Nova Scotia’s energy minister was delivering a prepared speech atop Dalhousie Mountain, Pictou County last Friday when he suddenly stopped to observe, “My god, it’s quiet isn’t it?” Bill Estabrooks was standing beneath the barely-turning blades of a 400-foot wind turbine. Six of nine turbines in the distance stood stock still. Seemingly unaware of the irony, Estabrooks touted provincial plans for more industrial wind factories. The NDP hopes that within 10 years, 40 percent of our electricity will be produced from renewable sources such as water, wood and most of all, wind.[1] [2] Except that on the day of the big announcement, there was barely a breeze, underscoring the unfortunate fact that wind turbines produce electricity only about a third of the time, often when there’s little demand for it.[3] [4]
The 34 turbines on Dalhousie Mountain, where Estabrooks and Premier Darrell Dexter announced their renewable energy targets, stretch for 10 kilometres and cost $130 million.[5] They generate only about 1.3 percent of Nova Scotia’s power. In fact, all 79 wind turbines in the province generate only about 2.8 percent of our power.[6] That means that if the NDP politicians don’t come to their senses, many more gigantic wind turbines will march across the landscape as the government strives to more than double renewable electricity generation by 2015 and to quadruple it by 2020. And that raises this question: What will we do two thirds of the time when the wind isn’t blowing?
The government’s answer is that wind can be backed up by burning natural gas.[7] Some experts warn, however, that turning ordinary gas turbines up and down to match wind fluctuations is wasteful, inefficient and could actually increase greenhouse gas emissions. Better, they say, to invest in more efficient systems such as the one at Tufts Cove in Dartmouth where Nova Scotia Power is spending $84 million to recover waste heat from two gas turbines to power a steam turbine. Investing in such combined-cycle turbines would be cheaper than spending hundreds of millions on wind turbines that need to be backed up by natural gas anyway. Why build two generation systems when one would do?[8] [9]
Besides, avoiding building more industrial wind factories would protect rural Nova Scotians who will be increasingly exposed to noisy turbines as the pressure grows to meet renewable energy targets.[10] [11] Darrell Dexter says there’s no scientific proof wind turbines cause harm,[12] but several peer-reviewed scientific studies say otherwise.[13][14] The premier also seems to have forgotten his 2005 conversation with Ward and Mae Brubacher, a couple in their 50s, who live 750 metres from two turbines on remote Fitzpatrick Mountain, Pictou County. Ward says when strong winds blow, the noise vibrations are like the booming of car stereo speakers. “Many times we have laid awake in bed with all the windows shut in the house listening to the whompf, whompf, whompf,” he says. “You get up, you read, you wait until you’re exhausted so you can sleep through it.”
Mae says she’s been forced to stop gardening and drive into Pictou to get a break from the noise. “Sometimes it’s four to five days in a row when it’s really loud. You’re losing sleep and there are certain days when you’re stressed to the limit. Then you finally get a break.” The Brubachers generate electricity from a solar panel and live completely off the grid. “We’re not against green energy,” Ward says, but wind turbines are destroying their peace and quiet.[15]
Meantime, a group of residents who live in Pictou County wrote to the minister of health this month requesting a temporary halt to industrial wind factories. The residents, members of the Eco Awareness Society, are opposing the installation of wind turbines on Browns Mountain about 1,440 metres above their homes. They sent the minister hundreds of pages of affadavits and testimonies from all over the world documenting the health effects of industrial wind including insomnia, migraines, dizziness, depression and problems with mental concentration and memory. They’re hoping Maureen MacDonald will order an independent scientific study of the health effects of wind power before the province embarks on its long and windy, dead-end road.[16]
Notes:
1. The province’s Renewal Electricity Plan is outlined in a clearly written, 28-page background report which states on page 16: “Wind will be the mainstay of our efforts to reach the 2015 renewable energy commitment…” and, “It seems likely that the largest portion of new renewable energy in 2020 will come from wind…”
2. The provincial background report (see link in footnote #1) acknowledges the intermittency of wind on page 19: “A key obstacle to the development of renewable energy is the fact that our best renewable sources — wind and tidal — are by their nature intermittent. Because they depend on natural forces that come and go, intermittent sources cannot provide a constant stream of electricity.”
