HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSD-078-10Clarington
Leading the Way
REPORT
PLANNING SERVICES
Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
Date: June 21, 2010 Resolution #: G279 -/o By -law #: N/A
Report #: PSD- 078 -10 File #: PLN 29.10
Subject: GREEN ENERGY ACT
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee
recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PSD- 078 -10 be received; and
2. THAT any interested parties listed in Report PSD- 078 -10 be notified of Council's
decision.
k
Submitted by: - ri112. Reviewed by:
y cye/Lan ma' FCSLA, MCIP,
ti fig Directo of Planning Services
FL/av
June 10, 2010
aLw-
fanklin Wu,
Chief Administrative Officer
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3M T (905)623 -3379 F (905)623 -0830
REPORT NO.: PSD- 078 -10 PAGE 2
1.0 PURPOSE:
1.1 At the May 31st meeting, Council requested:
"That Municipal Staff provide a detailed report regarding wind turbine installations
in the Municipality of Clarington, including the implications of the Green Energy
Act upon Clarington residents."
1.2 While Council was specific in requesting information on wind turbine installations, the
Green Energy Act involves other forms of green power generation and the information
regarding the background and process are general to all the forms of green energy
covered by the Act. As such the report includes additional information beyond potential
wind turbine installations in Clarington.
2.0 BACKGROUND
2.1 Ontario's Green Energy Act (GEA), and related amendments to other legislation,
received Royal Assent on May 14, 2009. Regulations and other tools to implement the
legislation were introduced through the month of September, 2009.
2.2 A Renewable Energy Facilitation Office (REFO) has been created within the Ministry of
Energy and Infrastructure. The objectives of the Office are:
a) to facilitate the development of renewable energy projects;
b) to assist proponents with the approval processes and procedures,
including public consultation, and
c) to assist proponents of renewable energy projects with other potential
requirements imposed by the Government of Canada.
2.3 The new Renewable Energy Approval (REA) process will support the Green Energy
initiative and the Ontario Government's Climate Change Action Plan that aims to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions, increase renewable energy generation and energy
conservation and create thousands of green jobs in Ontario. Information on
"Frequently Asked Questions" is available from the REFO office or on the website
(Attachment 1).
2.4 The REA integrates provincial review of the environmental issues and concerns that
were previously addressed through the local land use planning process (e.g. zoning or
site planning), the environmental assessment process and the environmental approvals
process (e.g. Certificates of Approval, Permits to Take Water). Municipalities no longer
have an approval role for Green Energy projects, rather they have an information
provision and commenting role.
REPORT NO.: PSD- 078 -10 PAGE 3
3.0 REQUIREMENTS FOR A RENEWABLE ENERGY APPROVAL
3.1 Regardless of the renewable energy source (wind, solar, biogas and biomass,
waterpower, geothermal) used to generate electricity most applications for an REA will
require a core set of reports:
• a project description report;
• a construction plan report;
• a design and operations report;
• a decommissioning plan report; and
• a consultation plan report.
3.2 Additional documents will be required depending on the project location, equipment or
technology being used to generate electricity. Requirements for technical reports are
identified for each type of renewable energy generation facility. Drafts of these
documents, among others, must be made available to the public by the applicant at least
60 days prior to the date of their final public consultation meeting, which must occur prior
to submission of an application for an REA.
3.3 Under the REA Regulation, the different types of renewable energy generation facilities
are categorized by class. Each class of project has unique requirements based on their
nameplate capacity. Nameplate capacity is the maximum rated output of a generator
under specific conditions designated by the manufacturer. Generator nameplate capacity
is usually indicated in units of kilovolt- amperes (kVA) and in kilowatts (kW) on a
nameplate physically attached to the energy generator.
RENEWABLE I REQUIRE REAltS
ENERGY SOURCE
Wind Facilities
Generating less than NO
or equal to 3 kW of
power.
Generating more
than 3 kW but less
than 50 kW.
Generating 50 kW
and over.
Solar Energy Fac'
Any size roof -top or
wall- mounted. facilities mounted on
YES. However, the
requirements are scaled
down to reflect the low
impact nature of the
facility.
YES
lities
NO. However most
Ground mounted
generating less than
or equal to 10 kW.
buildings, may require a
municipal building permit.
NO
GENERAL INFORMATION/NOT
These turbines can generate enough
energy to power your dishwasher and
fridge.
These facilities are sometimes called
"small wind" and could support from 2 to
38 households, or supplement a small
commercial operation.
These facilities could supplement larger
scale industrial needs or more
households than "small wind" facilities.
Residential uses such as domestic hot
water, pools; Commercial use to feed
back into the grid.
These are typically found at hardware
and outdoor stores.
REPORT NO.: PSD- 078 -10 PAGE 4
RENEWABLE REQUIRE REA? GENERAL INFORMATION /NOTES
ENERGY SOURCE
Ground mounted YES The average power requirement of 5 to
generating over 10 10 mid -sized homes is 10 kW.
kW.
Note: The Regulation does not contain provisions for ground mounted solar energy facilities
based on soil classification (e.g. prime agricultural land). However, a directive issued by the
Minister of Energy and Infrastructure to the Ontario Power Authority (OPA) for the Feed -in
Tariff program instructs the OPA not to enter into contracts for ground- mounted solar
photovoltaic facilities located on certain classes of prime agricultural lands and specialty crop
lands.
Bio- Energy Facilities
Thermal treatment, YES. The requirements Other permits may be required for off -site
anaerobic that must be met vary inputs (i.e. Restaurant - food waste).
digestion, biofuel depending on the project
combustion (e.g. location (e.g. on a farm),
biodiesel), and feedstock material and size
biogas. (e.g. greater or less than
500 kW).
Water Power Facilities
Wave energy, run
of the river.
NO. These projects Hydroelectric dams follow an entirely
continue to require relevant different process.
environmental assessment
and approvals processes
under the Ministries of the
Environment and Natural
Resources.
