratories and to fill their pocketbooks to maintain their lifestyles. This is the extent of the corruption. Upon reviewing these studies, it is clear that the findings are trash, sometimes even directly copied from other sources online. These studies tend to focus on the “benefits of the project” and do not include rigorous analysis.

“The Secretary of Environment and Natural Resources (SEMARNAT) does follow-up to the studies, but everything can be negotiated. The bureaucrats have the last word.”

Patricia Mora is a research professor in coastal ecology and fisheries science at the Interdisciplinary Research Center for Comprehensive Regional Development, Oaxaca Unit (CIIDIR Oaxaca), at the National Institute of Technology.

She also raises other issues: the thorough destruction of biotopes by wind farms…

“… we find ourselves at the meeting point of various intimately related aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems, known as “ecotones.” What occurs in each distinct ecosystem affects the dynamic on a larger scale, placing the existence of the adjoining ecosystems in danger.”

… the issues of low frequency sound, infrasound, and electromagnetic fields…

“There is abundant information about the harm caused by the sound waves produced by wind turbines. These sound waves are not perceptible to the human ear, which makes them all the more dangerous. They are also low frequency sound waves and act upon the pineal and nervous systems, causing anxiety, depression (there is a study from the United States that found an elevated suicide rate in regions with wind farms), migraines, dizziness and vomiting, among other symptoms. Western science has given very little weight to electromagnetic and sound waves. In contrast, Eastern science, which gives greater importance to the flow of energy through the body, links the origin of many illnesses to the pollution we generate through the emission of human-made energy flows. The harm caused by this pollution has only recently begun to be accepted.”

… the adverse effects on the population…

“The inhabitants would have to leave behind their traditional activities. Migration and misery would be their future. You can see how this has happened in other areas of the country. They would lose their culture and a lifestyle that has a deep respect for nature. For example, in the northwest coastal region of the country, the arrival of these projects has displaced the fishing communities and farmers. Today, many of these people and their children have migrated. In the worst cases, they have joined the drug trafficking business.”

“The only benefit has been for the companies. The carbon credits they have received have allowed them to avoid taxes and have permitted them to continue polluting.”

Read more:


Note: if an ad appears below, it’s from WordPress, not from WCFN. WordPress is free of charge, but publicity is how they recoup their costs. We regret that our budget does not allow us to afford an ad-free webpage.

Posted by: WCFN | August 3, 2014


lion industry - waiting to die

A lion industry at work in South Africa, depleting its wild lion population, reaching into neighbouring countries to swell its profits.

PLEASE HELP SAVE THE LIONS, WHICH ARE BECOMING EXTINCT. See this video from the Global March for Lions and follow their Call for Action:

Lion cub petting and extinction of wild lions. Well-intentioned tourists are being duped!
Global March for Lions


Current Statistics on “Canned Hunting”

- There are around 20 000 lions left in Africa.

- 900 Lions a year are legally hunted and exported for trophies (in the whole of Africa)

- South Africa exported 547 of these – bearing in mind that these are only the legally documented exports- probably many more go under the radar.

- In South Africa, there are many more lions in cages than in the wild. (2,743 ‘wild’ lions in SA game reserves at last count. About 8000 in captivity.)

- The captive killing of tamed lions (“canned hunting”) is a growing, un-policed industry.

- Less than 3% of trophy income reaches the local communities.

- Trophy hunting accounts for only 0.27% of GDP and 1.8% of tourism revenue.

- Lions have lost over 50% of their historic range in the last 30 years.

- Nature Conservation will not allow tamed lions to return to the wild, as “human-habituated lions” have lost their fear of humans.

- The genetics of lions in captive-breeding programs have been compromised, meaning they cannot return to their natural eco-system.

– Over 160 “Canned Lion” killing camps in South Africa established over the past 15 years.

- Lion bones are being traded large-scale from captive breeding operations into the Eastern Markets.

- Extinction risk for lions is even greater than rhino.

Source: Another website of the globalmarch4lions

Alternative URL:

Note: if an ad appears below, it’s from WordPress, not from WCFN. WordPress is free of charge, but publicity is how they recoup their costs. We regret that our budget does not allow us to afford an ad-free webpage.

