- On Wednesday, October 9, 2013, Isabelle Ducatillon was a guest on France Bleu Mayenne. Click to listen! http://www.francebleu.fr/infos/l-invite-de-france-bleu-mayenne/l-invite-de-france-bleu-mayenne-18 A court ruling in favor of residents affected by nuisances from a wind farm—and against the wind power lobby—has been widely reported in the media: **The Montpellier Regional Court recently recognized the “nuisance criteria” of a wind farm project in the Nord-Pas-de-Calais region in its ruling: aesthetic harm “resulting from environmental degradation caused by the complete distortion of a bucolic, rural landscape,” auditory harm “caused by the humming and whistling of the wind turbines,” and visual harm “caused by the flashing of white or red lights every two seconds, day and night.”
In the court’s view, “the entirely unusual, ongoing, and rapidly intolerable nature of the situation causes harm that goes beyond the normal inconveniences of living in a neighborhood, constituting a violation of property rights.”The Owners of Bourgon Castle**, provided an update on their fight against a wind farm project in the towns of Commer and Martigné.
- They ***are outraged that such a project could ruin a historic site—one that is open to the public and recognized at the national level as being of public interest through its designation as a Historic Monument.*A few clarifications:Specifically regarding the castle: - Visibility cones: The Albanel circular, which stipulates that a 10-kilometer distance must be maintained between wind turbines and a historic monument, was not followed.
-
- The landscapes surrounding the castles of Bourgon and Thuré are being marred by wind turbines measuring 150 meters in height—half the height of the Eiffel Tower.
-
- A negative impact on tourism and cultural heritage—two major economic sectors in Mayenne that support skilled local jobs that cannot be outsourced;
For nearby residents
: - A drop of more than 30% in property values due to the proximity of wind turbines, according to notaries, real estate agents, and case law - Daily nuisances—aesthetic, auditory and visual disturbances - Serious distress for breeders’ horses, which are numerous in Mayenne
For the French in general:
- According to ERDF, electricity bills are rising inexorably by more than 30%; French energy companies recently called for an end to subsidies for wind power, while German manufacturers are currently criticizing the additional costs that wind power imposes on their electricity bills. - Decline in competitiveness - Risk of blackouts, as French energy companies recently pointed out; - Additional pollution due to thermal power plants stepping in to replace wind turbines when there is no wind; Click to listen! http://www.europe1.fr/MediaCenter/Programs/Le-zoom-eco/Videos/Le-Rosbif-runs-on-flour-1682313/**National heritage preservation organizations have joined the legal challenges against the Commer and Martigné wind farm project, including La Demeure Historique (DH), VMF (Vieilles Maisons Françaises), and SPPEF… Furthermore, the latter cites remarks made by Mr. Hollande
at the environmental conference last October:
“In some cases, we even observed free-rider effects, waste of public funds, and speculative behavior.”
“It’s not right; it doesn’t make sense that public funds—whether in the form of subsidies or tax revenue channeled through such mechanisms—should be used to support a policy that doesn’t produce results.”**Europe 1 picks up on the topic: http://www.europe1.fr/MediaCenter/Emissions/Le-zoom-eco/Videos/Comment-l-energie-verte-risque-de-nous-plonger-dans-le-noir-1670871/ Mr. Raymond Lebas of “Maisons Paysannes de France” also comments: Why renewable energy (RE)—and primarily wind turbines? A brief history: The fight against the greenhouse effect became a European priority in the 1990s, leading to the implementation of the “Climate and Energy Package” under the French presidency of the Council of the European Union in late 2008, with the “three times 20” rule: by 2020, a 20% reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, a 20% improvement in energy efficiency, and a 20% share of renewable energy in final energy consumption.
France will rely on renewable energy sources (RES) for 23% of its energy needs. Since the decision to close the Fessenheim plant, this percentage is expected to rise to 30%—comprising 13% from hydropower and 17% from wind, biomass, and solar photovoltaic power. In Europe, and particularly in France, regulations are taking hold, and with the establishment of the “Regional Climate, Air, and Energy Plans ” (SRCAE) in 2012, only one document has been produced regarding electricity generation: the “Regional Wind Energy Plan,” (SRE); there is no equivalent for other renewable energy sources, such as hydropower, tidal power, biomass, geothermal energy, or solar energy (thermal or photovoltaic).*
Wind turbines thus become the leading player in renewable energy (1).
This choice is misguided; wind power runs counter to the established goals and poses a serious threat to France in the areas of ecology, the environment, the economy, society, and public health*** Ecology and the environment: • The primary goal of wind power is to provide clean energy and reduce GHG emissions.
