The Waubra Foundation
20th December, 2014

The Australian Charities and Not for Profit Commission (ACNC) Assistant Commissioner David Locke has advised the Waubra Foundation of his decision to confirm our ongoing registration as a charity which "advances health by preventing sickness”, and "advancing public debate", and that our work includes a variety of sources of sound and vibration, including extractor fans and diesel machinery used in mining, power station gas fired turbines, natural and coal seam gas field compressors, as well as industrial sized wind turbines.

While confirming the Waubra Foundation’s charity status, Assistant Commissioner Locke has revoked our status as a Health Promotion Charity, previously awarded to us by the Australian Taxation Office.(1)

The Foundation’s Board advises it will be challenging Assistant Commissioner Locke’s decision on this latter point.

The Foundation will also ensure the ACNC's decision in this matter is included in matters referred by the Foundation to the current Federal Senate Inquiry into Wind Turbines, chaired by Senator John Madigan. Senator Madigan is both well aware of the very real suffering of rural residents from environmental noise, and of the work we do in rural Australia.  Senator Madigan has also played a crucial role supporting the acoustic research, commissioned by Pacific Hydro and conducted by Acoustician Steven Cooper, in collaboration with three households living near the Cape Bridgewater Wind Power Facility. 

In making his decision we note that ACNC Assistant Commissioner David Locke overlooked the condition “environmental sleep disorder” resulting from excessive night time noise, and the many diseases which are well known to be directly caused or exacerbated by sleep disturbance and deprivation.(2)

We note that Dr David Iser was the first Australian medical practitioner to identify sleep disturbance, stress symptoms, and related illnesses and diseases in residents adversely affected by wind turbine noise at Toora in his population survey in 2004.(3)

We note the 2014 National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Systematic Literature Review into adverse health effects of wind turbines specifically found that sleep disturbance was noted in the seven research studies into wind turbine noise included in their latest literature review.(4)

download pdf file with references

From Bayshore Broadcasting
Saturday, December 13, 2014 8:31 AM by Kevin Bernard
Multi Municipal Wind Turbine Working Group says Health Canada study 'an insult.'

There is audio for this story. 
 click to open MP3 version 

The head of the "Multi-Municipal Wind Turbine Working Group" calls a Health Canada study on the impact of wind turbines "an insult." 

Mark Davis tells Bayshore Broadcasting News those involved, ignored a number of people who should have been the focus of the study.

Health Canada says it's study found no evidence to "support a link between exposure to wind turbine noise and any of the self-reported illnesses". 

Davis -- who is also Deputy-Mayor of Arran-Elderslie -- says the group has fired a letter to Prime Minister Steven Harper expressing their dismay with the study.

He says these are real people and he is convinced the giant wind turbines are having an affect on the health of those living near them.

The working group met in Chesley on Thursday, and Davis says they heard from several people who were in tears about how they can't sleep because of the noise, vibration and shadow flicker. 

Davis says when Health Canada found several vacant homes close to wind turbines sites, they simply moved on and didn't try to track down the residents who moved because of their health problems.

He adds the study was expanded to 10 kilometres from the wind turbines so they could get enough people in the group.

Davis says because those people who moved away were ignored, the study is flawed.

Another working group meeting will be held in Chesley on January 8th at 7 PM in the Chesley fire hall.

The anti-windmill lobby in Huron County is making history with a Charter Challenge to protect the health rights of local residents. Here is a press release to explain the what and the why of this important issue.

by Dave Hemingway, Anita Frayne
November 21, 2014

The long awaited Divisional Court Charter Challenge of three industrial wind turbine projects wrapped up on Thursday, November 20th. The Appeal went before Justices F.N. Marocco, D.M. Brown and J.R. Henderson at the Courthouse in London. Arguments were made by Julian Falconer and team, counsel for the four families (Drennan, Dixon, Ryan & Kroeplin) objecting to the proximity of industrial wind turbines to their homes in the 140 turbine K2 (Drennan) and 15 turbine St. Columban (Dixon & Ryan) wind projects currently under construction in Huron County, and the 92 turbine Armow Wind Project being constructed in Bruce County. Counsel for the Ministry of the Environment and the wind developers argued in support of the current legislative regime for the development of wind projects in Ontario. The matter of a stay of construction of the K2 and St. Columban Wind Projects was also heard. The Appeal was well attended each day by an attentive audience of supporters of the four families, press and other interested parties. This Charter Challenge Appeal was to the constitutionality of certain provisions of the Environmental Protection Act which was amended by the Green Energy and Economy Act. The Stay action was also spoken to. At the end of the Appeal Hearing, the learned judges reserved their decision on all matters before the court. The four families are not seeking any type of financial settlement in this action.

