Conclusions of the Newburyport Energy Advisory Committee (EAC)

Wind Turbine Ordinance Subcommittee

on proposed changes to
Section XXVI -Wind Energy Conversion Facilities of the Newburyport Ordinances

Executive Summary
The Wind Turbine Ordinance Subcommittee of the Newburyport Energy Advisory Committee
(EAC) has examined information related to proposed changes to Section XXVI -Wind Energy
Conversion Facilities of the Newburyport Ordinances. We also have reviewed publicly available
reports and information sources and want to offer clarifications of various impact and siting
issues. Our general conclusions are that the aspects of wind turbine installations related to noise,
health, visual impacts, electromagnetic interference, ice throw, environmental impacts on
wildlife and avian resources, and consequences to property values have been greatly exaggerated
by wind power opponents. We also point out the huge amount of information, often
contradictory, that is available on these topics.
Given our review and the important need to encourage development of renewable energy
resources in Massachusetts and locally, the subcommittee strongly believes that it is preferable
for Newburyport’s wind ordinance to accommodate future installations to the extent practical.
Recommended changes to the present wind turbine ordinance are therefore limited to changing
the criteria for setbacks from a fixed 300 feet to a 1.5 multiple of the turbine height. We also
recommend a broadening of project notification procedures to included newspaper notice of the
application and a clarification of the flicker study requirements.

Introduction
The production and use of energy has more impact on the environment than any other human
activity. Furthermore, the need for renewable energy as a component of national, regional, and
local energy production is undisputed and critical to our energy security. Wind power is
considered one part of the solution to this issue because it is one of the lowest–impact forms of
electricity available to us. It is also the most economical form of renewable energy, and every
kW generated by wind represents a reduction in C02 emissions and a reduced need for imported
fossil fuels.
The Newburyport Energy Advisory Committee (EAC) was established to offer advice and expert
opinion on such matters that relate to energy. A subcommittee has examined the issues that
relate to Newburyport’s wind ordinance and in this document, offers its findings and advice. We
begin with an examination of the issues that have been the subject of local debate.

Noise and Health

In 2009, a multidisciplinary scientific advisory panel comprised of medical doctors, audiologists,
and acoustical professionals conducted a review of current literature available on the issue of
perceived health effects of wind turbines. Among their observations are that irritations such as
annoyance from wind turbines are also produced by local and highway traffic as well as aircraft;
also that low frequency sound produced by turbines was a concern of older turbines but not of
modern ones. They concluded:

1
 1. There is no evidence that the audible or sub-audible sounds emitted by wind turbines
have any direct adverse physiological effects.
2. The ground-borne vibrations from wind turbines are too weak to be detected by, or to
affect, humans.
3. The sounds emitted by wind turbines are not unique. There is no reason to believe, based
on the levels and frequencies of the sounds and the panel’s experience with sound
exposures in occupational settings, that the sounds from wind turbines could plausibly
have direct adverse health consequences.
4. Wind turbines must comply with state and local noise regulations. Since turbines have
no unique acoustic characteristics, these regulations are sufficient.
Source: http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/filter_detail.asp?itemid=2487

Setbacks and Height

The Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources (DOER) has promulgated a model as-of-
right wind turbine ordinance with the following siting criteria;
1. The height of wind energy facilities shall not exceed 450 feet in height. Communities
may set a height limit that is less than 450 feet, provided that the limit selected allows for
the as-of-right construction and operation of turbines with a rated nameplate capacity of
600 kW or more.
2. Periodically, communities may wish to revisit their siting criteria to ensure that they
reflect industry standards as well as Green Communities Act requirements.
3. A wind turbine may not be sited within: (a) a distance equal to the height of the wind
turbine from buildings, critical infrastructure, or private or public ways that are not part
of the wind energy facility; (b) three times (3x) the height of the turbine from the nearest
existing residential structure; or (c) one point five times (1.5x) the height of the turbine
from the nearest property line.
4. The Site Plan Review Authority may reduce the minimum setback distance as appropriate
based on site-specific considerations, or written consent of the affected abutter(s), if the
project satisfies all other criteria for the granting of a building permit under the provisions
of this section.
Source: http://www.mass.gov/Eoeea/docs/doer/gca/gc-model-wind-bylaw-mar-10-2009.pdf