4.0 REQUIREMENTS SPECIFIC TO WIND TURBINES
4.1 The GEA sets out a number of classes for wind energy depending on the scale of the
development. Much of the municipal and public concerns have been with respect to
large scale turbines, rather than for small or micro sized turbines. The setbacks under
the GEA for large scale wind turbines are shown in Figure 1 below:
Number of
Wind Turbines
1 - 5 turbines
6 - 10 turbines
11 - 25 turbines
26 + turbines
Setback in metres (m) from closest Point of Reception
corresponding to wind turbine Sound Power Levels in decibels
(dBA)
102 dBA 103 — 104 105 dBA 106 -107 >107 dBA
dBA dBA
550 m 600 m 850 m 950 m Noise study
650 m 700 m 1000 m 1200 m required
750 m 850 m 1250 m 1500 m
Noise study required
REPORT NO.: PSD- 078 -10 PAGE 5
4.2 Ontario Regulation 359/09 sets out the information requirements and processing
requirements surrounding Renewable Energy Approvals for projects such as the large
scale wind developments. Although noise and environmental studies can be required
and mandatory minimum setbacks have been imposed; concern remains that the
standards do not adequately address the human health concerns associated with wind
farms. Separate requirements are also outlined for offshore wind projects, which are
categorized as Class 5 Wind Facilities. An Off -shore Wind Facility Report is required for
any Class 5 Wind Facility, as per O. Reg. 359/09.
5.0 MANDATORY CONSULTATION REQUIREMENTS
5.1 A component of the REA process is consultation with the general public, aboriginal
groups and local municipality(s). A proponent must document what was learned through
public consultation including how the project was changed in light of this information.
5.2 Public Consultation includes contact with landowners within 120 metres, a notice in the
local newspaper and at least two public meetings. All of the studies and reports
required as part of the REA process must be made available for public review prior to
the last public meeting. Some small scale wind projects (generating less than 50 kW)
are not subject to the public meetings or municipal consultation requirements of the
Regulation.
5.3 Consultation with the municipality (or municipalities) is required for most renewable
energy projects and must begin at least 90 days prior to the date of the final public
consultation meeting. This must also be before the applicant submits an REA
application. The Ministry of the Environment provides applicants with a form to
document municipal feedback on matters related to municipal services and local
infrastructure. The prescribed consultation form has two pages of questions for the
Municipality to respond to.
5.4 The questions seek information regarding:
• Roads (access, Traffic Management Plans);
• Service Connections (location of service connections other than roads);
• Facility Other (landscape design, emergency procedures, easements); and
• Project Construction (site rehabilitation, locations of buried and above ground
utilities, building code issues, natural and cultural heritage features).
5.5 The Municipality introduced a new fee for 2010 regarding the provision of comments
and information for renewable energy projects.
5.6 Through the REA process, a proponent must consult, not seek approval from the
Municipality. The only exception to this is when a renewable energy project requires the
removal and use of aggregate materials. In this case, municipal approvals are sought
for the aggregate license, not the REA.
REPORT NO.: PSD- 078 -10 PAGE 6
6.0 RECENT CONTRACT APPROVALS BY ONTARIO POWER AUTHORITY
6.1 On April 8, 2010 Ontario Power Authority released the listing of contracts they have
offered. The feed -in -tariff (FIT) administered by Ontario Power Authority is a
straightforward way to contract for renewable energy generation. It provides
standardized program rules, prices and contracts. Feed -in tariffs refer to the specific
prices paid to renewable energy suppliers for the electricity produced by the generating
facility. The pricing structure provides a reasonable return on investment and is
differentiated by project size and technology type. The FIT Program is for projects over
10 kilowatts; and the microFIT Program is for projects 10 kilowatts or less.
6.2 Three contracts were offered FIT contracts, that affect Clarington. ZEP Windfarm
Ganaraska in the Orono area, Clarington Windfarm by Leader Energy and Hybridyne
Solarfarm. The Hybridyne Solarfarm proceeded with a rezoning application in advance
of the Green Energy Act being introduced. As such, the Municipality played a more
significant role and have more knowledge of this project.
7.0 WIND TURBINE PROPOSALS IN CLARINGTON
7.1 The Windfarms that have been proposed in Clarington have posted to their websites the
area that they are studying (Attachment 2). The two windfarm projects have not to date
consulted with the Municipality although we have been notified of their proposals. The
ZEP Windfarm proponents held a public meeting in July 2009 in Orono.
7.2 The Clarington Wind Farm proposed by Leader Energy is for a 10 MegaWatt FIT
contract which would be between 3 -5 turbines. While the study area identified is large,
the specific location of the turbines has not been provided to the Municipality.
7.3 The Ganaraska Wind Farm proposed by ZEP is for a 20 MegaWatt FIT contract which
is 6 -10 turbines. Again, the study area identified is large and the specific sites have not
been provided to the Municipality, to date.
7.4 It is our understanding, the specific locations will not be made public until the 90 day
REA consultation period is initiated by the proponents.
8.0 HEALTH ISSUES RELATED TO WIND TURBINES
8.1 Public and Municipal Concerns with Respect to Renewable Energy Development
Although there are a range of public concerns from aesthetic to environmental, one of
the most prominent local concerns has been the impact of large scale wind turbines on
human health. In areas of Bruce and Dufferin Counties, where wind farms are already
constructed, there have been a number of cases of 'wind turbine syndrome', which has
symptoms including:
• Loss of sleep or sleep disturbance,
• Headaches / migraines,
REPORT NO.: PSD- 078 -10 PAGE 7
• Inner ear ringing or Tinnitus,
• Dizziness,
• Vertigo,
• Blurred vision,
• Heart palpitations,
• High blood pressure,
• Psychological stress, or
• Gastrointestinal problems.
Although the GEA includes setbacks of a minimum of 550 metres to sensitive receptors,
members of the public concede that this distance is insufficient to combat known and
unknown human health impacts.
8.2 In the past two years there have been three notable studies by medical professionals
which has concluded that there are no known adverse health impacts from wind
turbines, where the turbines have been properly sited:
1. "Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects An Expert Panel Review" prepared for
AWEA and CANWEA.
2. "The Health Impact of Wind Turbines: A Review of the Current White, Grey, and
Published Literature" prepared by Chatham -Kent Public Health Unit.
3. "The Potential Health Impact of Wind Turbines" prepared by the Chief Medical
Officer of Health recently released by the Association of Municipalities of Ontario
(Attachments 3 and 4).
9.0 CONCLUSIONS
9.1 The Green Energy Act and the related regulations, exclude municipalities (both upper
and lower tier) from the approval process. Council could support or oppose a project by
notifying the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure in writing. Council can also express
to the proponent their support or opposition to a project.