It is important to note that on the first day of the Appeal intervenor status, in support of the four couples, was requested by the County of Lambton as well as by a community coalition of fourteen different groups from across the province.Serious harm to human health, arising from exposure to industrial wind turbines, was at the heart of this Appeal. What became very clear during the Appeal was the disturbing data gaps when it comes to a solid understanding of how these turbines impact human health. Proper, scientifically based setbacks for these projects are critical for everyone – people living within the projects, wind developers, governing bodies and, in fact, all residents of our province. The focus of the Appeal was, of course, part of a much broader ongoing discussion across the province on the wind turbine front. Other concerns include the economics of wind energy development, animal health, property values, tourism, source water protection, wildlife habitats, migratory routes, loss of longstanding municipal rights and authority, loss of local democracy, loss of prime agricultural land for food production, loss of future development potential within wind developments, a drain on local extractive resources and the loss of trust among family members, friends and neighbours – people who have lived and worked together for years and who now feel deeply divided and betrayed.SWEAR (Safe Wind Energy for All Residents) is a group which formed in 2011 to support Shawn & Trish Drennan as they embarked on their legal journey to address their concerns about health impacts from wind turbines. Other avenues had been exhausted and, sadly, the legal route became the one remaining option. A considerable record has been created since that time and was brought to bear at Divisional Court. The Dixons, Ryans and Kroeplins, along with their supporters (HALT and HEAT), came under the SWEAR umbrella for this Appeal and we will all move forward together. Since its inception, all funds contributed to SWEAR have gone directly to legal costs. All other incidental costs have been and will be borne by SWEAR members.2It is our belief that the Green Energy & Economy Act, 2009, is a particular instance of a piece of provincial legislation gone terribly wrong. Going forward, it is quite possible that a similarly deeply troublesome piece of legislation will be passed pertaining to some other matter and will profoundly impact the day to day lives of other ordinary people in this province. Let’s be thankful that the four families in this situation have had the courage to stand up and fight for governmental accountability. Let’s do all that we can to send a cautionary message to our provincial legislators.If you share our concerns, please help to fund this important case which is essentially public interest litigation. It is unfair and unreasonable to expect a few to fund something which stands to benefit so many. In all likelihood, further action will be required, regardless of the outcome of this Appeal. Cheques can be made payable to “SWEAR” and sent to Dave Hemingway, R.R.#2, Bayfield, ON N0M 1G0. Donors can also go online to the SWEAR website at, and hit the “DONATE” button. For further information on this case, go to and

Thank you.Dave Hemingway, President Anita Frayne, Secretary/TreasurerOn Behalf of SWEAR


1925 BRUCE ROAD 10, BOX 70, CHESLEY, ON NOG 1L0 / 519-363-3039 / FAX: 519-363-2203

3 December, 2014



The Right Honourable Stephen Harper, Prime Minister
The Honourable Rona Ambrose, Minister of Health
Contradictions and bias undermine credibility of the
Health Canada Wind Turbine Noise Study

The Multi-municipal Wind Turbine Working Group is comprised of elected municipal
councillors and appointed citizens from parts of Southern Ontario where
approximately 30% of industrial wind turbines are concentrated. Over the past
several years we have received a growing number of delegations from constituents
whose health has been adversely affected by proximity to the wind turbines. It is not
easy to listen to people who continue to suffer from ringing and pressure in the ears,
pounding vibrations in the head and chest, nausea, dizziness and the ongoing
inability to sleep. Their stories are especially disturbing because we know these
people; we know they are not lying; and it is our responsibility under the Municipal
Act to protect their health.

We are dismayed that the recently released Health Canada Wind Turbine Noise and
Health Study has ignored the distress of real people by hiding behind meaningless
“estimated” noise projections and predictive modeling rather than first making
professional clinical observations based on the histories of actual sufferers.
Investigation of anecdotal evidence is the foundation of all medicine. 


Canada study summary contains no reference to the growing body of research that
contradicts the main theme of the summary. Our Grey-Bruce Medical Officer of
Health, Dr. Hazel Lynn has found 18 peer-reviewed studies that “provide reasonable
evidence . . . that an association exists between wind turbines and distress in
humans”. The Brown County (Wisconsin) Board of Health has declared its wind
turbines a “public health nuisance” and a “human health hazard for all people . . .
who are exposed to Infrasound/Low Frequency Noise and other emissions
potentially harmful to human health”.

Key findings contradict summary of results

The key findings have been released without data for verification and without peer
review. Epidemiologists have pointed out that the study lacks scientific credibility.
Gaps, biases and errors in methodology make it unreliable. For example, only 1234
out of the 2004 dwellings selected responded to the survey compromising its
validity. Only 20% of the homes studied were “near” turbines. And yet homes up to
10 kilometres away were included, diluting the results from the homes near the
turbines. And the serious issues of low frequency noise, cyclical sound and
amplitude modulation were simply overlooked.

