The health of the residents is paramount in the turbine noise process.

The Town of Falmouth is at the last minute injecting new financial figures into 26 meetings.

Where are the operation and maintenance costs of operating the Falmouth Wind 1 - Vestas V 82

My belief is this turbine is a political embarrassment and the local politicians don't want the operation and maintenance figures made public to Falmouth Town Meeting Members.

Many turbines with a rating of 1.5 megawatts or higher only three years old are having catastrophic gear box failures in New England . Portsmouth High School in Rhode Island , Princeton Massachusetts and Otis ANG base Cape Cod. All installed in 2009 to 2010 . A gear box runs around 600 thousand , special crane 100 thousand and blade repairs every three years and again in another three years .

Falmouth Wind 1 had an electric problem around Thanksgiving.

What are the projected repair costs for a gear driven turbine in the next one year?

THERE ARE NO OPTIONS PERIOD (they are coming down .) I THINK IT IS FINALLY TIME FOR A FULL INVESTIGATION INTO THIS MATTER . FIRST WE WITH THE WHITEHOUSE, THEN THE GOVERNORS OFFICE, THEN DEPARMENT OF ENERGY AND ENVIORNMENT . THEN THE MTC aka CEC, THEN THE CAPE LIGHT COMPACT, CVEC, AND AT THE END OF THE ROAD OF DECIET YOU WILL FIND THE FALMOUTH BOARD OF SELECTMEN . WHEN YOU DEAL WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE IN DENIAL THEIR CAN BE NO SOLUTIONS UNTILL THE ORGANIZATIONS CAN ADMIT THEY HAVE MADE A HUGE MISTAKE . THE TAXPAYERS AND RATEPAYERS DESERVE BETTER .

Falmouth Wind Turbine Study Health Impact Counter Points

http://legis.wisconsin.gov/eupdates/sen01/Massachusetts%20Wind%20Turbine%20Health%20Impact%20Study%20Talking%20Points.pdf

To the extent that these impacts can be ameliorated, it should be possible to take
advantage of the indigenous wind energy resource more effectively.” This
passage indicates the true purpose of the Massachusetts study—to create an
expansion of the wind industry through a slanted interpretation of wind health study
documents.

o The Panel merely reviewed literature and public media sources and met only three
times
o Stated that sleep disruption is the most commonly reported complaint by people and
discusses this primarily as a result of “unwanted sound” and audible, amplitudemodulated
noise (“whooshing”)
o Writes off most self-reported “annoyance” as a combination of sound, sight of the
turbine, and attitude towards the wind project (ES-5)
o Therefore, according to the Panel, because they “found” no negative health effects to
humans as a result of their literature research, it must necessarily follow that there
are positive health effects. Yet, these positive health effects are not the result of
wind turbines being safe, but that the turbines’ “green” impact on the environment will
result in a decrease of conventional sources of fuel. This endorsement of safety is
an admission that the Panel failed to strictly adhere to the scope of their charge.

Continued -

 Expert “Independent” Panel Members:

o Dr. James F. Manwell and Dora Anne Mills are extreme pro-wind advocates:
o Manwell oversaw the first utility scale wind turbine and the largest wind turbine
constructed in Massachusetts
o Manwell has won several awards from American Wind Association and U.S.
Department of Energy
o Mills has provided public testimony and “op-ed” newspaper pieces supporting wind
turbines while a member of the Commission and before the findings were released
o Posted information on Maine’s CDC website as Maine’s public health director that
wind turbines do not have negative health effects in 2009
o Page 2 of the study states that 5 of the panel members “did not have any direct
experience with wind turbines.” While the other members had backgrounds in
epidemiology, toxicology , neurology, and sleep medicine, they had no past direct
experience with wind turbines
 Massachusetts Study Cites Sources that Contain Information that Wind Turbines
Cause Negative Health Effects:
o The Panel used several articles by the same authors of other studies that Senator
Lasee provided to the PSC
o The Panel used several articles that Senator Lasee provided to the PSC that found
that infrasound from wind turbines can have negative health effects, yet the
Massachusetts panel comes to different conclusions than the study authors:

The “long & short” of the Report:
Option 1 solves the under-examined negative health, safety and property value problems and gives precedence to an ethically healthy community
Option 2 compromises all stakeholder group’s interests but one. That group’s platform was defined as any mitigation not constituting a municipal fiscal liability.
Option 3 solves a stakeholder group’s demand for climate action goals, another stakeholder group’s condition that energy revenue be unimpeded, while expelling a portion of the community’s people from their homes and or leaving many in harms way.