9.2 The municipal role is to provide the information required on the Consultation Form when
requested. The Consultation Form is provided by the proponent as part of the REA
process. The Municipality has set a $5,000 fee to prepare this information. To date,
other than Hybridyne Solarfarm, no requests for information have been submitted to the
Municipality.
9.3 The REA process is administered by the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office. The
Municipality will continue to provide as much information to the public and assist the
REA process as much as possible.
Staff Contact: Faye Langmaid
REPORT NO.: PSD- 078 -10 PAGE 8
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Frequently Asked Questions — Renewable Energy Approval:
http: / /www. mei.gov.on.ca /en /energy /renewable /index. p hp? page= refo_office
Attachment 2 — Windfarm Study Areas in Clarington
Attachment 3 — AMO Policy Update — Wind Turbines
Attachment 4 — Synopsis:
http: / /www.health.gov.on.ca /en/ public / publications /ministry_reports /wind turbine /wind turbine.
pdf
Attachment 1
To Report PSD- 078 -10
Freauentiv Asked Questions - Renewable Energy Approval
Why does the ministry believe a setback of 550 metres for wind turbines is a safe
distance?
• The minimum setback for wind projects of 550 metres will ensure noise levels do not
exceed 40 decibels at buildings used by people, such as a residence. Forty decibels
is approximately the noise level experienced in a quiet office or library.
• The setbacks rise with the number of turbines and the sound level rating of selected
turbines. For example, a turbine with a sound power level of 106 decibels has to
meet a setback of 950 metres from the nearest receptor.
• Were confident that the science around 550 meters is sound. We used the most
conservative modelling available nationally and internationally, and our experiences
in Ontario and that of other jurisdictions supports this.
• Going forward, the Ministry of the Environment will develop the science to monitor
and measure low frequency noise, as currently there are no established and
accepted protocols. In the future, wind farm operators may be required, through
conditions of the Renewable Energy Approval, to monitor and address perceptible
low frequency noise once acceptable protocols for doing so have been established.
Will renewable energy development be permitted in wetlands and other
ecologically sensitive areas?
• Protecting significant natural features such as wetlands and the hydrologic functions
they support are important to this government.
• The REA establishes clear rules to continue to protect significant natural features
and sensitive water bodies so that renewable energy project applicants know they
must protect these important features and the hydrologic functions they support.
• Renewable energy facilities will not be permitted in provincially significant wetlands in
Southern Ontario or coastal wetlands.
• In some instances a renewable energy facility may be permitted within 120 metres of
provincially significant wetlands, but only if an environmental impact study
demonstrates the ability to mitigate negative effects and is confirmed by the MNR.
How will species at risk, birds and bats be protected?
• The ministry is committed to ensuring that renewable energy projects are protective
of the natural environment.
• Existing rules under MNR's Endangered Species Act will remain. Applicants must
obtain a permit under the Endangered Species Act from MNR should their project
have the potential to negatively affect a species or habitat protected under the Act.
• As part of the REA for most project types, a study of the potential impacts on wildlife
habitat must be completed to the satisfaction of the MNR.
• The proposed process integrates existing study requirements with provincial
standards to ensure the natural environment is protected.
How will the environment be protected now that the Environmental Assessment
Act powers have been removed?
• The new process integrates existing previous study requirements with provincial
standards to ensure the natural environment is protected.
• The Renewable Energy Approval process ensures transparent decision making and
provides opportunity for public participation in the process.
• The new process replaces what was largely a proponent driven environmental
assessment framework and replaces it with clear provincial rules and requirements.
How will the new approval process be any faster than the existing process?
• The ministry has introduced a streamlined approvals process and a service
guarantee that bring with them greater certainty for developers who follow the rules.
How will 1 be consulted if there's a project in my community?
• The renewable energy approval process ensures transparent decision making and
provides opportunity for public participation in the process.
• Applicants must provide written notice to all adjacent land owners, as well as public
notice within a 120 metre radius of the proposed renewable energy generation
facility at a preliminary stage of the project planning, and post at least two
consecutive notices in a local newspaper.
• For most projects, applicants must also consult with local municipalities on specific
matters related to municipal land, infrastructure, services and information and will be
required to post a notice in a local newspaper of general circulation within the
municipality where the project is located.
• Once ready to submit the application for Ministry of the Environment review, the
applicant will be required to hold at least two community consultation meeting to
discuss the project and its potential local impact.
• Any required studies must be made available for public review 60 days prior to the
date of the second or final community consultation meeting.
• Municipal input is an important part of the REA process, and through a transparent
decision making process local concerns can be addressed in a timely manner.
How will Aboriginal communities be consulted and the impacts on their rights
considered as part of the approval?
• Aboriginal consultation will be mandatory for the applicant as part of the regulatory
requirements for a Renewable Energy Approval.
• While the Crown will delegate certain procedural aspects of consultation to an
applicant, the duty to consult rests with the Crown. The Crown will work to ensure
that the duty to consult is fulfilled prior to a project being eligible for approval.
• During this process, aboriginal communities will have an opportunity to raise issues
and concerns with the applicant and the ministry.
• If the applicant has not already appropriately considered impacts on Aboriginal and
treaty rights, the Director can direct them to go back and consult before accepting
their application for review.
• The Director will also consider the impacts of a project on aboriginal and treaty rights
when setting conditions in the renewable energy approval.
What role will municipalities have in siting wind turbine projects?
• The ministry recognizes the importance of local decision making with respect to
specific matters related to municipal land, services and information.
• A proponent of a renewable energy project will have to consult with local
municipalities prior to applying for a Renewable Energy Approval.
• The ministry has developed a template for this consultation, which the proponent will
use to relay project specific matters raised by the municipality. This document is to
be submitted to the ministry as part of the application.
• The renewable energy approval process would ensure transparency of decision
making and provide opportunity for municipal engagement in the process.
How do 1 know if my project needs approval?
• Wind power facility projects over three kW will require a Renewable Energy
Approval (REA). The 'requirements that must be met to obtain a REA vary depending
on the project's output (mW). For wind facilities generating between three and 50
kW, known as small wind projects, requirements are simplified and there are no
mandatory setbacks. Facilities mounted on buildings may require building permits.
For further information, contact the local building permit department.
• Solar power facility projects that are roof -top or wall- mounted solar facilities are
exempt from a Renewable Energy Approval. Any ground- mounted solar facility
capable of producing over 10 kW will require a REA. Ten kW is the average energy
requirements of five to 10 households and uses a surface area of about 55 square
metres.
