Bishop Hill Inner damage
Oct 1, 2014 Energy: wind The Telegraph is carrying an interesting report about an experiment carried out by German researchers, who fired low frequency sound at human subjects to see if they could find an effect on the inner ear.
The physical composition of inner ear was “drastically” altered following exposure to low frequency noise, like that emitted by wind turbines, a study has found.
The research will delight critics of wind farms, who have long complained of their detrimental effects on the health of those who live nearby.
In fairness, the sample size is small - only 21 subjects - but almost all of them exhibited the same reaction, and one gets a warmish feeling from the work because the scientists were measuring a physical effect rather than relying on their subjects' subjective reporting of what they experienced.
Worthy of further research, I would say.
Reader Comments (26)
were measuring a physical effect rather than relying on their subjects' subjective reporting of what they experienced.
and not models.
I had a discussion with my fellow town councillors here in france which led to my resignation. One of the councilors kept insisting that the only noise you get is the swooshing of the blades. At an astronomy club meeting this year, the mayor of another town said there was nothing wrong with turbines (éoliennes) and that he was having one in the next field to his house. I wished him a good night's sleep.
Many years ago, at least 15, I stood next to some turbines on a hill in the western Algave while they were turning. Not pleasant.
Worthy of suppressing, a Green would probably say.
@ Stephen Richards. So far in my neck of the woods in Aquitaine I have yet to see any signs of Eoliennes. They have certainly sprung up further north, around Niort there seems to be a contest to see how many can be built in the shortest time possible. Segoline Royale is trying to bankrupt France further with her renewables plan but I am certain, like your ex fellow councillors will discover, it will all end in tears as people wake up to how they have been scammed by govt. and local politicians alike. Good news about FN taking 2 seats in the senate? The times they are a changin' methinks.
But not on me, thanks.
l question is whether that low frequency makes them wind farm huggers or Koch breathing deniers /sarc
The Government has been covering up the health effects of low frequency sound (infra-sound) from wind turbines for many years. Infra-sound is used as a means of torture.
I am not sure it will "delight" objectors to wind farms.
Surely it will enrage them, given than virtually any other form of development or technology is put on hold for ever and a day while green interests protest and object. Meanwhile, put up a wind farm anywhere with no regulatory hurdles whatsoever and no information or proper research on environmental or health risks.
Yes, wind farm objectors are likely to be "outraged". I know I am.
It's a shame they didn't study more people. It looks as though they are fishing for funding, which I guess is the way of the world, but a pity nonetheless.
I recall reading stuff about infrasound in the 60's, when it was thought to be a potential weapon. This has been explored and its abandonment seems to be more to do with practicality and portability than any problem with the theory.
This is a useful summary.
Quote: "Infrasound is an amazingly effective weapon under the right conditions."
Perhaps we should just get the Middle East interested in windmills...
John Leon
Some French items to be found here http://www.friends-against-wind.org/
@David S 11:01
Ethical researchers would know that once it had been shown that the experiment was causing damage to the subjects, the experiment should be stopped.
You can now read the study at RSOS.
'...Get those 21 subjects paid off NOW....'
I'm sure Renewables UK would be delighted to help fund more research in this area.
Imagine, er, observe what it's doing to the rest of the critters in the biome, and not just to their inner ears.
=============
"Worthy of further research, I would say."
But not on me, thanks.
Oct 1, 2014 at 9:37 AM | Unregistered Commenter michael hart
--------------------------------------------------------
If this leads to the demise of wind turbines and the use of more efficient power generation then the relatively trivial amount spent on this research will save us all money (and maybe help prevent the lights going out).
Real world research with potential real world benefits seems like the wrong target for a kicking to me.
Only about 10% of the population is sensitive to infra-sound. It is typically a 55-75 year old man with tinnitus. Something about losing the ability to hear higher frequency sound amplifies the sensitivity to lower frequencies. I have become sensitive to very low frequency sound and it is quite annoying, but my wife cannot hear it.
Interesting, not only does noise we can't hear somehow affect us but a healthy ear emits a whistling noise. Personally I've been deaf to high frequencies for some time, specifically to my wifes voice. You just learn to live with it :)
John Leon
I understand that tomorrow (02-Oct-2014) on their 20:00 News Programme France2 are having an item concerning corruption and wind turbine projects
Only about 10% of the population is sensitive to infra-sound. It is typically a 55-75 year old man with tinnitus.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Source?
Source?
Google "The Hum".
http://www.livescience.com/38427-the-hum-mystery-taos-hum.html is typical.
Oct 1, 2014 at 9:37 AM | Unregistered Commentermichael hart
"Worthy of further research, I would say."
But not on me, thanks.
===============================
Me, neither.
Maybe John Gummer could "volunteer" his daughter.......
Redbone (2:09 PM): read the article; you will notice that they say that you do not have to be able to “hear” (be aware of) the sound for it to do damage. A bit like infrared, microwaves or x-rays, I suppose – not visible to the human eye, or otherwise detectable to our senses, but can cook you nonetheless.
Worthy of further research, as the Bishop says, but certainly not on the general populace… Oh, hang on – that is precisely what they are doing!
I hate windfarms, mainly because I pay for them. I empathise with people who hate them because they destroy rural scenery. However, it's worth noting that all the reported health problems come from people who have a windfarm nearby, but not on their own property. In other words, the complaints only come from people who are not collecting a big fat pay-out at my expense. The people who are collecting pay-outs never report a health problem. Surely this merits closer examination?
Knowledge about the negative effects of low-frequency noise on humans has been out there for many years. Fifty years ago I worked with a semi-retired aircraft engineer who drove a seriously well-built big luxury car; he and his wife stayed fresh on long journeys by wearing high quality ear protection.
"Worthy of further research, I would say."
They won't get a dime. If they wanted a big grant, they should have done this:
1. Show a statistical correlation between ear damage and time over the past 30 years. An r of .05 will be fine if they use the word 'robust' in the paper. Heck, with Mannian math, an r of -.05 can be made to work.
2. Create a model based on proxy data showing a correlation between ear damage and (virtual) global warming. Append actual climate data, as necessary, suitably filtered to hide any decline.
3. Publish the paper, "GLOBAL WARMING CAUSES DEAFNESS."
4. Vwallah! The money will come flooding in.