Posted by: WCFN | July 26, 2014

Mitigation by video cameras

World Council for Nature



Cameras and radars won’t save the eagles

DTBird only 7% effective when it works, says Norwegian study

August 4th 2014

Avian radar and video systems are targeting the wind farm market, claiming they are the solution to the turbines’ lethal impact on birds and bats. Save the Eagles International (STEI) and the World Council for Nature (WCFN) wish to alert to the fact that these perceived “solutions” are in fact counterproductive. They will, on the contrary, expand the mortality to important bird habitats and other sensitive areas previously spared by windfarm developers.

The DTBird video system, to name one, consists of a sound-warning device linked to four daylight video-cameras installed on the tower of each wind turbine, covering in principle all angles up to 150 meters away, and 50% to 300 meters (1). This system works only during daylight hours, so it is of no use for saving bats, migrating songbirds (which travel by night to avoid over-heating), and other useful creatures like owls.

Yet, wind turbines kill owls by the thousand – e.g. about 270 a year at the Altamont Pass wind farm in California (2). Regarding song birds, these are butchered by the million by the fast moving blade tips (3). As for bats, which are attracted to insects that swarm around wind turbines, the massacre is even greater (4). All this killing, by the way, will have serious consequences for agriculture, because bats and owls help control insects and rodents, respectively.

Thus, DTBird is useless for stopping 75-85% of the mortality caused by wind turbines. And as we shall see from a study made at Smola, Norway, it is only effective for scaring away 7% of the birds that approach wind turbines during the day.

Let’s do the maths: 7% of 15-25% = 1 – 1.75%. This means that DTBird, during the periods when all its cameras and related equipment are working perfectly, can reduce total mortality at wind farms by 1.75% at best.

DTbird includes a software said to be able to recognize birds from insects, falling leaves and other unwanted visual effects. It is also said to automatically trigger a dissuading sound when signals identified as birds are getting too close to the turbine. But if we read the evaluation made by NINA (Norwegian Institute for Nature Research), which tested the system during 6 months for two wind turbines on the island of Smola, it so happens that the warning mechanism is sometimes triggered by raindrops, insects and shifting clouds (5). NINA warns that these “false positives” could cause habituation, reducing the effectiveness of the dissuasion (6).

In any event, habituation or not, the performance of the DTBird video-system is dismal: “In only 7% of all video sequences where warning/dissuasion was iniciated, was a visible flight response observed” (7). In other words, when it works, DTBird is INEFFECTIVE at scaring away 93% of the birds that approach its wind turbine in the daytime.

If this weren’t enough, breakdowns are frequent. During the 6-month trial at the hands of NINA technicians, in spring and summer, the 8 DTBird cameras malfunctioned 3 times, and the detection module for one of the two turbines was out of order for a month (5). One can imagine how difficult it would be to maintain in excellent working order, say 10 modules and 40 video-cameras installed on 10 wind turbines, during 25 years (including winters).

Thus, even if the system were effective at 100% instead of 7% (or 1.75%), an army of state inspectors would be needed. They would have to check daily on the wind farm assigned to them, to ensure that each turbine effectively emits dissuading sounds when birds come close, and that the creatures actually react by avoiding the turbine. For we must remember that, in most countries, certain birds are so rare that the death of a single individual could have a significant impact on the conservation status of its population – e.g. the Bonelli’s Eagle in France .

This gives an idea of how enormous the task would be, to ensure that the cameras and detection modules may be relied upon every day of the year. So much so that it would be unrealistic to consider mitigation by electronic devices, whichever the system or its maker.

Avian radars, which are supposed to detect birds and stop wind turbines in time to avoid collisions, are an equally unrealistic “solution”. Actually, once the wind turbines are installed, and as governments can’t afford an army of uncorruptible “windspectors”, the radar unit is quite simply left unused. At the Kennedy Ranch wind farm in Texas, it was found that the avian radar had not stopped a single wind turbine in 18 months of operation. Actually, a witness watched in horror as a pelican got whacked out of the sky (8).