Environmental
The Massachusetts Renewable Energy Trust has found that wind energy offers many
environmental benefits, notably the absence of polluting emissions. Environmental concerns
include impacts on local sites, scenery and wildlife. Modern wind technology has made great
strides in addressing these concerns, and current impact studies for specific sites show
significantly reduced impacts on wildlife when modern turbines are used.
1. Wind energy projects do not emit pollutants that harm wildlife or contribute to climate
change, which is already altering habitats worldwide. However, wind facilities can
degrade and fragment wildlife habitat. This may lead to changes in animals' travel and
migration pathways and to the physical displacement of individual animals.

2
 2. Careful project siting and good design practices can reduce or eliminate these impacts.
Avoid locating projects in particularly sensitive habitats because the degree of risk posed
by a site depends on both the types and numbers of animals that may be affected.
3. For proposed projects, conduct environmental impact assessments to inventory natural
resources and examine how installation and operation might change environmental
conditions and species use patterns. Impact avoidance and mitigation strategies include
installing turbines in less sensitive locations and adjusting construction practices and
schedules.
Source: http://www.masstech.org/cleanenergy/wind/impactenv.htm

Avian
The Massachusetts Renewable Energy Trust has also examined avian issues found that the use of
monopole towers rather than lattice-type or guyed structures, larger and slower-moving blades
rather than small rapidly spinning ones, and widely spaced turbine arrays rather than dense ones
reduce such problems. They also concluded
1. Collisions with modern land-based wind turbines account for less than 1 out of every
10,000 bird deaths attributable to human causes or 0.01%. Predation by house cats
accounts for about 10% and collisions with buildings and windows for more than 50%.
2. According to the best available data, wind power's adverse impacts on birds and bats
occur at the individual rather than the population level, whereas positive effects-such as
reductions in emissions of harmful pollutants and greenhouse gases-can be experienced at
the population and species level.
Source: http://www.masstech.org/cleanenergy/wind/impactenv.htm

Property Values
The federally sponsored Renewable Energy Policy Project studied 25,000 property transactions
in view shed of wind projects and did not find evidence of wind power reducing property values
compared to similar sites.
Source: http://www.repp.org/articles/ static/1/binaries/wind_online_final.pdf

Visual Impacts and Flicker

The Massachusetts Renewable Energy Trust has concluded that wind turbine visibility impacts
are unavoidable. However, careful project siting and good design practices can help reduce or
eliminate the adverse visual impacts. Computer simulations and balloon and crane tests are
commonly used to provide a realistic picture of how turbine installations might change views
from specific locations. During project design, engineers can also plot very precisely whether
and how often flickering shadows might fall on specific locations.
A variety of methods are used to alleviate adverse visual impacts. Options include deploying
turbines in less visible locations and configurations, painting turbine components in low-contrast
colors, installing low-intensity and nonintermittent lighting systems, and planting trees and other
vegetation to screen views from residential and other settings.
Source: http://www.masstech.org/cleanenergy/wind/impactenv.htm

3
Electromagnetic Interference (EMI)
The American Wind Energy Association has examined the issue of whether a wind project can
interfere with electromagnetic transmissions such as radio, television, or cell-phone signals.
They concluded:
1. It is not a problem for modern small (residential) wind turbines since the materials used
to make such machines are non-metallic (composites, plastic, wood) and small turbines
are too small to create electromagnetic interference (EMI) by "chopping up" a signal.
2. Large wind turbines, such as those typically installed at wind farms, can interfere with
radio or TV signals if a turbine is in the "line of sight" between a receiver and the signal
source, but this problem can usually be easily dealt with improving the receiver's antenna
or installing relays to transmit the signal around the wind farm. Use of satellite or cable
television is also an option.

