Wind turbines make people sick (Australia)

Dec 9, 2011

Facebooktwittermail

.
“Wind Turbines and Public Health”

.
The Waubra Foundation, Australia
.


.
Editor’s note: ¬†Click here for full documentation of the¬†references presented throughout the above video.

  1. Comment by robert mcmurtry on 12/09/2011 at 8:15 pm

    This video is outstanding and should be widely shared.

    In addition, it merits referencing. Could WTS webmaster post the requisite information?

    Bob

    Editor’s note: Thanks for the prod! It’s now done.

  2. Comment by Marsh Rosenthal on 12/10/2011 at 12:06 am

    Lots of well-meaning people simply miss the first point. Industrial-scale wind power generation is a non-starter for many reasons—the first being that it does not work. It cannot generate more than 25% of the stated machine size, be it 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, or 3.0 MW.

    The Dutch, in a recent scientific study, found that the technology is NOT SUSTAINABLE. They learned that the preferred method of back-up generation—gas-fired power plants—because of their intermittant running which parallels the intermittancy of wind turbines due to the variations of the wind, burn less efficiently, burn more fuel, and produce more effluent than if NO wind plants existed at all.

    Imagine that! There goes the “green” reason to litter the world with this monstrous junk.

    But wait, there’s more. Those of us who have read Dr. Nina Pierpont’s book, “Wind Turbine Syndrome,” or who have met and spoken to some of the victims in Falmouth, MA,, as I have, know that municipalities and wind developers would sooner make guinea pigs out of nearby wind turbine neighbors than dismantle the turbines because of the enormous stimulus loans they have taken and spent, or because there is so much money to be made from building and operating them.
    .
    guinea pig
    .
    Here’s the picture. Nationally, politicians gather huge amounts of money into their campaign funds. The petroleum industry, who have tremendous financial resources, make VERY generous contributions to both major candidates. One of them gets elected. Now it’s Barak Obama. Mr. Obama maps out a U.S. energy future with renewable energy generation playing a significantly growing role. In Massachusetts, Governor Deval Patrick echoes this by declaring the goal of 20% electric power generation by 2020 via renewables. Wind power is the favorite of the green-minded, and this is no accident.

    Meanwhile, the petroleum conglomerate has purchased the controlling interests in the major industrial wind power companies. This is a no-brainer for them because wind power, which does not produce but a snippet of electricity, does not compete with their main products, gas and oil. So, what’s this all about? The petroleum conglomerate has moved into the business of producing its own form of legal money, Production Tax Credits, from taxes. They are coining money hand over fist.

    Now, some of you may have heard that industrial wind plants—“wind farms” to the so-called green-minded—sustain a depreciation on the value of their equipment over a five-year period. Well, that’s okay, because if you are the owner of these facilities you can just turn around and sell it to the next operator company, AND THEY START ALL OVER and enjoy the five-year depreciation all over again, and everyone can repeat this little game ad nauseum.

    Now, none of this merry plundering could happen if we taxpayers and electric ratepayers didn’t pick up two-thirds of the tab. When you consider that the average, garden variety 2.0 MW wind turbine costs about $3 million, we must cheerfully ante up $2 million each. If the grand plan conservatively calls for 100,000 turbines, that’s $200 billion.

    While I believe I have grossly underestimated the scheme, you begin to get the picture. There seems to be less money for social services programs, education and infrastructure, but the federal government has billions to shovel into the “renewable energy industry,” the emperor’s new scam.
    .
    emperor
    .
    I know there’s lots more—but how much can you stand?

    Marsh Rosenthal

  3. Comment by steph johnston on 12/11/2011 at 12:39 pm

    Quite frankly, as one of the ~ 70 Norfolk victims of Industrial wind Turbines whose house is surrounded within a 3 km radius by 18 Vestas 1.65 MW IWTs, I find I can “take it” less and less with each passing day as the IWT assault 24/7/52 continues into the FOURTH year.

    Because of all the research sent to me to read, I understand more and more of the mechanism of the IWT assault which in turn has helped to devise strategies for improving a healthy immune system, getting away from the house daily for as long and as often as possible just so that I can manage the night time critical/necessary sleep such as it is.

    Calvin and Nina have been instrumental in helping me maintain physical and mental health and for that I am VERY grateful.

The comments are closed.