It’s a fact that has to do with human nature: windfarm owners won’t cut into their profits willingly. Indeed, stopping wind turbines abruptly several times a day wears the brakes and lowers production. It is also costly to maintain in excellent working order, 365 days a year, dozens of cameras – half of them facing the sky (and the rain) – and associated sensitive electronic equipment.

In a nutshell, video and radar systems may look good on paper, but they are impractical. In fact, their only use is to help developers obtain planning approvals for wind turbines in protected bird flyways and other sensitive habitats. They are thus counterproductive, helping destroy our most valued wildlife. Logically, they should be banned altogether from windfarm projects, as officials often base their favourable decisions on mere plans to install such mitigation systems, whether or not these will prove effective in the end.

Mark Duchamp
Chairman, World Council for Nature
President, Save the Eagles International


(1) – Page 25 of NINA’s evaluation report

(2) – Wind turbines kill an average of 270 burrowing owls per year at the Altamont Pass windfarm in California: 270 burrowing owls


(4) – How much wildlife can USA afford to kill/

(5) – Page 14 of NINA’s evaluation report

(6) – Page 3 of NINA’s evaluation report

(7) – Page 18 of NINA’s evaluation report

(8) – The truth about avian radars

Posted by: WCFN | July 15, 2014

Open letter to the Danish government


World Council for Nature

15 July 2014

To the government of Denmark,

Allow me to bring your attention to several press releases by our organisation, the World Council for Nature. Press releases that have been picked up by numerous news media around the world, and which cast an unfavourable light on the Kingdom of Denmark.”

The first release draws attention to the 1,600 stillbirths of mink puppies, many exhibiting deformities, which occurred this year at a long-established mink farm which has wind turbines as new neighbours. The second quotes the mink farmer complaining that, “when the wind blows from the South West (where the wind turbines are), mother minks attack their own puppies.” And the third relates the closing of a plant nursery because its female employees complain of irregularities in their menstrual cycles, including unusual bleeding, since the installation of wind turbines nearby. The Danish media had already reported these tragic news, in the following articles:

As far as we were able to find out, the response of your government to these health warnings has been to ignore them. When they were brought to the attention of your Minister of Health, Nick Hækkerup, by Member of Parliament Karina Adsbøl at a hearing on the health effects of wind turbines, Mr. Hækkerup turned a deaf ear to the matter: VIDEO Karina Adsbøl

Is ignoring the issue part of your policy for handling well-documented harm done by wind turbines, especially by those of the new, bigger variety? (See the work of Professor Henrik Møller, recently fired from Aalborg University at what appears to be the instigation of the wind energy lobby. Profs. Møller and Christian Pedersen demonstrated conclusively, in a peer-reviewed article a year or so ago, “the bigger they are, the more infrasound they produce.” Inconvenient truths on wind turbines are unwelcomed in your country, it would appear.)

One can’t ignore the facts that infrasound travels as far as 40 km, and that peer-reviewed studies have shown that chronic exposure at shorter distances can cause Vibro-Acoustic Disease. (VAD encompasses a long list of ailments, ranging from tinnitus to cardiac dysfunctions, cancer, and birth defects.) In their research on low frequency noise (including infrasound), Dr. Mariana Alves-Pereira and her colleague Dr. Castelo-Branco found that young horses can develop limb deformities when raised in the vicinity of wind turbines (1). Their study also found that the members of the family breeding these horses suffered themselves from VAD.

But the above are just small samples. Globally, cases abound of farm animals gravely affected by wind turbines (1). As for people, thousands of windfarm neighbours suffer from sleep deprivation, headaches, nausea, vertigo, tinnitus, etc. (Sleep deprivation, alone, triggers a host of ailments, ranging from stress and difficulty working and concentrating, to car accidents and a weakened immune system.)

With respect to deformities and stillbirths, it stands to reason that humans can be affected just as are minks and cattle, especially when economic and employment constraints prevent them from moving away from the wind turbines. (The story of the women employed by the garden center, mentioned above, is eloquent and tragic in this regard) (3).

