As my long-time readers (hi, Mom!) know, I’ve critiqued what seems an endless series of “health studies” from “experts” that claim wind turbines have no health effects on the neighbors. That list now includes:
Colby (2008) aka Chatham-Kent
AWEA-CanWEA Expert Review, aka Colby (2010)
Maine’s Neuro-Acoustical Issues paper, aka Mills (2009)
Ontario’s Potential Health Impacts of Wind Turbines, aka King (2010)
Australia’s Rapid Review, aka NHMRC (2010)
The latest in the series is Massachusetts’ Wind Turbine Health Impact Study: Report of Independent Expert Panel, published in January 2012. I originally wasn’t going to post anything about it. First off, it wasn’t a study – it was a literature review, just like all the other “studies” mentioned. And why waste my time on the same-old same-old?
God knows there’s enough victims in New England (starting with Falmouth) that they could have gone out into the field and practiced some science for a change, but I suspect they were afraid of what they might find. So they Googled around, found Pedersen, Pedersen and van den Berg and one new entrant, Shepherd. They found fault with everything and went home declaring there was nothing there. Which made their boss, Governor Patrick, very happy.
Enter one Raymond Hartman, whose resume looks pretty serious. He took a look at the Impact Study and came away with much the same impression that a lot of us who have been studying this stuff for a long time did. In short, it was Junk Science, just like all the others in this series. He published a summary of its faults, which I’ve converted to a pdf and reformatted a little to make it more readable. It is a series of points, easily read in a few minutes. I’d urge everyone to take a look at it.
Hartman, Junk Science