Wind power will not contribute to this; a wind turbine only generates electricity at its rated capacity when wind speeds are between 50 and 60 km/h. It is generally accepted that an onshore wind turbine will generate (even though the blades are turning) only 20 to 25% of its rated power; therefore, thermal power plants must be installed in parallel. These investments result in duplication of effort and generate significant amounts of GHGs, meaning that 1 MW of “clean” power requires 3 MW of “dirty” (thermal) power (2). • The wind power grid is very scattered; since wind power generation facilities are located in rural areas while the electricity is consumed in densely populated areas, the distribution network must be redesigned and strengthened.
Consumption can sometimes be very far removed from production. This was confirmed by D. Batho on Oct. 10, 2012, at the meeting: “As you know, the development of renewable energy will require the construction of several thousand kilometers of high-voltage power lines.” • The manufacture of wind turbines is not environmentally neutral.
The magnets used in alternators contain neodymium (500 kg for a 2.5 MW wind turbine). This element is a rare earth metal, and its extraction and refining result in the release of numerous toxic substances: heavy metals, sulfuric acid, and radioactive elements (uranium and thorium).
The radioactivity measured in villages in Inner Mongolia near the Baotou rare-earth mine is 32 times the normal level (in Chernobyl, it is 14 times the normal level). These elements cause pancreatic and lung cancers as well as leukemia (3). • Destruction and homogenization of landscapes: Given the expected large number of wind farms, the wind energy program is causing significant disruption to France’s landscapes (4).
For the Poitou-Charentes region (25,809 km²), the SRE (5) aims to have 850 wind turbines by 2020—that is, 168 wind farms, each with 5 turbines—or an average of 153 km² per wind farm. Each wind farm would therefore be located within a square with sides of 12 km.
Since the visibility range of a wind turbine can reach up to 20 km, there will almost always be a wind turbine within our field of vision.
Economy
• In France, the early development of wind power was strongly stimulated by EDF’s obligation to purchase wind power at a highly attractive rate: 8.2 c/€ per kWh of onshore wind power generated. Through the CSPE (Contribution to the Public Electricity Service) mechanism, which is paid by consumers, EDF is reimbursed for the loss it incurs as a result of this obligation to purchase electricity at a rate much higher than the cost of its own production.
This has two consequences: a significant increase in electricity costs for consumers and a windfall for developers. • Following the expansion of the renewable energy capacity (wind and solar) the CSPE, initially set at 4.5 €/MWh (2000), was successively raised to 10.5 €/MWh at the end of December 2010 and to 13.5 €/MWh on January 1, 2013.
Full compensation for costs in 2013 was estimated at 18.8 €/MWh, but this was capped at 13.5 €/MWh by the government, which refuses to allow EDF to pass on the actual costs (6). Barring any changes in the calculations, the increase will likely be €3 per year, resulting in a CSPE of around €40/MWh for 2020. • The feed-in tariff, which is highly advantageous for developers, has transformed the original goal—reducing GHG emissions—into a source of income for developers (7) over the next 5 years, solely due to renewable energy.
The increase is attributable to the CSPE, the estimated €45 billion in grid upgrades, changes to the management of interconnections, and duplicate investments. Added to this will be the cost of enhancing safety at nuclear power plants in the wake of Fukushima (8). • Employment will not benefit from the expansion of wind power.
In the long run, the impact on tourism will destroy more jobs than wind power will create. The jobs created by wind power are not long-term. Major European wind turbine manufacturers are all struggling and laying off workers, and maintenance requires very little labor (9). • The trade deficit resulting from wind turbine imports can be estimated at 19Md euros in 2020, following the installation of 19,000 MW (onshore wind turbines)
10
. • In countries that have opted for nuclear power, wind power is not viable in the long run. “Given the high cost of wind power, it is legitimate to ask whether developing this form of energy is worthwhile, considering that, throughout Europe, the cost per kWh that can be avoided through accessible energy-saving measures is currently much lower than the cost per kWh that can be generated by wind power” (
11
).
In other words, to reduce GHG emissions, investing in the building sector would be far more effective; it would help reduce energy poverty, create jobs in France, and reduce our trade deficit. • The decline in property values around these sites is very real.
Industry professionals (notaries and real estate agents) estimate that the value of properties adjacent to a wind farm decreases by between 21 and 46 percent up to a distance of 1,300 meters) (
12
). • Since the reform of the Business Tax (TP)—which had been the driving force behind municipalities’ decisions to approve the construction of wind farms—the new calculation of the “financial windfall” that municipalities will receive has become complex.