3. A wind factory’s average power output can be expressed as its “capacity factor.” The Lightbucket blog explains: “The capacity factor of a power plant is the ratio of the electrical energy produced in a given period of time to the electrical energy that could have been produced at continuous maximum power operation during the same period.” Lightbucket’s Table 1 shows an average world capacity factor for wind of only 19.6% in 2006.
4. The Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA) which represents industrial wind producers boasts that the capacity factor at a PEI wind farm — “sited in one of Canada’s windiest locations” – has a capacity factor of 40%.
5. Info from Firelight Infrastructure Partners, investors in the Dalhousie Mountain project from a fact sheet distributed to the media on April 23/10.
6. Figures on Dalhousie Mountain wind generation and total Nova Scotia wind generation verified by Nova Scotia Power, April 26/10.
7. See the provincial background report (link in footnote #1), page 19: The report describes natural gas as “clean and local” and adds that it is the best choice of fuel for backing up intermittent wind generators. “Although it is a fossil fuel, natural gas burns far cleaner than coal or oil. It releases less carbon, much less sulphur dioxide, fewer nitrogen oxides, and virtually no ash or particulate matter. Unlike coal fired plants, gas turbines can start up and shut down quickly to match changes in the wind and tides. Nova Scotia has substantial deposits of natural gas offshore and onshore. Its use also benefits our economy.” On pages 23-24, the provincial background report discusses the possibility of importing hydro-electricity from Hydro Quebec and/or Labrador as a back up for wind. It makes it clear, however, that expensive new transmission lines would have to be built. “Unfortunately, at the moment, Nova Scotia is almost an island in terms of electricity.” Nova Scotia would also have to change its rules to allow imported back-up power to be counted as part of its renewable energy targets. At the moment, power must be generated in Nova Scotia to qualify as renewable.
8. Based on a report by Peter Lang, a retired Australian engineer with 40 years experience with a variety of energy/electricity projects. In a report entitled, “Cost and Quantity of Greenhouse Gas Emssions Avoided by Wind Generation”, Lang concludes that: “1. Wind power does not avoid significant amounts of greenhouse gas emissions. 2. Wind power is a very high cost way to avoid greenhouse gas emissions. 3. Wind power, even with high capacity penetration, can not make a significant contribution to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.”
9. For details on the Tufts Cove combined-cycle system see the N.S. Power website
10. See, Nina Pierpont’s recent book “Wind Turbine Syndrome.”
11. For comprehensive information on health risks and effects see: http://www.savewesternny.org/docs/pierpont_testimony.html
12. During the media scrum at Dalhousie Mountain on April 23/10, I asked Premier Dexter about possible harm to the health of rural Nova Scotians. He replied: “Well, as you know, this is something that’s been looked at through numerous peer-reviewed studies. They have not found any connection between wind farms and people’s health, but we know that those questions get raised so we’re continuing to monitor the science in relation to it and to see if there’s anything that should give rise to concern.” The premier appeared to be basing his comment on a study of available scientific literature commissioned by the Canadian and American wind energy associations. It is called: “Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects.” Nova Scotia Power gave me a copy in an attempt to refute claims made by Nina Pierpont and other doctors (see footnote #10).
13. For sharp criticism of the industry association report see an updated version of the paper entitled “Summary of Recent Research on Adverse Health Effects of Wind Turbines.”
The original paper can be found here.
14. Allison Denning, regional environmental assessment coordinator at the federal health department sent a letter to the provincial environment department on August 6, 2009 formally objecting to a statement made by proponents of the Digby Wind Power Project. Denning writes: “The final sentence in Appendix B states that ‘there is no peer-reviewed scientific evidence indicating that wind turbines have an adverse impact on human health’. In fact, there are peer reviewed scientific articles indicating that wind turbines may have an adverse impact on human health.” Denning then lists eight such studies.
15. I had two conversations with Ward and Mae Brubacher. One by phone on March 1, 2010 and the second in person when I visited them after the NDP Dalhousie Mountain announcement on April 23/10. I played them Darrell Dexter’s comment denying any health effects and they mentioned having discussed their noise problems with him during a meeting organized by their neighbour. Other selected quotes: Ward: “Some days it’s so noisy we have to come in the house, shut all the windows and doors and turn on the TV.” Mae notes that thankfully there are days when the wind doesn’t blow very hard and peace and quiet returns: “When it goes on all day, it creates a lot of stress. If this were to go on all the time, we’d have to move.” Ward: “It’s definitely a better way to generate electricity, but there’s another side to this. These big wind farms are in our faces, disrupting the natural landscape. Sure they are a marvel to look at. But if they’re in your view all day that’s a sacrifice as well.” The Brubachers operate a small business that helps rural property and woodlot owners create their own nature trails and recreational facilities. The two .8 MW wind turbines near them are owned and operated by Shear Wind Inc., a company based in Bedford, N.S. For the Brubacher’s blog, see here.
