| Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005. |
Submission to the Planning Assessment Commission re Gullen Range
Author: | Aesthetics, Australia, Impacts, Noise, Property values
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Contents
Summary and recommendations … 5
On what terms should this modification application be determined? … 10
Verification of wind turbine locations … 13
– The surveys … 13
– The turbine relocations and the Department’s response to them … 14
– The absurdities within the Department’s position … 21
Visual impact … 23
– The public domain … 23
– Residences23
– Principles for a more adequate assessment of visual impact … 25
– Discussion and conclusions … 40
Noise … 44
– The deficiencies of the South Australian Noise Guidelines (2003) … 44
– The Department’s new noise conditions … 46
– Cooper’s research for Pacific Hydro at Cape Bridgewater … 50
– Waterloo noise monitoring by Hansen and colleagues … 51
– B29: background noise levels … 54
– Discussion and conclusions … 55
Other issues … 59
– Shadow flicker … 59
– Health … 59
Property value … 61
Turbine spacing … 63
This material is the work of the author(s) indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.
The copyright of this material resides with the author(s). As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Queries e-mail.
| Wind Watch relies entirely on User Funding |
 (via Stripe) |
 (via Paypal) |
Share:
[ Short URLs: https://wind-watch.org/doc/?p=4133 | http://wndfo.net/D4133 ]
Tags: Wind power, Wind energy