Furthermore, the UMass Renewable Energy Research Laboratory has concluded that the
fiberglass composite of modern wind turbine blades is unlikely to cause any interference with
broadcast signals.
Sources: http://www.awea.org/faq/wwt_environment.html and
http://www.umass.edu/windenergy/publications/published/commu
nityWindFactSheets/RERL_Fact_Sheet_3_Impacts&Issues.pdf

Ice Throw
The UMass Renewable Energy Research Laboratory has found that ice is likely to accumulate on
ridge mounted wind turbines in New England, just as it accumulates on trees. The ice sloughs
off as the blade flexes. For public safety, ridge-line winter trails may need to be moved away
from the base of the tower to a distance of 2-4 times the blade-tip height, depending on the site.
Source: http://www.umass.edu/windenergy/publications/published/commu
nityWindFactSheets/RERL_Fact_Sheet_3_Impacts&Issues.pdf

Other Issues
The EAC views issues such as blade failure, collapse, blade throw, fire, emergency response,
maintenance, and manufacturer defects to be matters of wind turbine warrantee and while of
importance to owners and insurers, these matters are not germane to siting ordinances

The Polarization of the Wind Energy Debate

Debates over wind turbine siting has become polarized both verbally, in the media, and on the
Internet in particular. There are Web sites promoting wind power and there are those fervently
opposed.
Industry trade organizations and wind power research centers offer a wealth of information about
turbines, their benefits, and factors that make for responsible siting. There are many such
organizations including:
American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) – http://www.awea.org/
Power of Wind – http://www.powerofwind.com/

4
 Wind Energy Works – http://www.windenergyworks.org/
WWEA – World Wind Energy Association – http://www.wwindea.org
Utility Wind Integration Group – http://www.uwig.org/
National Wind Coordinating Collaborative (NWCC) – http://www.nationalwind.org/
Wind Energy Planning – http://www.windenergyplanning.com/
North American Wind Power – http://www.nawindpower.com/page.php?24
Wind-Works – http://www.wind-works.org
Utility Wind Integration Group – http://www.uwig.org/
National Wind Coordinating Collaborative (NWCC) – http://www.nationalwind.org/
Countering this generally positive message, numerous web sites have emerged in opposition to
wind power. There are many and they typically focus on one particular proposed project, for
example:
Alliance to protect Nantucket sound - http://www.saveoursound.org/
War Against Wind - http://www.waragainstwind.blogspot.com/
“Exposed: MA Audubon Promotes Bird Killing Project”
There are also more general anti-wind-power advocacy efforts such as:
Industrial Wind Action - http://www.windaction.org/
American Wind Energy Opposition - http://www.aweo.org/index.html
National Wind Watch - http://www.wind-watch.org/
The vast amount and often-conflicting information available on these websites makes it difficult
to make an independent judgment about a particular project. However, when examining
accounts of wind turbine incidents, it is important to understand the number of installations that
are in operation.
According to Worldwide Wind Energy Development, “As of January 2007, there are more than
90,000 wind turbines operating worldwide, representing more than 70,000 MW of installed
generating capacity.” (Source http://www.wind-works.org/articles/WorldwideWindEnergy
Development2007.html) Given that number, and the experimental nature of many early
installations, it should be no surprise that failures and unsatisfactory outcomes have occurred.
The challenge is putting anecdotal accounts in perspective.
Providing potentially less biased view on wind-poser development are government and research
group offerings, including:
U.S. DoE - Wind Powering America – http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/
National Wind Technology Center – http://www.nrel.gov/wind/nwtc.html
UMass Wind Energy Center - http://www.umass.edu/windenergy/
Wind Power in Massachusetts -
http://www.masstech.org/cleanenergy/wind/massachusetts.htm