• Bio- energy power facility projects must use biogas or biomass source material as
defined under the Electricity Act. Bio- energy projects that are located on a farm and
are already subject to an approved Nutrient Management Strategy under the Nutrient
Management Act are exempt from obtaining a Renewable Energy Approval.
• Water power facility projects do not require a Renewable Energy Approval. The
Water Power Class Environmental Assessment dated October 2008 is the source
document for understanding the rules governing the development of water power
projects. Water power projects must also obtain the existing permits and approvals
from the Ministry of the Environment and Ministry of Natural Resources.
• For more information on renewable energy generation projects, and what is required
for approvals, please contact the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office at
REFOC&ontario.ca or 1- 877 - 440- REFO(7336) or (416) 212 -6582.
As a developer do I have to send multiple applications to different ministries to
get my project approved?
• The Ministry of the Environment now has a single approval. The process integrates
existing study requirements with provincial standards to ensure the natural
environment is protected.
• The Ministry of Natural Resources will continue to issue its approvals under its
existing legislation but in a fashion that is coordinated with the Renewable Energy
Approval providing clear guidance to help proponents through the process.
• Though multiple approvals are being issued based on experience and mandates of
various ministries there will still be a one - window approach for renewable energy
project approvals through a facilitator's office.
What happens to wind and other renewable energy projects that are part way
through the current approval process?
• It is proposed that projects currently holding all required approvals for their facility,
such as a Certificate of Approval, will not require a Renewable Energy Approval and
will not be subject to the new rules, unless or until an amendment to the Certificate
of Approval is required.
• The ministry recognizes that there are projects where substantial work has been
done to date but yet all final approvals have not been obtained.
• Projects that have an Ontario Power Authority contract and have issued a notice of
Completion at the time of the regulation's proclamation continue with EA process
and apply for a Certificate of Approval. These projects, however, must comply with
the 550 metre minimum noise setback and the new property and road setbacks will
apply.
• Some projects — such as solar and biogas /biomass — do not require an
environmental approval under the current rules, but will require a REA under the
new rules. If these projects have an OPA contract and would have not been
prohibited under municipal zoning prior to proclamation, they will be able to apply for
a Certificate of Approval instead of a Renewable Energy Approval.
• It is proposed that where projects that have ministry approvals (e.g., a Permit to
Take Water or Certificate of Approval) will not be required to get a Renewable
Energy Approval unless there is a need for a change to the approval or permit.
What if I have a question about the application? Is there someone that I can contact
for more information /assistance?
• For more information, please contact the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office
(REFO) by email: REFOCEontario.ca. or by telephone:1- 877 - 440- REFO(7336) or
(416) 212-6582
AMO ; Chief Medical Officer of Health Releases Review of Potential Health Impact of W... Page 1 of 1
Attachment 3
To Report PSD- 078 -10
Atie
1.11iun of %luoit pa Llir+ of Ontario
AM•
1.1141111 of \Luut gsdrtlh sit On tar io
AMO Policy Update - May 27, 2010
Wind Turbines
Chief Medical Officer of Health Releases Review of Potential Health Impact of Wind Turbines
A technical working group led by the Chief Medical Officer of Health (CMOH) has just released a synopsis of
existing scientific evidence on the potential health impact of noise generated by wind turbines. The results are of
interest to the municipal sector because the working group sought to answer questions commonly raised by those
concerned with perceived health effects of wind turbines such as
• What scientific evidence is available on the potential health impacts of wind turbines?
• What is the relationship between wind turbine noise and health?
• What is the relationship between low frequency sound, infrasound and health?
• How is exposure to wind turbine noise assessed?
• Are Ontario wind turbine setbacks protective from potential wind turbine health and safety hazards?
• What consultation process with the community is required before wind farms are constructed?
• Are there data gaps or research needs?
The review concludes that while some people living near wind turbines report symptoms such as dizziness,
headaches, and sleep disturbance, the scientific evidence available to date does not demonstrate a direct causal
link between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects. There was no support for claims that the noise, shadow
flicker, electromagnetic fields, vibration, ice throw, or low frequency sound associated with wind turbines cause
adverse health effects.
In terms of the regulatory environment governing wind turbines (a synopsis of which is available under Policy
Issues on the AMO website), the report found the 550 m setback is adequate but that community engagement
deserves "greater attention in future developments ". Early engagement of the affected community at the outset of
planning for wind turbines is important to not only address perceived health concerns about wind farms but also to
address issues of fairness and equity, which also may influence attitudes about effects on health.
AMO Contact: Scott Vokey, Energy Services Coordinator, email: svokey @amo on ca, (416) 971 -9856 ext. 357
http: r! www. amo .on.ca/AMiPrinterTemplate.cfin? Section = Home &TEMPLATE= /CM.'HTM... 6i 1/2010
Attachment 4
To Report PSD- 078 -10
Summary of Review
This report was prepared by the Chief Medical Officer of Health (CMOJI) of Ontxriu iii n spouse to
public health concerns about wind turbines, particularly related to noise.
Assisted by a technical working group comprised of members from the Ontario Agency for Health
Protection and Promotion ( OAHPP), the Ministry of Health and Long -Term Care I1110111- and
several Medical Officers of Health in Ontario with the support of the Council of Ontario Medical
Officers of Health I COMOH), this report presents a synopsis of existing scientific evidence on the
potential health impact of noise generated by wind turbines.
The r eview concludes that while some people Living near wind turbines report symptoms such
as dizziness, headaches, and sleep disturbance, the scientific evidence available to date does
not demonstrate a direct causal link between wind turbine noise and adverse health effects.
The sound level from wind turbines at common residential setbacks is not sufficient to cause
hearing impairment or other direct health effects, although some people may find it annoying.
Introduction
In response to public health concerns about wind turbines, the CMOII conducted a review 01 existing
scientific evidence nn the potential health impact of wind turbines in collaboration and consultation
with a technical working group cormmsed of members from the OA] IPP, MOHI:CC and COMO}i.
A literature search was conducted to identify papers and reports (from 1970 to date) on wind turbines
and health from scientific bibliographic databases, grey literature, and from a structured Internet
search. Databases searched include MEDLINE, PubMed, Environmental Engineering Abstracts,
Environment Complete, INSPEC, Scholars Portal and Scopus. Infonualion was also gathered through
discussions with relevant government agencies, including the Ministry of the Environment and the
Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure and with input provided by individuals and other organizations
such as Wind Concerns Ontario.