16. For more on the Eco Awareness Society see here.
This article appears in Apr 22-28, 2010.


Well done Mr Wark.
I look forward to more articles which explore the downside of renewables, only then can we all make an informed choice.
http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2010/03/21/feeble-…
I wish you had mentioned the ridicule heaped upon former Tory Energy Minister when he pointed out the wind did not always blow in Nova Scotia. I particularly remember CBC TV reporter Paul Withers taking the piss out of Dooks. The opposition MLAs also had fun, as did some eco nerd at EAC.
and this gem : “Denmark’s main fuels for electricity production are coal, oil and natural gas,[9] and its levels of carbon dioxide, a key greenhouse gas, [10] have been rising over the past 15 years.[11] Of all the major European Union countries, it is expected to be the farthest from compliance with its Kyoto Protocol standards for greenhouse gases.[12] ”
taken from : http://www.greenberkshires.org/wind_power_posting…
Write a review of the new Stewart Brand book, that will set the cat among the pidgeons.
Denmark’s GHG emissions related to electricity have increased, but only because they’ve moved traditionally diesel-based industries over to electricity. Overall, if you look at the entire economy, their GHG emissions have decreased, precisely because they’ve moved to wind:
http://climateprogress.org/2010/04/27/one-…
Haven’t read the whole article but one of the already existing and interesting uses of windpower is at Wreck cove where one / some? windmill(s) pump, (or power pumps) to raise some water near, but not in, the Wreck Cove watershed into the water shed. I don’t know the numbers but it’s something like raising the water 20 feet to then drop it 200.
Too many wind energy proponents don’t look at wind charts that show the optimal locations for wind turbines. Wind turbines can be good in the right spots, but we can’t rely on them 100%, and the article is correct in stating that when the wind turbines are fluctuating, you need to turn natural gas turbines up and down, which is hugely inefficient. Efficiency is gained by operating at higher temperatures, and keeping a stable temperature in the system. Ramp ups and ramp downs are wasteful.
The final paragraph perplexed me, however. How can a turbine in the Maritimes be 1,440 metres above someone’s home when the tallest peak east of Quebec city is a whopping 820 metres, and located in New Brunswick? That means the turbine must be 600 metres tall, or the article meant feet. Which is it? (I know it’s not the former)
Hi Ben: Just to clarify, my reference to the turbines being 1,440 metres above the homes is a fine example of bad writing. I meant that the turbines will be up on Browns Mountain and the nearest ones will be 1,440 metres from those homes. (I am referring here to the homes owned by members of the Eco Awareness Society.) Other homes will be 1,120 metres from the turbines. (These are homes owned by people leasing land to the company.)
Dear Mr Wark
As usual you have taken a narrow and biased position on a large topic and normally I tend to agree with you. This time you are missing a number of the real issues due to this limited view.
The province’s attempt to move towards a higher percentage of renewables is a simple necessity, not an option, so the real discussion is how much of what resource should we be seeking, to get off fossil fuels with their volatile pricing and availibilty.
I think that the government has actually got its sums wrong: there is a very limited supply of natural gas and the province has already sold it off, so cannot suggest it will be there for local use. The suggested forest biomass is simply strip mining the whole province and is completely unsustainable. The obvious analogy is burning the furniture to heat the house.Using the waste heat from existing plants makes sense, why only now is it suggested.
So what is left? Wind, Tidal, Solar and the critical issue, Energy Use Reduction. To make this all work will take an informed, educated and cooperative approach. This means no longer putting up wind farms in inappropriate places and not without full public discussion. It means distributed power generation and management, a smart grid as it is often called. It means efficient housing, heating, vehicles and a complete change in how we live.
It may require hydro power from Newfoundland and Labrador but that is not necessarily a green source and it hands energy ownership to another province.