The evidence of adverse health effects from wind turbines has been mounting for years. Let’s note the independent research of Nina Pierpont, M.D. (Johns Hopkins), Ph.D. (Princeton University), who described in detail the symptoms she uncovered through interviewing windfarm victims. (Dr. Pierpont published her 300-page report as, “Wind Turbine Syndrome: A Report on a Natural Experiment,” 2009) (4).

We must add to this the widely available, published work of Dr. Alec Salt and colleagues at the Cochlear Fluids Research Lab, Washington University School of Medicine (St. Louis, Missouri). Professor Salt has demonstrated that infrasound produced by wind turbines can indeed dys-regulate inner ear function, triggering the cascade of symptoms documented by Dr. Pierpont. Infrasound can readily do this, despite the fact it cannot be heard audibly. For decades the wind industry has clung to the fallacy that, “If you can’t hear it, it can’t hurt you.” Salt, a professor of Otolaryngology, has demolished that myth.

There is also the widely reported clinical experience of Dr. Steven Rauch, physician, Medical Director of Harvard Medical School’s renowned Clinical Balance and Vestibular Center. Dr. Rauch was recently interviewed by The New Republic:
“Dr. Steven Rauch, an otologist at the Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary and a professor at Harvard Medical School, believes WTS [Wind Turbine Syndrome] is real. Patients who have come to him to discuss WTS suffer from a “very consistent” collection of symptoms, he says. Rauch compares WTS to migraines, adding that people who suffer from migraines are among the most susceptible to turbines. There’s no existing test for either condition but “Nobody questions whether or not migraine is real.”

“The patients deserve the benefit of the doubt,” Rauch says. “It’s clear from the documents that come out of the industry that they’re trying very hard to suppress the notion of WTS and they’ve done it in a way that [involves] a lot of blaming the victim” – see: “Big Wind Is Better Than Big Oil, But Just as Bad at P.R.,” by Alex Halperin in The New Republic, June 16, 2014

The list of studies and other research on the health effects of wind turbines is too long for including in this letter. Instead, we direct you to the list published by Dr Sarah Laurie, Australian physician and CEO of the Waubra Foundation:

We applaud the fact that, under prodding from windfarm victims, your government has begun investigating the health effects of wind turbines. Unfortunately (or is this intentional?), the scope and methodology of the investigation appear to overlook the following, commonsensical, measures:

First, there must be a rigorous epidemiological study, if necessary using case-crossover data, as Dr. Pierpont, a population biologist besides being a physician, demonstrated.

Secondly, wind turbine ILFN (infrasound and low-frequency noise), must be measured down to 0.1 Hz within the homes of windfarm victims complaining of illness. That is, noise measurements should be taken within their homes at night, windows closed, when the wind is blowing from the direction they perceive as problematic.

Thirdly, there must be a moratorium on the installation of new wind turbines until these studies are completed, published, and commented upon by the scientific and clinical community.

The World Council for Nature’s primary goal is the conservation of biodiversity. We believe a mentally healthy human population and governments acting responsibly, according to transparent and honest science, are the necessary means for achieving this.

We look forward to your response to our concerns.


Mark Duchamp, Chairman






Note: if an ad appears below, it’s from WordPress, not from WCFN. WordPress is free of charge, but publicity is how they recoup their costs. We regret that our budget does not allow us to afford an ad-free webpage.

… and kills another small business

“All my female employees are complaining of irregular menstruations, and several have permanent headaches.”
(Boye Jensen, nursery owner, Denmark)

This is just a picture from the web, for illustration only.

The Danish press reports the case of a garden centre (nursery) going out of business because of nearby wind turbines. Headaches are frequent among employees, and female workers complain of unusual bleeding and problems with their menstrual cycles. They are worried that more serious illnesses may follow. Five have recently resigned. The owner is now closing his business for fear of being held liable should a child be born with deformities, as happened to numerous mink puppies at a fur farm near wind turbines in Jutland (1).

Boye Jensen, the owner of Lammefjordens Perennials, is 67. He started his nursery 43 years ago, and it became a prosperous business with 15 employees and annual sales of 12 million krones (equiv. $ 2.1 million). He was planning to continue working for another 6-7 years, then sell the nursery. But his business is now worth nothing, creating an enormous financial loss.