Developers are “enticing” city councils with “IFER” projections that are optimistic, to say the least. It is important to note that a municipality will receive less than 20% of the total revenue generated by all the new taxes and will lose approximately 60% compared to the former property tax (TP).
Society: • Increased energy insecurity due to the sharp rise in electricity and gas prices (
13
). • The breakdown of social cohesion in communities where the environment is destroyed for everyone for the benefit of a few (
14
).
Technology: This is, in fact, a mature industry from which we can no longer expect technological breakthroughs through research efforts, as is still possible for other energy sources. Legal: Many questions remain at both the national and local levels: the tariff decree is being challenged before the Council of State because it was not notified to the European Commission as state aid.
The Court of Justice is expected to issue an opinion in the fall of 2013. It cannot be ruled out that the funds received over the past 10 years by existing parks may have to be repaid (Le Monde, January 18, 2013). At the local level, the prefectural decree of September 29, 2012, approving the SRE, is the subject of a legal challenge before the Poitiers Administrative Court.
Safety: The General Council of Mines Issues an Alarming Report (
15
) “Safety is not a concern for either wind farm developers or public authorities.” In addition to the collapse of the entire wind turbine or a fire in the nacelle caused by overheating, the most frequently reported incidents involve the total or partial ejection of a blade—with pieces weighing several hundred kilograms potentially being hurled several hundred meters—or falling ice.
The incidents cited occur on all machines, even the most recent ones. The findings of this expert group highlight the inadequacy of the recommendations, particularly with regard to safety distances.
The ballistics study shows that the ejection distance can exceed 1,000 meters. It is worth noting that the rotational speed reaches 300 km/h at the tips of the blades. Health: The visual and, above all, noise disturbances are underestimated by the developers.
These wind turbines—rotating, flashing machines—require a sustained effort over time to look away from them.4 The most unbearable nuisance is undoubtedly the noise. On November 28, 2009, *Le Monde* devoted an eight-page feature to the “wind-tormented,” who live near wind turbines and “suffer from stress, nausea, insomnia, dizziness, irritability, depression….”
The newspaper reports that “testimonies are piling up at an alarming rate.” The noises are mechanical in nature (105 dB at the nacelle level for 2-MW wind turbines) and aerodynamic, caused by turbulence around the blades that produces a humming sound.
Developers often attribute these problems to subjective causes, which, to say the least, reflects a lack of understanding of the complex phenomena associated with noise (
16
). Infrasound (frequencies below 20 Hz) has a longer wavelength, is less affected by obstacles, and can travel very far—sometimes several kilometers (
17
).
One of the most significant consequences is sleep disturbance (
18
). These sounds are perceived by the inner ear without our being aware of them. Finally, we have long known that exposure to infrasound, even at very low intensities (10 dB), is associated with impaired alertness and sleep disturbances comparable to the neurological syndrome of migraine-associated vertigo.
Generally speaking, complaints often precede studies that prove their validity; this was the case with asbestos, mercury, and distilbène (
16
) etc. ADEME, which merely promotes industrial wind power while denying these nuisances, has come under severe criticism (
19
) From the perspective of environmental impacts and safety, a consensus is emerging around a minimum distance of 1.5 km from residential areas, a distance also recommended by the Academy of Medicine.***
Abbreviations:
- CSPE: Contribution to the Public Electricity Service
- DREAL Regional Directorate for the Environment, Land Use Planning, and Housing
- ENR Renewable Energy
- GHG: Greenhouse Gases
- ICPE: Classified Facilities for Environmental Protection
- IFER—Flat-Rate Tax on Network Companies
- RTE Electricity Transmission Network:
- SRCAE Regional Climate, Air, and Energy Plan
- SRE Regional Wind Energy Plan
- SCOT (Territorial Coherence Plan) References :
1In 2002, the Energy Regulatory Commission projected that 70% of renewable energy would come from biomass, due to the unparalleled qualities of this energy source (on-site methane treatment and reduction of greenhouse gases, positive impact on agriculture, job creation). In reality, however, 70% of the funds were allocated to the wind power sector as part of a massive import drive that created only marginal job growth and yielded no technological innovation (European Parliamentary Opinion, April 2012).
2The situation in Germany confirms this. The shutdown in 2011 of 8 out of 17 nuclear reactors resulted in a 12% loss in electricity production. Despite the installation of offshore wind turbines and the increase in capacity of the existing fleet (replacing 1-MW wind turbines with 2-MW or larger ones), the country will only be able to meet its needs by breaking ground on 17 coal- or lignite-fired power plants and 29 gas-fired power plants.
