An Expert's Thoughts on Great Lakes Wind

Blanche Brauns: Rainbow Out Of Lake Michigan ~Enlarge

One of the region's and nation's foremost authorities and voices on the environmental and community impact wind energy is Dr. Roopali Phadke, Assistant Professor in the Department of Environmental Studies at Macalester College in St. Paul, Minnesota.  Since it feels like "wind week" in this space, it seems timely to publish an interview I recently conducted with her by e-mail.

Q.  How seriously do you regard the emerging science on and citizen backlash against wind turbines because of human health effects?  Should this be a major factor in siting decisions and if so, what standards make the most sense?

A.  I think that noise impacts may be the most contentious set of local concerns.  It is about battling notions of what counts as evidence, knowledge and experience. Residents living adjacent to wind projects are broadcasting their testimonials in the press and to relevant local regulators.  Citizen concerns have also prompted public agencies to investigate. The Minnesota Department of Public Health's 2009 white paper on wind noise was among the first. The study does call for the reexamination of project setbacks and the cumulative impact of noise.

I think it should be a factor in siting decisions and that the industry and regulators need to establish pre- and post-project studies so we build our base of knowledge on the issue. Right now we are making setback decisions in the absence of good long-term data.

Q.  Now that Michigan has inventoried both onshore and offshore wind potential, and other jurisdictions are moving ahead with preliminary siting in the Great Lakes, how would you characterize the legitimacy and importance of aesthetic issues associated with great lakes offshore wind?

A.  I believe that aesthetic issues are extremely important for land use planning and help us determine why we choose to live, work and recreate where we do.   The Great Lakes are certainly an important scenic resource and wind energy development will not be appropriate if there are serious visual impacts to recognized and protected scenic and historical resources. There are guidelines for conducting visual impact surveys to protect such resources.

On a more personal basis, residents and visitors will have very different opinions about whether or not a wind energy project amounts to 'visual pollution.' The worst case is when conversations and deliberations about visual impact get shut down through accusations of NIMBYism. I believe that residents often react to the aesthetic impact of wind energy not out of selfish interests but because they are trying to protect their sense of community. That should be respected.

Q. Do you foresee that either of these concerns could pose significant future barriers to the growth of both onshore and offshore wind power in the region?

I think these issues are already impacting our ability to hit renewable energy targets. Opposition groups have successfully passed many county level wind energy moratoria. Because we haven't made much progress with off-shore developments its hard to say what the local response will be like. I think the health issues will be less important offshore, but it depends on how far offshore it gets.