For sure some people will never tolerate living near windmills, just as some avoid cities, highways and truly hate lawnmowers for noise and annoyance reasons. People have lived with windpower for several thousand years so do not simply quote a limited range of highly biased opinions stating that they are bad for health. Try living down wind of of a coal fired generating station, next to a refinary or even a coal mine. You probably will not knwo that it has killed you until you are dying.
There is a huge amount that we need to hold an informed discussion about and your opinions should add to this instead of subtracting.
I am currently employed creating a balanced 3rd party website to foster education and discussion regarding wind farm development in Nova Scotia, which should be operational within 2 months. The idea so far is for people to be able to form a discussion about wind power in Nova Scotia, with excellent facts and testimonials.
It comes down to a choice, really. Live with annoying wind turbines in the area, or continue to breathe in carcinogens from coal-fired and natural gas fired power plants.
The Renewable Energy Strategy actually paves the way for new regional transmission system integration between Nova Scotia and other maritime provinces (possibly even New England) so that when the wind isn’t blowing in Nova Scotia, we can supplement that power with electricity imported from out of the province. It is even possible that the electricity imported could be from wind farms in neighboring provinces, where the wind happened to be blowing at that moment.
There are ways other than natural gas to ‘prop up’ the intermittent nature of wind power.
As for wind turbine noise effects, they exist. The cause isn’t understood yet, however (as epidemiological studies have begun and are expected to be concluded in the near future, according to Pierpont’s testimony before a New York wind farm EPA hearing). No one can deny that there has been medically documented cases of what a few doctors now refer to as “Wind Turbine Syndrome”, but it is proving to be difficult to determine an empirical connection between the turbines and the syndrome. Certainly from the sounds of things, it can be really aggravating.
The solution as I see it is to let communities develop their own wind power. In this way, the people who live in rural communities will be the ones compromising between turbine placement and unwanted effects. Between return on investment and quality of life. And as a bonus, they will be making a capital investment that will generate money for the community for decades to come (a turbine pays for itself quite quickly, and it’s profitability isn’t a slave to oil prices). The province’s plan involves a Community Feed-In Tariff (COMFIT) program wherein municipalities, First Nations, Co-ops, non-profits, and citizens contributing to a Community Economic Development Investment Fund (CEDIF) can create wind, biomass, tidal, wave, in-stream hydro, as well as combined heat and power plants to sell to the grid at a guaranteed price per kWh for 20 years.
You know how municipalities are always complaining that they don’t have enough money. Well, how about adding a few hundred thousand dollars a year to the municipal budget with a turbine! You could pay for it with an increase cost of parking tickets. Talk about a double greenhouse gas reduction whammy.
This is vitally important! We need to begin regaining control of the electricity generation that the subsidiary of the multinational corporation Emera (Nova Scotia Power Inc) has held a monopoly on for too long.
Viva la Revolución!
Hey Ben, please do a similar expose on Oil and explain the environmental and social implications for drilling and burning oil and then tell me what you think about wind. Talk about shell oil in nigeria, talk about the environmental impact of the tar sands on the boreal forests. Talk about how acidic our oceans are becoming and how species from one side of the globe to the other are being impacted by global warming. Let us know how many mountains have been scraped off the face of the earth to get at coal. Please do us all a favor and look at energy as a global issue not just in nova scotia. Next time you turn on a light think about tufts cove. Smarten up would you , for the sake of everyone on this planet. Tell me that wind turbines kill almost as many birds as cats and lets see if we can get cats banned as well. If you find the results a little more alarming then a couple of wind generators keeping you awake at night , please let us know.
Hello to Nova Scotia.
I’m from Germany and my wife and me are going to leave this country, because of that wind madness. We have over 25.000 wind turbines in Germany with an installed capacity of more than 27 GW. That is cir. 30% more than the capacity of our nuclear power plants (please, don’t start a debate about nuclear power – earth is flat, pigs can fly and nuclear power is save). The nuclear power plants produce 25% of our needed energy, the wind turbines only 6,6%. And the price for this 6,6%? In 2009 german energy customers had to pay cir. 4 billion Euro (over 5 billion $) for wind energy, money that is missing in other parts of life. Over 2 million birds are killed every year by wind turbines. People fall ill by wind turbines (Jutta and I have insomnia, tinnitus and Jutta was in hospital, because of heart rhythm disorder; we are living 320 to 600m besides 6 windturbines for the last 15 years).