At the same time, the study contradicts itself. It found that wind turbine noise is
“statistically related to several self-reported health effects including blood pressure,
migraines, tinnitus, dizziness, and disturbed sleep”. And yet the key findings which
have been widely publicized claim that “no evidence was found to support a link
between exposure to wind turbine noise and any of the self-reported illnesses”.
Does Health Canada no longer advocate the precautionary principle which calls for
rigorous caution when the safety of any group is even remotely threatened,
acknowledging that lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for
postponing measures to protect them? 


It is our belief that that the premature marketing of the key findings has been a
disservice to the people of Canada, an insult to those who continue to suffer the
adverse effects of the turbines, and has resulted in loss of respect and credibility for
Health Canada. We await your explanation as to how Health Canada came to its
conclusion that there are no health problems when obviously there are.

Yours truly,
Mark Davis, Chair
Deputy Mayor, Arran-Elderslie

download entire letter with references here

Shirley Wind Human Health Hazard Declaration

* BCCRWE (Brown County Citizens for Responsible Wind Energy) Requests Your Words of Support *

At the October 14, 2014 Brown County Board of Health meeting a motion was made to declare the Shirley Wind turbines a Human Health Hazard. The following motion was unanimously approved by the Board:

"To declare the Industrial Wind Turbines at Shirley Wind Project 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."

Brown County is located in Wisconsin, USA.

Brown County Citizens for Responsible Wind Energy (BCCRWE) has issued a press release regarding this Human Health Hazard declaration, which can be seen at: 

BCCRWE is requesting your words of support for this action.

Research indicates that industrial wind turbines can negatively affect the physical, mental and social well-being of individuals if placed too close to homes. BCCRWE has been working intensively for the past 5 years with professional researchers, physicians, acousticians, and legislators to protect citizens of Brown County, the state of Wisconsin, the United States, and those in other countries from the negative health impacts resulting from industrial wind turbines being built too close to people. 

BCCRWE welcomes and encourages individuals, organizations, and governmental agencies from around the world to send their words of support regarding the Board of Health's action. BCCRWE will pass your emails on to the Brown County Board of Health as support for their courage, integrity, responsibility, intellectual honesty, and care in declaring the industrial wind turbines at Shirley Wind to be human health hazards. 

If you or others you know have experienced negative health impacts from living in close proximity to industrial wind turbines and would like to share that experience along with your words of support with the Brown County Board of Health, please do so. 

Send your words of support, and if applicable your experiences, to:   

Thank you,

Brown County Citizens for Responsible Wind Energy

Last night in Ontario while you slept. 

Jim & Tanya left their home to go sleep in a parking lot.

At 1:30 in the morning Brian drove to work and slept in his car.

Jordan has to go to school today. His teacher wonders why his grades are slipping.  

Youtube link click here
Sleep Deprivation 

Sleep deprivation is used by torturers because it makes a person more suggestible, reduces psychological resistance and it reduces the body’s capacity to resist pain. Sleep deprivation is a very effective torture technique. The (United Nations) 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. 

Psychological Techniques 

Psychologically abusive techniques were used to disrupt sleep and disorient detainees. The CIA’s KUBARK manual suggests that interrogations aided by the use of temperature extremes, noise bombardment and sleep deprivation are able to induce ‘regression, psychic disintegration, and feelings of helplessness that lower prisoners’ defences.’

from National Wind Watch

Inter-Noise 2014: 43rd International Congress on Noise Control Engineering
Melbourne, Australia, 16-19 November 2014

The noise characteristics of ‘compliant’ wind farms that adversely affect its neighbours
Sarah Large, Mike Stigwood
MAS Environmental, UK
In the UK many wind farms cause complaints of noise despite complying with control limits. Problems relate to reliance on the LA90 index, failure to consider or apply ratings on the context of the sound characteristics and actual human responses due to complex characteristics. In general in the UK low frequency and very low frequency sound effects are either ignored or denied.

Initial findings of the UK Cotton Farm Wind Farm long term community noise monitoring project
Mike Stigwood, Duncan Stigwood, Sarah Large
MAS Environmental, UK
This paper provides early results of a long term study of community impact from wind farm noise and uses of the data obtained. A continuously recorded database of noise collected under different meteorological conditions has allowed detailed analysis of particular characteristics such as amplitude modulation and also the reliability of assessment methodologies for predicting and quantifying impact. Surprising outcomes are explored including upwind impact. 