Boye Jensen at his plant nursery
Boye Jensen, the owner of Lammefjordens Perennials

He is discussing with his lawyer whether to sue Vattenfal, the company that owns the wind turbines, or the Municipality of Holbaek, which approved their installation 400-700 metres from his nursery. He expects to go to court and seek damages worth several million krones.

Himself a neighbour to 127-metre high wind turbines since their installation three years ago, Boye Jensen has long been convinced that low frequency noise emitted by the turbines makes people ill as they do animals” (2). Then, recently, he heard the tragic news from Kaj Bank Olesen’s mink farms (1). This, along with the resignation of several of his employees for health reasons, made him realise his business had become untenable because of the wind turbines. “The nursery owner made this hard decision after a mink breeder in Jutland was able to establish a causal link between the loss of a third of his mink puppies, deformed or stillborn, and several giant wind turbines erected nearby” (2).

Plant nursery or Garden center Lammefjordens Stauder near Holbæk
Boye Jensen, in his garden center

The story made the news in Denmark (2) (3), and Member of Parliament Karina Adsbøl expressed her concerns to the Minister of Health at a parliamentary hearing. The Minister, typically, replied by addressing other, less important issues mentioned by the MP, and ignored the important ones, i.e. wind turbines causing birth defects in animals forced to live near them, and disrupting women’s menstrual cycles (4).

The World Council for Nature (WCFN) is calling attention to the fact that, as occurred for tobacco, asbestos, thalidomide etc, governments are siding with private financial interests in ignoring or denying the existence of obvious health problems linked to wind turbines. As is the case for the millions of birds and bats killed yearly by the turbines’ blades, mendacious studies are published by unscrupulous consultants, and by professionals and universities happy to oblige their benefactors. Hypocrisy is rampant, species are fast disappearing from our skies, and thousands of windfarm neighbours are being submitted to torture. The word “torture” is not an exaggeration: sleep deprivation is indeed a recognised form of torture.

In Denmark as elsewhere in the world, many rural families are suffering, particularly since the manufacture of the mega turbines (1 MW and over), which emit more infrasound as they grow bigger. This may explain why the complaints are growing louder. How much longer can this suffering be ignored, or even denied by health authorities?

Some countries, including Canada and Australia, have commissioned studies into the matter of noise emitted by windfarms. But the studies’ scope and methodology doom them to failure, perhaps intentionally. What is really needed is:

1) an epidemiological study, and
2) the measurement of low frequency sound (including infrasound down to 0.1 Hz), inside the homes of windfarm victims, at night, windows closed, when the wind is blowing from the direction that is causing the problem.

Most of all, as a precaution, no mega turbines should be erected less than 10 km from habitations until these studies are completed, published and analysed. There is indeed compelling evidence that infrasound travels much farther than other noise, and tortures sensitive people in their homes at distances of 10 km and more. Shorter distances could be temporarily set for smaller turbines, in proportion with their generating capacity.

WCFN calls upon the Danish government to intervene in favour of victims. A wealth of evidence is available, including peer-reviewed studies, that warrants applying the precautionary principle without delay (5). Children are particularly at risk – evidently even the unborn.

WCFN’s primary goal is the conservation of biodiversity. A sane and responsible human population is the single most important means of achieving this goal.  A letter of protest is being sent to the Danish government.

Mark Duchamp
Chairman, World Council for Nature
July 10th 2014


(1) – Kaj Bank Olesen’s mink farm: stillbirths and deformities:

(2) – Translation of the article from the Nordvestnyt (North West News) on the closure of the garden center:

(3) – Garden centre story mentioned in one of Denmark’s leading newswpaper, Jyllands-Posten (the Jutland Post):

(4) – Video: a Member of Parliament, Karina Adsbøl, addresses her concerns to the Minister of Health, mentioning the deformities at the mink farm and the menstruation problems at the garden center:

(5) – Waubra Foundation:

Older Posts »



Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 107 other followers