5
At the federal level, US DoE has established a goal of wind energy contributing 20% of the U.S.
electricity supply by 2030 (http://www1.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/wind_2030.html).
Helping guide this process, the National Wind association has prepared “Permitting of Wind
Energy Facilities: A Handbook” (http://www.nationalwind.org/asset.aspx?Assetid=185) written
to assist stakeholders, including decision-makers and agency staff at all levels of government,
wind developers, interested parties and the public, to be informed participants in the wind energy
development decision-making process.
At a more local level, the University of Massachusetts publishes a Community Wind Fact Sheet
Series with the following topics of relevance to siting and permitting:
Impacts & Issues -
http://www.umass.edu/windenergy/publications/published/communityWindFactSheets/R
ERL_Fact_Sheet_3_Impacts&Issues.pdf
Permitting in Your Community -
http://www.umass.edu/windenergy/publications/published/communityWindFactSheets/R
ERL_Fact_Sheet_7_Permitting.pdf
The Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs has also prepared a
Renewable Energy Siting Study (http://www.mass.gov/Eoeea/docs/doer/renewables/wind/wind-
siting-study-04-15-09.pdf) the concludes there should be siting reform that provides renewable
energy facilities with the same “one-stop” permitting process as larger fossil-fueled facilities.
Massachusetts Creates One-Stop Agency For Renewable Energy Development -
http://www.nawindpower.com/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.4947
25 Nov. 2009 - Gov. Deval Patrick, D-Mass., has signed legislation that transfers the
state's Renewable Energy Trust (RET) to the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (CEC),
effectively creating a single state agency responsible for renewable energy development.
Created by the Green Jobs Act of 2008, the CEC is charged with advancing the
Massachusetts green economy through support of research and development,
entrepreneurship, and workforce training, funded in part by a portion of annual RET
revenue.
This has legislation has resulted in the Community-Scale Wind program, providing feasibility
grants, design & construction grants, and site assessment services for public projects
(http://www.masstech.org/renewableenergy/commonwealth_wind/community_scale.html). The
program awards grants for qualifying wind projects with a nameplate capacity greater than or
equal to 100 kW. A project is eligible for funding if it is located at a commercial, industrial,
institutional, or public site and something Newburyport needs to bear in mind when making
decisions on what and what not to allow in our community.
The following web sites are useful in putting criticisms of wind power in perspective. While
these are presented by wind industry organizations, the material they present inarguably
overpowers the typically anecdotal arguments against specific projects.
Top Ten Wind Energy Myths - http://www.windenergyplanning.com/top-ten-wind-
energy-myths/
Wind Energy and Wildlife -
http://www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets/Wind_Energy_and_Wildlife_Mar09.pdf

6
 Wind Turbines and Health -
http://www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets/Wind_Turbines_and_Health.pdf
Utility Scale Wind Energy and Sound -
http://www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets/Utility_Scale_Wind_Energy_Sound.pdf
Wind Power Myths vs. Facts -
http://www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets/050629_Myths_vs_Facts_Fact_Sheet.pdf

Massachusetts Model As-of-Right Zoning Ordinance

The Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs has promulgated a
Model As-of-Right Zoning Ordinance or Bylaw: Allowing Use of Wind Energy Facilities
That includes the following provisions:
3.9.6 Height
The height of wind energy facilities shall not exceed 450 feet in height.
3.10.3 Setbacks
A wind turbine may not be sited within:
(a) a distance equal to the height of the wind turbine from buildings, critical
infrastructure, or private or public ways that are not part of the wind energy
facility;
(b) three times (3x) the height of the turbine from the nearest existing residential
structure; or
(c) one point five times (1.5x) the height of the turbine from the nearest property
line.
3.10.4 Setback Waiver
The Site Plan Review Authority may reduce the minimum setback distance as
appropriate based on site-specific considerations, or written consent of the affected
abutter(s), if the project satisfies all other criteria for the granting of a building permit
under the provisions of this section.
3.10.5 Shadow/Flicker
Wind energy facilities shall be sited in a manner that minimizes shadowing or flicker
impacts. The applicant has the burden of proving that this effect does not have
significant adverse impact on neighboring or adjacent uses.
Source: http://www.mass.gov/Eoeea/docs/doer/gca/gc-model-wind-bylaw-mar-10-2009.pdf)