But back to our emigration plans.
Our first thought was Nova Scotia, because weather and landscape is very similar to ours. Than we read about the story of the d’Entremont family from Lower West Pubnico. About wind farms in Pictou County and the plans to destroy Digby Neck.
Could you imagine, what will happen to the migration routes of the birds? We see it every spring and autumn. The migration routes from north east to south west continue over our area. But the routes are cut off by wind turbines and the birds, wich had a long way over sea, have to make long detours. And don’t forget: birds are killed by the blades of the turbines. The same will happen in Nova Scotia.
Another problem is the infrasonic and its disturbance for the whales. Nova Scotia has established a green tourism especially with whalewatching. The soundpollution underwater will scare away the whalse and thus the income of many people.
Again back to our emigration plans: it seems, Nova Scotia is not the place, we want to spend our old age.
(I hope, there are not too much mistakes)
Marco Bernardi
Schleswig-Holstein
Germany
Hello to Nava Scotia again.
I have forgotten one thing. You don’t have to believe that wind energy could save one single conventional power plant. In 8 km linear distance from our property in Brunsbüttel, 2 coal power plants with 1.600 MW capacity are planed, just to enable the poweroutput of the offshore wind farma Alpha Ventus and Butendiek into the national power grid.
If the citizens of Nova Scotia were really concerned about the environment they would all sign up for a course on” How to turn off switchs ” and learn or adapt their lifestyle to using less electricity.
Not only would this reduce our collective carbon footprint but it would also improve the health of all in our relief from electropollution!
Hey Tom, I think you and all the other pundits for making power at far off locations & shipping it all over the Province need to wake up & smell the damn coffee. We IMO would be better served if more Nova Scotians were producing their own power from solar & small wind turbines on our own property. We all now live in homes that are running on 110v/220 & this is a direct result of Power Plants having to send out high voltage power so it can travel these long distances. then its ‘stepped’ down to a usable voltage ! When we could be powering our homes with 12 volt systems, & 24 volt for the bigger appliances.
IF government wasn’t in the pocket of big business IMO, bigger initiatives would be available for home owners to install solar panels & personal wind turbines. For me the lack of incentive programs, the fact if a homeowner does set up their own system, we are obligated to “sell” any extra power back to NS Power, for a pittance. Is just more proof the Government & big Business are simply jumping on the green wagon in an attempt to convince the public they actually are doing something. You may be pulling the wool over the eyes of many…but your not fooling all of us.
Seeing as a large part of Nova Scotians live outside of the 2 cities. If we were only able to produce on each site 50%+ of our power needs where would we then be, I ask you ? In a recent National Geographic magazine article there was metion that if 70 % of the existing roof tops in the US were geared to collect solar, they would be able to produce all the power the US needs in the Daytime. That would be without 1 square foot of any other land in the US being touched to make power, if they went 100% they would have a surplus & putting storage systems onsite & using readily available 12volt technology would make an even bigger impact.
Power production hundreds of miles away from the places that use it, is 19th Century thinking IMO…& its time for all of you to attempt to pull yourselves into the 21st century where we actually are !
Thanks for bringing up the important issue of perceived health effects of noise from wind turbines. This must be investigated seriously but the studies need to be based on more than anecdotes and self-reports. If a connection is proved (with a physical mechanism) then engineering can reduce the noise source levels in the relevant frequency bands, and appropriate standoff distances worked out. Let’s not assume that all the noise effect are “acoustic”, i.e. travelling through the air and sensed by the ear: low frequency vibration could be coupled through structures into the ground and into a dwelling. This needs to be considered as well.
One also needs to be mindful of the difference between direct physiological effects and psychological effects caused by stress through annoyance. The latter has been shown to be dependent upon attitudes towards wind power in general.
One final comment to the author: your subtitle is very clever but I do not like your implication that provincial authorities are intentionally making people sick.
Hi, i think instead of thinking on how we can squeeze more juice out of the electric fruits i think we honestly need to start thinking on how we can start using people power. Huh? Yes thats right. People power. Start walking places, start manually preparing foods, and start playing board games instead of video games. There i said it.
There are no health risks associated with wind generated power buzzing away in your neighbourhood. I’m sure that hearing the radio through your fillings is something you can get used to. Well it doesn’t matter anyway, it’s only the poor rural suckers who have to deal with it. Lol!