It general. published papers in peer - reviewed scientific jounuils, and reviews by recognized health
authorities such as the World Health Organization (WHO) Carty more weight in the assessment of
health risks than case studies and anecdotal reports.
The review and consultation with the Council of Ontario Medical Officers of llealth focused on the
following questions:
• What scientific evidence is available on the potential health impacts of wind turbines?
• What >s the relationship betweeit wind turbine noise and health?
• What is the relationship bets een low frequency sound, infrasound and health?
• How is exposure to wind turbine noise assessed?
• Are Ontario wind turbine setbacks protective from potential wind turbine health and
safety hazards?
• What consultation process with the conununit,y is required before wind farms are constructed?
• Are there data gaps or research needs'.'
The following summarizes the findings of the review and consultation.
Wind Turbines and Health
2.1 Overview
A list of the materials reviewed is found in Appendix 1. It includes research studies, review articles,
reports, presentations, and wehsites.
Technical terms used in this report are defined in a Glossary (Page 11).
The main research data available to date on wind turbines and heath include.
Four cross - sectional studies, published in scientific journals. which investigated the relationslups
between exposure to wind turbine noise ail annoyance m large samples of people (351 to 1,94S )
living in Europe near wind turbines (see section 2.2).
Published case studies of ten families with a total of 38 affected people living near wind turbines
in several countries (Canada, 1'li, Ireland, Italy and USA) ( Pierpont.'201)9). However, these cases
are not found m scientific ,journals. A range of symptoms including dizziness, heady cLes, and
sleep distur'bmice, were reported by these people. The researcher (Pierpont) suggested that the
symptoms were related to wind turhim• noise, particularly low frequency sounds and infrasound,
but did not investigate the relationships between noise and symptoms. It should he noted that
no conclusions on the health impact of wind turbines can be drawn from Pierpont's work due to
ntethodob (ghat limitations including small sample size, lack of exposure data, lack of contrails and
selection bias.
• Reward' on the potential health and safety hazards of wind tin bine shadow flicker,
electromagnetic fields (EMFs). ice throw and ice shed, and structural hazards (see section 2.3).
A synthesis of the research available on the potential health impacts of exposure to noise and physical
hazards from wind turbines on ne.0 by residents rs found m sections 2.2 and 2.3, incltuling research on
]ow frequency sound and mfrasound. This is followed by informal ion on wind turbine regulation in
Ontario ( section 3.0.), and our conclusions (section 4.0).
2.2. Sound and Noise
Sound is c'ltan cl erized by its sound pressure level (loudness) and frequency ( pitch ), which are measured
in standard units known as decibel ( dB) and Hertz OM. respectively. The normal human ear perceives
sounds at frequencies surging from 201Iz to 20,000 Hz. Frequencies below 200 Hz are commonly referred
tai as "low frequency sound" and those below 20Hz as " infrasound," but the boundary between them
is not rigid. There is variation between people in their ability to perceive sound. Although generally
considered inaudible, Ultrasound at high- enough sound pressure levels can he audible to some people.
Noise is defined as an unwanted sound (Rogers et al. 2000, Les enthal 2003).
Wind turbines generate sound through mechanical and aerodynamic routes. The sound level depends
on various factors including design and wind speed. C intent generation upwind model turbines are
quieter than older downwind models. The dominant sound source from modern wind turbines is
aerodynamic, produced by the rotation of the turbine blades through air. The aerodynamic noise is
present at all frequencies, from infrasound to low frequency to the normal audible range, producing
the characteristic "swishing" sound (Leventhal' 2006, Colby et al. 2009).
l nvirorunental sound pressure levels are most commonly meal n'd using an A- weighted scale. This scale
gives less weight to very low and very high frequency components that is similar to the way the huutau
ear perceives sound. Sound levels around wind turbines are usually predicted by modelling, rather than
assessed by actual measurcuter its.
The impact of sound on health is directly related to its pr essure level. l ligh sound pressure levels ( >75dB )
could result in hearing impairment depending on the duration of exposure and sensitivity of the individual.
Current requirements for wind turbine setbacks in Ontario are nil ended to limit noise at the nearest
residence to -1(1 dB (see sect ion 3 I. This is a sound ]evet comparable to indoor background sound. This
noise limit is consistent with the uighl -tine noise guideline 01.10 dB that the World Healtlt Organization
(WHO) Europe recommends for the protection of public hea ltlt front conummity noise. According to the
WHO, this guideline is below the level at w lath effects on sleep and health occurs. However, it is above the
level at which complaints stay occur (WHO 2009)
Available scientific data indicate that sound levels associated with wind turbines at common residential
setbacks are nut sufficient to damage hearing or to cause other direct adverse health effects, but some
people may still find the sound annoying.
Studies in Sweden and the Netherlands (Pedersen et al. 2009, Pedersen and Waye 200.5, Pedersen and
Waye 2007, Pedersen and Waye 2001) have found direct relationships between modelled sound pressure
level and self-reported perception of sou td and annoyance. The association between sound pressure level
and sound perception was stronger than that with annoyance. The sound was :unoying only to a small
percentage of the exposed people; approximately 0 to 10 per cent were vary annoyed at sound levels
between 3:1 and l :5d[t4. Annoyance was strongly correlated with individual perceptions of wind turbines.
Negative attitudes, such as an aversion to the visual impact of wind tubules on the landscape, were
associated with increased annoyance, while positive attitudes, such as direct economic benefit from wind
tm'hines, were associated with decreased annoyance. Wind turbine noise was perceived as more annoying
than transportation or industrial noise at comparable levels, possibly due to its swishing quality changes
throughout a 24 hour period, and lack of night -time abatement.
2.2.1 Low Frequency Sound, Infrasound and Vibration
Concerns have been raised about human exposure to "low frequency sound" and "infrasound"
(see section 2.2 for definitions) from wind turbines. There is no scientific evidence, however, to
indicate that low frequeicy sound generated front wind turbines causes adverse health effects.
Low frequency sound and infrasound are everywhere in the environment They are emitted from natural
sources (e.g., wind, rivers) and from artificial sources including road traffic, aircraft, and ventilation
systems. The most common source of infrasound is velueles. Linder many conditions, lac frequency sound
below 4011z from wind turbines cannot be distinguished from environmental background noise front the
wind itself (Leventhal] 2006, Colby et al 2009 ).