Investigating the impacts of wind turbine noise on quality of life in the Australian context: A case study approach
David Mcbride, Daniel Shepherd, Robert Thorne
University of Otago, New Zealand; Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand; Noise Measurement Services, Australia
The WHO considers noise pollution to be of sufficient threat to public health to justify the publication of guidelines on noise effects and mitigation. ‘Community noise’ has largely been studied in the context of transportation and general neighbourhood noise, with exposure to wind turbine noise relatively understudied for historical, methodological, and political reasons. There also appears to be a general uncoupling of wind turbine noise from the other sources, which endows upon it an exclusivity that excuses it from the methods, guidelines, and critique used for other noise sources.

Outcome of systematic research on wind turbine noise in Japan
Hideki Tachibana
Professor Emeritus, The University of Tokyo
In Japan, serious complaints about wind turbine noise have arisen from nearby residents since the commencement of large-scale construction of wind generation plants in about 2000. Regarding this new type of environmental noise problem, scientific knowledge is insufficient and no standard methods for measuring and assessing the noise have been established in Japan. 

Special noise character in noise from wind farms
Valeri V. Lenchine, Jonathan Song
SA Environment Protection Authority, Australia
Noise produced by wind farms may exhibit a multitude of different noise characters, ranging from amplitude modulation, tonality and low frequency noise. The presence of the noise characters is able to increase the annoyance factor caused by a noise source significantly. A penalty to the noise levels is applied in accordance with some regulations when a noise character is detected. This paper discusses a noise character that can be described as “rumbling” that was detected during a long term monitoring program which was conducted in an area adjacent to a wind farm.

Correlation of amplitude modulation to inflow characteristics
Helge Aa. Madsen, Franck Bertagnolio, Andreas Fischer, Christian Bak
DTU Wind Energy, Technical University of Denmark
Amplitude modulation (AM) of noise from wind turbines and its more extreme version named “other amplitude modulation” OAM have been investigated intensively during the last few years due to the additional annoyance impact this type of noise has compared to broad band noise. In a recent published research by RenewableUK the hypothesis has been that one of the causes of OAM is transient stall on the blade due to non uniform inflow such as shear.

Wind turbine noise measurements – How are results influenced by different methods of deriving wind speed?
Sylvia Broneske
Hayes McKenzie Partnership Ltd, United Kingdom
With the increasing number of operational wind farms/turbines, the requirement for noise measurements required to demonstrate compliance with planning conditions is increasing as well. The British ETSU-R-97 noise limits are often set relative to measured or standardised 10 m height wind speeds and therefore the assessment of noise from wind turbines requires simultaneous noise and wind speed/direction measurements.

Using wind farm noise auralisations for effective community consultation
Frank Butera, Kym Burgemeister, Kai Fisher, David Mounter
Arup, Melbourne, Australia, and Singapore; Hydro Tasmania, Hobart, Australia
Two of the most common questions that wind farm developers face during community consultation are ‘what will the wind farm look like’ and ‘what noise will it make?’ A lot of work has been undertaken recently to develop ‘visualisations’ or ‘photomontages’ to answer the first question. However, there has not been an equivalent tool available to enable local communities to understand what a wind farm actually sounds like. 

The relevance of the precautionary principle to wind farm noise planning
Bob Thorne
Noise Measurement Services Pty Ltd, Australia
Wind farms consist of clusters of industrial wind turbines which, when placed in rural areas, are associated with intrusive and unwanted sound. Wind turbine noise has characteristics sufficiently different from other, more extensively studied, noise sources to suggest that standard industrial noise standards are not appropriate for measurement and assessment purposes. A seven year study is reported and, although limited in population size, it is clear that there are definite adverse health effects related to wind farm noise.

Wind turbine sound – metric and guidelines
Conny Larsson, Olof Öhlund
Uppsala University, Sweden
The meteorological conditions vary over the globe but also change over the day and the year and vary a lot depending on the terrain for a certain location. The meteorological parameters govern both the wind turbine emission sound levels and the sound propagation conditions and therefore gives rise to different sound immission levels. Long-time measurements of meteorological effects on sound propagation from wind turbines over forest areas have been performed at two sites in Sweden for more than two years.

An investigation of different secondary noise wind screen designs for wind turbine noise applications
Colin Novak, Anders Sjöström, Helen Ule, Delphine Bard, Göran Sandberg
University of Windsor, Canada; Lund University, Sweden; Akoustik Engineering Limited, Canada
The use of diaphragm type microphones with the typical foam windscreen ball for outdoor noise measurement applications are mostly restricted to wind speeds below 4 to 6 m/s. This is due to the extra noise induced into the microphone, particularly at low and infrasonic frequencies, as a result of the wind excitation on the diaphragm.