7
Energy Advisory Committee Recommendations
The EAC wind ordinance subcommittee has reviewed the changes recommended by the 2009
Planning and Development Committee. We agree with several of committee’s recommendations
regarding the areas needing revision, however, we believe the specific changes excessively
restrict any future wind turbine installations in the City.
We see public safety issues being met by a setback distance from a property line of one and a
half (1.5) times the wind turbine height (highest position of a blade tip). We also see the need to
potentially waive such a requirement if there is agreement among abutters. For example, a
cooperative wind turbine installation might make more sense than a single property owner opting
for a smaller, albeit compliant unit.
EAC supports the current references to compliance with state and local noise regulations,
consistent with DOER's own Model As-of-Right Wind Turbine Ordinance. We recommend the
following changes and only the following changes:
XXVI-C Applicability and Criteria
1. The construction of any wind energy conversion facility shall be permitted in the I-1
and I-1B zoning districts, a minimum distance of 300 feet 1.5 times the turbine height
from a residential zoning district, subject to issuance of a Special Permit and provided the
proposed use complies with all Dimensional and Special Permit Regulations set forth in
Sections F and G of this ordinance.
2. Wind monitoring or meteorological towers shall be permitted in the I-1 and I-1B
zoning districts, a minimum distance of 300 feet 1.5 times the meteorological tower
height from a residential zoning district, subject to issuance of a building permit for a
temporary structure. Only one monitoring or meteorological tower per lot is allowed.
3. The minimum distance requirements established above may be may reduced as
appropriate based on site-specific considerations, or written consent of the affected
abutter(s), if the project satisfies all other permitting criteria under the provisions of this
ordinance.
XXVI-h Application Procedures
4. A. General Filing Requirements
[add] 4. Applicant shall post notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the City
and shall supply written notice of the application to the Zoning Board of Appeals,
Mayor, abutters and abutters to abutters within 3 times the turbine height of the
proposed Wind Energy Conversion Facility.
4. B. Location Filing Requirements
4. A line map to scale showing the lot lines of the subject property and all properties
within 300 feet of the property lines 1.5 times the turbine height of the proposed
installation, as well as the location of all buildings, including accessory structures, on
all properties shown. In addition, the map shall show the distance to any residential
zoning district if within 300 feet of the property lines 1.5 times the turbine height of
the proposed installation, and any residential structures within a distance of 3 times
the hub height of the turbine.

8
4. C. Siting and Design Filing Requirements
1. VICINITY/SITE MAP
A one-inch-equals-40 feet vicinity plan, signed and sealed by a Registered
Professional Engineer or Licensed Surveyor showing the following:
a) Property lines for the subject property and all properties adjacent to the
subject property within 300 feet 1.5 times the turbine height.
b) Outline of all existing buildings, including purpose (e.g., residential
buildings, garages, accessory structures, etc.) on subject property and all
adjacent properties within 300 feet 1.5 times the turbine height. Distances, at
grade, from the proposed wind energy conversion facility to each building on
the vicinity plan shall be shown.
c) Proposed location of wind energy conversion facility, including all turbines,
fencing, associated ground equipment, transmission infrastructure and access
roads. Including:
1) Location of all roads, public and private, on the subject property and on
all adjacent properties within 300 feet 1.5 times the turbine height
including driveways proposed to serve the wind energy conversion
facility,
2) All proposed changes to the existing property, including grading,
vegetation removal and temporary or permanent roads and driveways,
3) Representations, dimensioned and to scale, of the proposed facility,
including cable locations, parking areas and any other construction or
development attendant to the wind energy conversion facility.
d) Tree cover and average height of trees on the subject property and adjacent
properties within 300 feet 1.5 times the turbine height.
e) Contours at each two feet Above Mean Sea Level (AMSL) for the subject
property and adjacent properties within 300 feet 1.5 times the turbine height.
4. D. Environmental Requirements

2. FLICKER REQUIREMENTS
The applicant shall provide a site-specific flicker study exhibiting the locations of all
shadows and flicker areas. This report should detail the limits of impact, as well as
the number of days, times, and durations that flicker is possible as a result of the
presence of the Wind Energy Conversion Facility.

***