The last two options involve significant attention and detail to performing triage on energy and fiscal numbers tabulated for the report. The numbers and data points supportive of Option 1 went largely ignored (i. e. Mass Department of Public Health said they could not provide the resources necessary to satisfy the Falmouth Board Health’s urgent requests for assistance), mis-interpreted, or resident’s evidential impact proof was neglected.

A good decision is based on knowledge and not numbers ~ Plato

It'll be interesting to see if this tenant of truth ‘holds water’... in Falmouth!

This needs to be exposed for what it truly is. The town meeting members did'nt do their homework and got hustled by the Selectmen ...who wore hoodwinked by the CEC.

Someone once said ~
"When one bases his life on principle, 99 percent of his decisions are already made"
I wonder whether this applies to politics? Or maybe..Falmouth is simply the potential 1% exception?

Please find attached the $400,000.00 final report of the Wind Turbines Options Analysis Process. The full appendices will soon be available online at www.cbuilding.org/falmouthwind .

Boards of health in Bourne, Falmouth, Scituate, Fairhaven and Kingston (to name only a few) are being pressed for relief from residents. The impetus for the escalation of health concern is born from inadequacies of zoning regulations recommended by wind energy promoters. These promoters "hoodwink" communities into believing that 'big wind projects are the NEW "Goose that lays Golden Eggs". The Massachusetts Clean Energy Center authored a state supported Wind Turbine Model Bylaw (regulatory tool) for municipalities considering wind energy projects. This is heralded as the State standard, yet more and more local boards of health are finding themselves in a quandary. This "rotten egg" then becomes an unfortunate Political issue. In Falmouth, this health issue has no business being addressed by any board other than Health!

Health concerns of residents fall squarely under the jurisdiction of the a board of health. The level of acceptable health afforded is not measured by, nor should be subject to, municipal budget or climate action impacts. Falmouth needs to recognize the wind turbine options process as only a distracting 'side show' in the State's three ring circus (DEP,DPH,Beacon Hill corner office). The problem requires the solution to be dealt with, head on - where it belongs, under the "Big Tent".. under the jurisdiction of Falmouth's Board of Health.

The Chief Executive Officer of Vestas says this about low frequency noise :

"At this point you may have asked yourself why it is that Vestas does not just make changes to the wind turbines so that they produce less noise? The simple answer is that at the moment it is not technically possible to do so, and it requires time and resources because presently we are at the forefront of what is technically possible for our large wind turbines, and they are the most efficient of all."
https://www.wind-watch.org/documents/letter-from-vestas-worried-about-regulation-of-low-frequency-noise/

At what point do the residents of Fairhaven ,Falmouth ,Scituate and Kingston join together in class action litigation ? (Let a jury decide the noise issues )You could have the attorneys that represent each group become the class representatives.

The first thing would be to get class action certification through the Massachusetts court system. My belief is there are many more people who won't come forward about the low frequency/ infra sound noise until some kind of court action occurs .

After you've done everything you can to help yourself the court system and jury trial is the way to go .

Finnally the real issues at hand are coming out . "
BOY AN I TIERED OF TRYING TO EDUCATE ELECTED OFFICIALS , CITIZENS, TAXPAYERS AND RATEPAYERS ON THIS ISSUE . "
Now look folks, what Falmouth needs is some love and financial help from the Governor. It's time too put this matter into perspective for everyone . For one we tried the some old technology that had failed decades ago in Boone N. C PLEASE LOOK IT UP FOR YOURSELF. If you google windturbine experiment Boone N.C you can see for yourself the failed experiment . Same exact results we are experincing in Falmouth MA. 2013 . Why the current administation has'nt anyone smart enough on staff to look into these matters is beyound my scope of reason . I repeat the again . Please lookinto this it is quite inlightening . NASA spent 20 million dollars on the same experiment back in the late 70's. Why must we keep waisting are money on old technology? They ended up taking the turbines down and now the tower is holding up a watertank at The University of Texas A & M. Maybe the Town can rent the towers to a cell phone carrier after the turbines are takin down ? I don't know, but one thing is perfectely clear to me it is time to put this unfortunite mistake to bed . So please Governor Patrick , PLEASE help the TOWN OF FALMOUTH restore our community back to pre turbine conditions and bring the Town back in complience with the Massachusetts Constitution . Remember this is a health issue .