The three countries with the highest GHG emissions in Europe are Germany (10.2), Denmark (9.7), and Spain (8.2) (in metric tons per capita per year in 2007), and France (6.2). “The country that has developed wind power the most is Denmark, with wind power accounting for 13% of its energy mix.”
“Thus, 13% is made up for by oil-fired power plants that come online when there is no wind. This is not an effective way to prevent air pollution.” (Magazine “Défense No. 117, Sept.-Oct. 2005”).
Denmark has not subsidized wind power since 2005.3According to the map of cancer villages in China, the cancer mortality rate is 70% in villages near Baotou. (See Wikipedia on rare earth elements.)
The United States has stopped using it because it is too polluting.4See the book by Karine Grijol, geographer and associate professor at the University of Perpignan: “La faiblesse du vent, enjeux et contradiction de l’éolien en France” (The Weakness of the Wind: Challenges and Contradictions of Wind Power in France). Published in the “L’œil du géographe” series.5Regional Wind Energy Plan (Poitou-Charentes) – SRE, July 2012, page 11. It is clear that the elimination of ZDEs will increase this visual impact, as the wind farms will have fewer wind turbines.6http://www.cre.fr (January 2013): The projected public service costs for electricity for 2013 are estimated at 7.2 billion euros, of which €5.1 billion corresponds to projected costs for 2013 and approximately €2.1 billion to the adjustment for 2011.Full compensation for the projected 2013 costs (€7.2 billion) requires a per-unit public service contribution for electricity estimated at €18.8/MWh.
Article L.121-13 of the Energy Code, introduced by Law No. 2010-1657 of December 29, 2010, on the 2011 budget, limits its year-over-year increase to 3 €/MWh. The Court of Auditors has denounced this CSPE as an “unnamed tax.”7(JM Germa, La Compagnie du Vent, France’s 157th-richest person in just a few years). The magazine *Challenges* cites a certain Mr. Paris Mouratoglu, whose portfolio is valued at 660 million euros, and a Mr.
François Pélissier, who entered the wind power “business” just four years ago and whose fortune is now estimated at 125 million, etc.8(CRE, February 2013). The average electricity bill for French households is expected to jump by 30% by 2017, according to projections by the Energy Regulatory Commission. In a report on retail energy markets, the regulator states that more than one-third of this increase will be due to the rise in the electricity public service contribution (CSPE), which is largely attributable to the expansion of renewable energy. (Le Monde, July 2012) The average electricity bill for a French household will rise by 50% by 2020 due to high investments in renewable energy and growing investments in nuclear, according to a report by senators presented on Wednesday, July 18.
Subject, as the text emphasizes, to legislation and behavior that consumption unchanged. (Court of Auditors, June 2012) The additional cost of renewable energy will be €2.4 billion in 2012 and will reach €8.4 billion in 20209Each new “green” job eliminates 3.7 jobs in the traditional economy, according to a study by Verso Economics (UK) based on the Scottish experience—which is, in fact, the most proactive. (“The Economic Impact of Renewable Energy Policy in Scotland and the UK”).
10
The cost of importing 1 MW of wind power is approximately 1M€ (Wind Energy 2006).
11
Academy of Technologies, Oct. 2008.
12
Judgment of the Angers Regional Court dated April 9, 2009.
13
According to a report by the Energy Ombudsman, in 2011 there was an 80% increase compared to 2010, with an average debt of 1,900 euros. Today, an estimated 3.8 million households are affected.
14
EDF itself confirmed this at a recent seminar: “Violent opposition to wind power has emerged in certain villages in Seine-et-Marne, going so far as to disrupt social ties (breakdown of family ties, disruption of community life, physical violence, property damage, etc.).”
15
PUBLIC SAFETY AT INDUSTRIAL WIND FARMS, ABALAIN Jean-Pierre, CHAZAL Jean-Yves, SCHUMPP Bernard Report on Shortcomings, 2007.
16
Nicole LACHAT, “Wind Turbines and Human Health: A Literature Review and Recommendations,” June 2011.
17
JJUNG S.S. et al. 2001. Experimental identification of acoustic emission characteristics of large wind turbines, with an emphasis on infrasound and low-frequency noise. J. Korean Physic Soc 53: 1897–1905.
18 BAKER H et al. 2009. “Seismic Effects on Residents from 3-MW Wind Turbines,” Third International Meeting on Wind Turbine Noise, Aalborg, Denmark, June 17–19, 2009. 19 VILLEY-MIGRAINE, Marjorie, 2004.
Wind Turbines, Sound, and Infrasound: Effects of Industrial Wind Power on Human Health, University of Paris II–Panthéon–Assas.