Wind Turbines and Human Health

Abstract

The association between wind turbines and health effects is highly debated. Some argue that reported health effects are related to wind turbine operation [electromagnetic fields (EMF), shadow flicker, audible noise, low-frequency noise, infrasound]. Others suggest that when turbines are sited correctly, effects are more likely attributable to a number of subjective variables that result in an annoyed/stressed state. In this review, we provide a bibliographic-like summary and analysis of the science around this issue specifically in terms of noise (including audible, low-frequency noise, and infrasound), EMF, and shadow flicker. Now there are roughly 60 scientific peer-reviewed articles on this issue. The available scientific evidence suggests that EMF, shadow flicker, low-frequency noise, and infrasound from wind turbines are not likely to affect human health; some studies have found that audible noise from wind turbines can be annoying to some. Annoyance may be associated with some self-reported health effects (e.g., sleep disturbance) especially at sound pressure levels >40 dB(A). Because environmental noise above certain levels is a recognized factor in a number of health issues, siting restrictions have been implemented in many jurisdictions to limit noise exposure. These setbacks should help alleviate annoyance from noise. Subjective variables (attitudes and expectations) are also linked to annoyance and have the potential to facilitate other health complaints via the nocebo effect. Therefore, it is possible that a segment of the population may remain annoyed (or report other health impacts) even when noise limits are enforced. Based on the findings and scientific merit of the available studies, the weight of evidence suggests that when sited properly, wind turbines are not related to adverse health. Stemming from this review, we provide a number of recommended best practices for wind turbine development in the context of human health.

Thirty years of North American wind energy acceptance research: What have we learned?

“…Annoyance from wind turbine sound 5.2.1 Some studies have correlated turbine sound with annoyance, which may be associated with sleep disturbance, negative emotions, or other health-related effects (Knopper & Ollson, 2011;Knopper et al, 2014;Michaud et al, 2016a). The annoyance experienced by people living near utility-scale wind facilities is correlated to more negative attitudes (Fast et al, 2016;Firestone et al, 2015).…”

“…Some research has demonstrated that annoyance and complaints decline with increased distance from turbines (Kaliski & Neeraj, 2013;Nissenbaum et al, 2012), but there is no general consensus about the setback distance required to minimize or mitigate annoyance (Nissenbaum et al, 2012) as distance is just one component of how sound from turbines propagates to nearby residents. Accordingly, researchers (and stakeholders in general) often rely on a sound-specific threshold to reduce annoyance and stress impacts and concerns from local residents, which is commonly 40-45 dBA 6 (Knopper & Ollson, 2011;Knopper et al, 2014;Paller, 2014;Phadke, 2013 . In a recent comprehensive study of measured wind turbine sound levels and reported health effects, turbine noise reached a maximum of 46 dBA and a mean of 35.6 dBA for 1,238 residents living between 0.25 -11.22 kilometers from operational wind turbines in Canada (Michaud et al, 2016b).…”

“…Recent epidemiological research concludes that wind turbine sound and infrasound 8 are not directly related to adverse human health effects (Knopper & Ollson, 2011;Knopper et al, 2014;Michaud et al, 2016a) or sleep quality (Michaud et al, 2016b). Some research attributes wind-related health symptoms to the "nocebo" hypothesis, in which the expectation of negative health effects influences symptoms experienced (Knopper et al, 2014).…”

“…Some research attributes wind-related health symptoms to the "nocebo" hypothesis, in which the expectation of negative health effects influences symptoms experienced (Knopper et al, 2014).…”

“…Similarly, Fast et al (2016, p. 3) conclude that "rather than dismissing health claims as groundless or inconsequential, policy-makers should take a precautionary approach so as to more thoroughly address the factors that contribute to frustration on the part of host communities." If community concerns and expectations regarding sound and health impacts are not adequately addressed, a portion of the population may remain annoyed even after noise limits are enforced (Knopper et al, 2014).…”