Low frequency sound from environmental sources can produce atutoyance in sensitive people and
Ultrasound at high sr land pressure levels, :Move the threshold for huntau hearing, can cause severe ear
pain. There is no evidence of adverse health effects from mfrasound below the sound pressure level of
110dB (Leventhal12003 and 2006 ),
Studies conducted to assess wind turbine noise indicate that infrasound and low frequency sounds front
modern wind turbines are well below the level where known health effects occur, typically at 30 to 70dB.
6
A small increase in sound level at low frequency can result in a large increase in perceived loudness. This
may he difficult to ignore, even at relatively low sound pressures, increasing the potential for amnoyance
(Jakobsen 2005, Leventhal] 2006)
A Portuguese research group (Alves- Pereira and Castelo Branco 2007) tuts proposed that excessive long-
term exposure to vibration from high levels of low frequency sound and infrasound can cause whole
body system pathology (nihro-acoustic disease) This finding has not been recognized by the international
medical and scientific cotunnutity. This research group also hypothesized that a family living near wind
turbines will develop vibro- acoustic disease from exposure to low frequency sound, but has nut provided
evidence to support this (Alves- Pereira mul Catstelo Branco 2007).
2.2.2 Sound Exposure Assessment
Litile mlormation is available on actual measurements of sound levels generated from wind turbines and
other environmental .sources. Since there is no widely accepted protocol for the umasureileut of noise
from evind turbines, current regulatory requirements are based on modelling (see section 3.0).
2.3 Other Potential Health Hazards of Wind Turbines
The potential health impacts of elect tor mound ic fields (EMFs ), shadow flicker, icy• throw- and ice stied,
and structural hazards of wind turbines have been rem sew ed in two reports I Chatham-Kent Public Health
Unit 2005; Rule out et al 2010). The following summarizes the findings from these reviews.
• EMFs
Wind turbines are not considered a significant source of EMI,' exposure
wind faints are low.
ice emissions levels around
• Shadow Flicker
Shadow flicker occurs when the blades of a turbine rotate in sunny conditions, casting moving shadows
on the ground that result it alternating changes in light intensity appearing to flick oii and off. About
3 per cent of people with epilepsy are photosensitive. generally to flicker frequencies between 5 -3011z
Most industrial turbines rotate at a speed below these flicker frequencies.
• Ice Throw and Ice Shed
Depending on weather conditions, ice may form on wind turbines and may be thrown or break loose
and fall to the ground. Ice throw launched far from the turbine ntay pose a significant hazard. Ice that
sheds fount stationary conipomuits presents a potent tat i isk to service personnel near the wind farm.
Sizable ice fiagnents have been reported to be found within 100 metres of the wmd turbine. Turbines
can be stopped during icy conditions to minimize the nsk.
• Structural hazards
The maximum reported threw distance in donut-tented nuhme blade failure is 150 metres for an enure
)lade, and 500 metres for a blade It agnient. Risks of 1 urbine blade fuhi l • reported in a Dutch handbook
range from one in 2,100 to one in 20,000 turbines per year ) Brawn et al 2005 ) Iitjuries and fatalities
associated with wind turbines have been reported, mostly during constriction and maintenance
relater) activities.
Wind Turbine Regulation in Ontario
The Ministry r if the Enviromnent regulates wind turbines in Ontario. A new regulation for renewable
energy projects came into effect on September 24, 2009. The requirements include minimum setbacks
and eonllnlnnty consultations.
3.1 Setbacks
Provincial setbacks were established to protect t intar-ians from potential health and safety hazards of
wind turbines including noise .utd struct ural hazards.
The minimum setback for a wind turbine is 550 metres from a receptor. The setbacks rise with the
number of turbines and the sound level rating of the selected turbines. For example, a wind project
with five turbines, each with a sound power level of lOTdB, must have its turbines setback at a minnnunt
950 metres from the nearest receptor.
These setbacks are based on modelling of sound produced by wind turbines and are intended to Imtit
sound at the nearest residence to no more than 40 dB. This limit is consistent with Mints used to control
noise from other environmental sources. 1t is also consistent with the night -time noise guideline of 40 dB
that the world Health Organization ()WHO) Europe recouuuends for the protection of public health front
conmtmtity noise. According to the \VHO, this guideline is below the level at which effects on sleep and
health occurs. however, it is above the level at which complaints may occur (WHO 20091.
Ontario used the most conservative sound modelling available nationally and internationally,
which is supported by experiences in the province and in other jurisdictions (MOE 2009). As yet.
a measurement protocol to verify compliance with the modelled limits in the field has not been
developed. The Ministry ot'the Enviromnent has recently lured indepeulent consultants to develop a
procedure for measuring audible sound from wind turbines mid also to review low frequency sound
impacts from wind turbines, and to develop recommendations regarding low frequency sound.
Ontario setback distimces for wind turbine noise control also take into account potential risk of injury
from ice throw and structural failure of wind turbines. The risk of injury is minimized with setbacks of
200 to 5011 metres.
3.2 Community Consultation
The Ministry of the Environment requires applicants for wind turbine projects to proside written
notice to all assessed land owners within 120 metres of the project location at it preliminary stage
of the project planning. Applicants must also post a notice on at least two separate days in a local
newspaper. As well, applicants are required to notify local mtuucipalittes and any Aborigiiud community
that may have a constitutionally protected right or interest that could be it npacted by the protect.
Before submitting an application to the Ministry of the Environment, the applicant is also required
to hold a minimum of two community consultation meetings to discuss the project and its potential
local impact. To ensure informed consultation, any required studies must be made available for public
review 00 days prior to the date of the final comnuunity meeting. Following these meetings the applicant
is required to submit as part of their application a Consultation Report that describes the comments
received and how these comments wet e considered n the proposal.
The applicant nest also consult directly with local municipalities prit er to applynig for a Renewable Energy
Approval on specific matters related to municipal lands, infrastructure, and services. The Ministry of the
Environment has developed a template, which the applicant is required to use to document project - specific
matt en, raised by the municipality. This must be submitted to the ministry as part of the application. The
focus of this consultation is to ensure important local service and mfrastrucntre concerns are consideied
in the project.
For small wind projects (under 50 kW) the public meeting requirements above are not applicable due to
their limited potential impacts.
