National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences 魅せられる"生物学の面白さ"

Thirty years of North American research on public acceptance of wind energy has produced important insights, yet knowledge gaps remain. This review synthesizes the literature, revealing the following lessons learned. (1) North American support for wind has been consistently high. (2) The NIMBY explanation for resistance to wind development is invalid. (3) Socioeconomic impacts of wind development are strongly tied to acceptance. (4) Sound and visual impacts of wind facilities are strongly tied to annoyance and opposition, and ignoring these concerns can exacerbate conflict. (5) Environmental concerns matter, though less than other factors, and these concerns can both help and hinder wind development. (6) Issues of fairness, participation, and trust during the development process influence acceptance. (7) Distance from turbines affects other explanatory variables, but alone its influence is unclear. (8) Viewing opposition as something to be overcome prevents meaningful understandings and implementation of best practices. (9) Implementation of research findings into practice has been limited. The paper also identifies areas for future research on wind acceptance. With continued research efforts and a commitment toward implementing research findings into developer and policymaker practice, conflict and perceived injustices around proposed and existing wind energy facilities might be significantly lessened.

/pdf/thirty-years-of-north-american-wind-energy-acceptance-277oetpv5z.pdf

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

Health Canada, in collaboration with Statistics Canada, and other external experts, conducted the Community Noise and Health Study to better understand the impacts of wind turbine noise (WTN) on health and well-being. A cross-sectional epidemiological study was carried out between May and September 2013 in southwestern Ontario and Prince Edward Island on 1238 randomly selected participants (606 males, 632 females) aged 18-79 years, living between 0.25 and 11.22 km from operational wind turbines. Calculated outdoor WTN levels at the dwelling reached 46 dBA. Response rate was 78.9% and did not significantly differ across sample strata. Self-reported health effects (e.g., migraines, tinnitus, dizziness, etc.), sleep disturbance, sleep disorders, quality of life, and perceived stress were not related to WTN levels. Visual and auditory perception of wind turbines as reported by respondents increased significantly with increasing WTN levels as did high annoyance toward several wind turbine features, including the following: noise, blinking lights, shadow flicker, visual impacts, and vibrations. Concern for physical safety and closing bedroom windows to reduce WTN during sleep also increased with increasing WTN levels. Other sample characteristics are discussed in relation to WTN levels. Beyond annoyance, results do not support an association between exposure to WTN up to 46 dBA and the evaluated health-related endpoints.

/pdf/exposure-to-wind-turbine-noise-perceptual-responses-and-4bc5fmy626.pdf

Exposure to wind turbine noise: Perceptual responses and reported health effects.

https://www.fmhs.auckland.ac.nz/assets/fmhs/som/psychmed/petrie/docs/2015%20Explain%20the%20nocebo%20response.pdf

Health complaints and wind turbines: The efficacy of explaining the nocebo response to reduce symptom reporting

Hydraulic fracturing has become a contentious issue around the globe. In the present study, using a sample of American adults ( n  = 412), the role of political orientation (conservative vs. liberal) and basic knowledge about fracking on fracking risk perception attitudes, fracking economic attitudes, energy reliance attitudes, trust of energy information sources, and preferred dwelling distance from energy operations was investigated. Basic knowledge about hydraulic fracturing as a possible moderating mechanism was also explored. Correlational and regression results revealed that political ideology and basic fracking knowledge are key predictors of fracking and energy source attitudes, and that the nature of the relation between ideology and fracking risk perceptions, fracking economic attitudes, reliance on natural gas, wind and solar, and distrust of government agencies, are influenced by an individual’s basic knowledge about fracking.

/pdf/attitudes-toward-hydraulic-fracturing-the-opposing-forces-of-44h16di6po.pdf

Attitudes toward hydraulic fracturing: The opposing forces of political conservatism and basic knowledge about fracking

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.

https://www.livingstoncounty-il.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/PR-Ex.-74-Knopper-et-al.-2014.pdf

Wind turbines and human health.

Objectives: The Health Impact Assessment (HIA) was conducted to evaluate the potential community health implications of a proposed oil drilling and production project in Hermosa Beach, California. The HIA considered 17 determinants of health that fell under 6 major categories (i.e., air quality, water and soil quality, upset conditions, noise and light emis - sions, traffic, and community livability). Material and Methods: This paper attempts to address some of the gaps within the HIA practice by presenting the methodological approach and results of this transparent, comprehensive HIA; specifi - cally, the evaluation matrix and decision-making framework that have been developed for this HIA and form the basis of the evaluation and allow for a clear conclusion to be reached in respect of any given health determinant (i.e., positive, negative, neutral). Results: There is a number of aspects of the project that may positively influence health (e.g., increased education funding, ability to enhance green space), and at the same time there have been potential negative effects identi - fied (e.g., odor, blowouts, property values). Except for upset conditions, the negative health outcomes have been largely nuisance-related (e.g., odor, aesthetics) without irreversible health impacts. The majority of the health determinants, that had been examined, have revealed that the project would have no substantial effect on the health of the community. Conclusions: Using the newly developed methodology and based on established mitigation measures and additional recom - mendations provided in the HIA, the authors have concluded that the project will have no substantial effect on community health. This approach and methodology will assist practitioners, stakeholders and decision-makers in advancing the HIA as a useful, reproducible, and informative tool.

http://ijomeh.eu/pdf-58560-3756?filename=Health Impact Assessment.pdf

Kathleen Souweine

Papers

Wind turbines and human health.

Health Impact Assessment of an oil drilling project in California