Residents continue wind farm discussion at county board meeting

By Kayleigh Rahn
Many Douglas County residents continue to speak to the Douglas County Board members regarding their opposition to a proposed commercial wind farm.

The residents are opponents of a proposed wind farm application submitted by EDP Renewables, which has worked for nearly a decade to get the 200-megawatt, 49-turbine site wind farm off the ground.

Over the summer months, neighboring landowners and residents requested the county board amend its Wind Energy Conservation System ordinance (WECS) to increase the set back requirements. The residents say the property line set backs are not enough to protect their homes from shadow flicker, ice throw, a run away turbine, and most oft discussed low-frequency noise.

Although, the board voted against adjusting the ordinance, residents have filled the board for months.

During the Wednesday, Nov. 21 meeting, Resident Jim Allen said low-frequency noise has remained a concern for residents within the farm footprint.

“This has come up again,” he said. “I didn’t know if any of the board members have taken any attempt to learn about low-frequency sound that is generated by the industrial wind complex around here. If you have, that’s good; if not I would encourage you to look at this very closely because it can cause some severe problems.”

Steve Allen, of Newman, invited the board members to view videos that detail the concerns they’ve found regarding low-frequency noise.

“Everyone is this room wants what is best for the Douglas County community,” S. Allen said. “I have no doubt about that. I have friends on this board. We may be on different sides of the issue that doesn’t affect my personal relationship with those people. There’s obviously a very strong division on this issue. There is more and more information that comes out all the time.”

Allen noted that community members have compiled information regarding the effects of low-frequency noise.

The full story can be found in the Wednesday, Nov. 28 edition of The Tuscola Journal.