Conclusions
The 1'nllowirrg are tite niain conclusion, of the review and consultation on the health impacts of
• ind turbines:
• While some people living near wind turbines report symptoms such as dizziness, headaches. and
sleep disturbance, the scientific evidence available to date does not demonstrate a direct causal
link between wmnd turbine noise ant adverse health effects.
• The sound level from wind turbines at common residential setbacks is not sufficient to cause
hearing impairment or other direct adverse health effects. however, some people might find it
annoying. It has been suggested that annoyance may be a reaction to the characteristic "swishing"
or tha t!lilting nature of wind turbine sound rather than to the inti•nstty of sound.
• Low frequency sound and infrasound from current generation upwind model turbines are well
below the pressure sound levels at which known health effects occur. Further, there is no scientific
evidence to date that vibration front low frequency wind turbine noise causes adverse health effects.
• Community engagement at the outset of planning for wind turbines is important and may alleviate
health concerns about wind farms.
• Convents about fairness and equity may also influence attitudes tow ards wind farms and allegations
about effects on health. These factors deserve greater atteutiou in future developments.
The review also identified that sound measurements at residential areas around wind turbines and
comparisons with sound levels around other rural and urban areas. to assess actual ambient noise
levels prevalent in Ontario, is a key data gap that could be addressed. An assessment of noise levels
around wind power developments and other residential environments, preluding monitoring for
sound level compliance, is an important prerequisite to making an informed decision on whether
epidemiological studios looking at health outcomes will be useful.
10
Glossary
A- weighted decibels (dBA)
The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound let el meter using at A- weighted filter
The A- weighted filter de- emphasizes the very Ic 'w and very l iiph tiequ enchvs of the sound in a manner
sin 'liar to the frequency resit rose of the human ear.
Decibel (dB)
t'nit of measurement of the loudness ( Intensity) ul snnnc) Loudness ul uonual adult human voi re is about
60 -70 d[3 at three feet. The decibel scale is a logarithmic scab• and it increases, /decreases by a factor of 11) from
one scale increment to Lite tics 1 adjacent one.
Downwind model turbines
Downwind model turbines have the blades of the rotor located behind the supporting tow er structure, facing
away from the wind. The suppi irtiug tower structure blocks sore of the wind that Mows towards the blades
Electromagnetic fields (EMFs)
Electromagnetic fields are a contbmation of mi isible electric and magnetic fields. They occur both naturally
( light is a natural form t.1' EMI') and as a rest di of human activity. Nearly all electncal and electronic devices
emit some type of EME.
Grey literature
Information produced by all levels of government, academics, business and Industry in electronic and print
formats not controlled by commercial publishing, tee., where publishing is not the primary activity of the
producing body.
Ilertz (Hz)
A unit of measurement of frequcnc
y; the uuniher of cycles per second of a periodic waveform.
Ultrasound
Commonly refers to sound at frequencies below 20IIz. All hough genetally considered inaudible
infrasound at high - enough sofa id pressure levels can he audible to some people.
Low frequency sound
C•e muuonly refers to sound al. frequencies bi t ween 21) and 301) Hz.
Noise
Noise is an unwanted sound.
Shadow Flicker
Shadow 111' ker is a result of the sun casting iii ernnntent shadows from the Dimling blades of a wind turbine
onto a sensitive receptor such as a w inflow un a building. The ticker is due to all emitting light intensity
between the direct beam of sundigl n and 1he shadow from the turf pine bbules.
Sound
Sound is wave -tike variations 111 air pressure that occur al frequencies that can be audible It is ettarac1 erized
by its loudness (sown! pressure level) and pitch ( fir equency ), which are nte•asured in standard units known as
decibel (dB ) and Het tz (I-Iz), respectively. The normal human ear perceives sounds at frequencies ranging from
2011z to 20,000 IIz.
Upwind model turbines
Upwind model turbines have the blades of the rotor located in front of the supporting tower stnictute, smiilar
to how a propeller is at the front of an airplane. Upwind turf Ines are a modern design and are quieter than the
oldt•r downwind models.
Wind turbine
4find turbines rue large tow •us with rotating blades that use wind to generate electricity.
11
Appendix 1: List of Documents on Wind Turbines
Journal Articles and Books
Brawn IIGJ, et al. IIandbuek risicuzonernig windturbines. Netherlands: SenletN'went; 20(15.
Jakobsen .J. iul'rasound enussion Bum wind turbines .I Low Fret! Noise 171' 10 /ire (rood r. 2005;24(:1).145 -155.
Keith SE, Michaud DS, Bly SHI' A proposal for evaluating the potential health effects of wind turbine none
fur projects under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Art. J Low Fern Noise 14b Act rr Control
2008 ;27(4):353-265
Levenlhall t3. tnfrasound from wind turbines: fact, fiction or deception r_'rni Aeou.st. 2006;34) 2):29 -36.
Pedersen E, Hallberg LR -M, Waye KT. Living in the vicinity of wind tiwhines: a grounded theory study
Quo( Res I'.syrhol. 2007;4(1 -2 ):40 -63.
Pedersen E, Iau'sntan P. The impact of visual factors on noise annoyance among people thing in the vicinity of
wind turbines. J F, n 1'i foe Ps yc•kol. 2008;2S(4)179 -389.
Pedersen E. Persson Waye K. Wind 1 mhines: low level noise sources interfering with restoration' F, rt firms Res
Lett. 2008;33015002. Available from http. / /ww'w. lop. org /E.J/article /1 71S 9`3'S6/3/1/OI 5002/er14_1_ 115002.pdf.
Pedersen E, I'ersson Wave K. Wind turbine noise, ;uu toyance and self-report ed health and wen-being in dihtetent
hying environments. Urrap Ent iron Med. 2007;6417 ):150 -0
Pedersen E. van den 13erg P Bakker R, Houma J Response to noise from modern wind farms in The Nclhcrlands.
.J Amos( Noe .1m. 2(I00:12f,(2)a0,34 -43 .
Pedersen E, Waye EP Percept nun and anunyanie due to wind (whine noise - a dose-response 1elationslup.
.7
Aco test Stn. Auo. 200 - 1;116) 6).34(1 -70.
van den Berg GP. Effects of the wind profile at nigh) on wu id turbine sound. J Son ad Pib. 2004;277(4-5055-970.
Available franc http: / /www.nowap.co uk/docsAvindnoise.pd
Literature
l'hathai ic Kent Public Health Unit. The Itealth impact of w and tad mitts: a movie w of the current white, grey, and
published literature Clot hum, uN: Chatham -Kent Municipal Connell: 20115 timed 2(110 Mw SJ Available nom:
http / /w•ww.wind- works. org /Large1 urhines /Hoatih iLloand le20 Wind °.,CUbytt!0( lICt:20Hvattleld2OTinitpdf.
Colby R7), Dobie R, Leventhal) G. Lips •onb UM McCuuuey RJ, Seilo MT, et al. Wind turbine sound and health
effects. An expert panel i•eiew• American Wind Energy Association S Canadian Wind Energy Association;
2000 [cited 2009 Dec 21J. Available from Idryl: / /www.cann Casa /pdf /ndkwind /Wnid_Turbute Sound, and Health_
Etfects.pdf.
hideout K, Copes R, 13os C. Wind 1 nrhines and health. Vncouver: National Collaborating Centre for Environmental
IIeadlh; 2010 .Jan [cited 21)10 Mar Availible front http. / /www.nerehca/ files /Wind_Turhines_.humuy_2010.pdf.
Wind turbines and Health: a review of evidence. Toi onto: Ontario .Agency for Health Protection and Promotion;
21109 [cited 201U Mar 5J. Available from http: / /www.oalipp.cai'resourres/ documents /presentations /20uliseptl0/
Rind° /02tTurbines %211!'- i20Sept's„il)10 2020II,Cpdf.
Emiromnental Protection Agency, Iilfice of Water Auxiliary and supplemented power fact sheet: wind turbines.
Washington. T)C: Environmental Prutectum Agency, 2307 [cited 2010 Jan 71 Available from hitp:'/win w.epa.guvJ
iwiu'nub'wind_linnl pdf.
12
Levetdhall G, Pelinear P Benton S. i\ review of published tesearch on low frequency noise and its effects. London.
Englmul: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; 2003 [cited' 201' Mar 51. t'onhact No.: EPG 1/2/50
Available 'from: lit tp:/'www defr'a.goc uk/envn onmeitUquality /noiseheseare1ilIo frequency /documents'
low freduuise.pdf.
Minnesota Department of Health, Environmental Health Division Public health impacts of wind hubines.
Saint Paul, MN: Minnesota Deparrnwnt of Commerce, Ufiioe of Energy Security; 200(1 kited 2010 Mar 51.
Available froth: hl tp: / /energyIa' ilities.p t'.stal e.nn us /document s/Publie0 4i:) IIealth "a?ffimpaetsni20of',;2fWind &920
Dubinos 111;305.22 Ill ( 2DRevised.pol
National Research Council. Committee nn Environmental Impacts of Wind- Energy Projects. Envirom [mntat
impacts of Oink energy projects. Washington, Ut'• Naliouai Academies Press; 2007.
Ontario. Ministry of the Env tronment. Frequently asked questions: renewable energy apprm al
Toronto: Queen's Printer for Ontario; 2009. Available from: http] / /wan w.ene.goc:on.ca/en /bnshu•ss /green - energy/
docs/FAQs 1.20- ftnad.pdf
Ontario. 'Ministry of the Emironment. Noise guidelines for wind farms] mletpretat ion for applying MOE NP('
publications to wind power genet atiou 1'aeihttes. 1, wottb,_ Queens ('rimier fur Ontario; 2005 [oiled 2010 Mar 51.
Available from: htip /ww'v.ene. gua cut.ca'pu bh cations/4705W pcil
Ontario. Ministry of the Environment. Des elopment of noise setbacks fur wind faruts' t equit ements tor compliance
with 510E noise lulu Is Toronto, ON' Queen's Printer for Ontario; 2009 Available faun
htth/ by -w w.ene.gov.on.cm'en/husinessi green - energy /docs/WIrtdNoiseSetbacks.pdf.
Pedersen E. IIuntmt response to wind turbine noise: perception, annok ace and moderating factors. G bteborg.
Sweden: Gbteborgs IJuiversilel, Satdgrenska Aeedell Depart meat of Public Health and l'omntunity Medicine;
2007 jelled 2010 Afar 5]. Available from: http:// gupea. ub.gn.se /dspace'bitsheauil2OT771 431,11 /gupea_ 2077_ 44:31, l.pdf.
Pieryont N. Wind 1arbine syndrome] a report on a natural experiment [pre - publication draft]. Santa Fe, NM:
Fi- Selected Books; 2009 [cited 2010 Mar 5]. Available from: hltp', /www windttu'binesymirome.comt/m p- content./
uploads /2000A)3hns- read}- for- pos0ug- on-wts'•om- ;i-7-09 pdf.
I.;unakrisl man R (Aiolos Engineering Corm nation Wtnd turbine facilities noise issues.
Toronto: Queen's Printer for Ontario 21107 i cited 2010 Mar 51. Report No : 1071 /_218b'AR155Rev:3.
Available from: https /;ozoi te. scliolarsport :S.mfu /bttslreanr'1SS ; /1:3073,1'283287,pdf.
Rogers AT 1Flanwell.IF, Wright S. Wind turbine acoustic noise, a white paper. Amherst, MA: University of
Massachusetts at Aii herst, Department of Mechaitical [ual Industrial Engineering, Renewable Energy Research
Laboratory; 2006 [cited '3010 Mar 5]. Available from: httpJ /www.ceere. nigh' erl/pubheations /whitepapers/Wmd_
11 triune Acoustic Noise_ Rev2006.pdf.
an den Berg E Pederson E, Buuma .1, Bakker 11 Project WINUFARMperception: visual and acoustic impact of
wind turbine farms on residents: final report. TO raungert, Netherlands: University of Groningen: 2008 [cited 2010
Mar 5]. Published jointly by the University of Groningen and the Universit of Gothenburg. Available from:
http:Uwww .vviud -w at ch.org/docuutents /wp -cunt crd /uploads /wfp- li nt -1_p U
Whitford .1. Model wind rut bine by -laws and best practices tiff Nova Scotia mnnicq 'alibes: final report.
Halifax. NS: Union of Nova Scotia Muntcipalnies: 2008 [cited 2009 Apt 21]. Contract No.. 1031551.
Available from: ht. ip.// www .sustainabili1v- unsm.ca/our-w ork hun].
1::