Photo: Vlasta Juricek

There’s no denying that wind turbines make noise. A giant rotor blade the size of an aircraft wing swooshing through the air is going to make a noticeable sound, particularly in a quiet, rural setting.

And it’s an often-repeated claim of wind farm opponents that this noise can lead to a whole host of health issues, including headaches, tinnitus, fatigue, and sleep disturbances. Health fears, among other objections, have sometimes been cited by local governments as they establish large setbacks, moratoriums, or other restrictions on wind farm development.

But a new study published in the journal Environmental Research Letters [PDF] suggests those claims are, at best, conflated. The analysis by four Swedish scientists reviews existing literature and finds that with the exception of some self-reported cases of sleep disturbance, there is no scientific or empirical basis to conclude that wind turbine noise causes health problems.

Among the works examined was Nina Pierpont’s oft-cited book Wind Turbine Syndrome, which relies on anecdotal evidence from 38 individuals living near wind farms, several of whom reported insomnia, tinnitus, nausea, dizziness, and other symptoms. Pierpont concludes that the symptoms are a direct result of low-frequency noise from nearby turbines, but the Swedish researchers found the book “has several limitiations” which “make the conclusion unjustified.”

For example, the lack of acoustic measurements, no comparison group of people with no or low wind exposure, and no investigation of the subjects prior to the wind turbines [being constructed] (prior health status was estimated retrospectively). In addition, the results, which are based on a very small sample, are contradicted by results from cross-sectional studies … which included a total of more than 1600 people.

The review did conclude, however, that the pulsating noise from wind turbines is more annoying to people living nearby than comparable sound levels from other sources, such as traffic. And because annoyance can lead to stress and sleep deprivation, it’s possible that wind farms can be blamed for indirect health issues.

Wind turbine noise is causing noise annoyance, and possibly also sleep disturbance, which means that one cannot completely rule out effects on the cardiovascular system after prolonged exposure to wind turbine noise, despite moderate levels of exposure.

However, that can be true of any source of noise, from cars to airplanes to obnoxious neighbors, and will vary from individual to individual. Siting guidelines for wind turbines already typically have noise restrictions to minimize this impact.

Being annoyed is not the same thing as getting sick. And while this paper doesn’t necessarily rule out the possibility that wind turbines could have a health impact, it’s telling that after years of study, no one seems to have established a scientifically sound connection.

Photo: Steve White

Increasingly, the focus on the Keystone XL debate is shifting from Washington, D.C. to Lincoln, Neb.

Despite the arrests of more than 1,000 protesters in front of the White House, and a letter from the Dalai Lama, Desmond Tutu, and others opposing the pipeline, a greater impact is likely to come from another group of constituents:

Nebraska football fans.

A story last week in the Lincoln Journal Star described fans at Nebraska’s Memorial Stadium booing as a TransCanada-sponsored “Husker Pipeline” video played on the big screen. The outcry prompted University of Nebraska-Lincoln Athletic Director Tom Osborne to end the sponsorship agreement.

To be clear, Osborne wasn’t taking a position on the pipeline itself, he was merely acting on a policy to “avoid ads of a political nature” inside the stadium. “The athletic department has no position, either pro or con, regarding the proposed TransCanada Pipeline,” Osborne said in a statement.

Still, the rebuff by Osborne, who coached the Cornhuskers for 25 years and is one of the state’s most revered public figures, is not to be taken lightly.

Two weeks ago, Republican Gov. Dave Heineman sent a letter to the State Department calling for the pipeline to be rerouted around the Ogallala Aquifer, which provides irrigation and drinking water for much of the Great Plains. Because of the potential threat to this critical groundwater supply, a broad, bipartisan coalition is emerging in the state to oppose the pipeline.

So can Nebraska stop the pipeline? InsideClimate News, which has been covering the issue extensively, has an excellent overview of how the process could play out in the state. While the state’s congressional delegation differs over whether it’s a state or federal issue, the State Department has said that “individual states have the legal authority to approve petroleum pipeline construction in their states, including selecting the route for such pipelines.”

Nebraska, however, has no state agency assigned to regulate pipelines, and the legislature isn’t scheduled to reconvene until January, after the State Department is expected to issue its final decision on the pipeline. Some state lawmakers are pushing for an unprecedented special legislative session to deal with the issue.

The State Department’s most recent environmental impact statement estimated that rerouting the pipeline could increase costs by as much as 25 percent, potentially rendering the project economically unfeasible. Which means the Nebraska legislature could have as much power as President Obama to determine the pipeline’s fate.

The recent “Husker Pipeline” incident reveals that TransCanada may be as reviled as (dare I say it) the Colorado Buffaloes inside the walls of Memorial Stadium. While it’s not a scientific poll, it’s clear evidence that a lot of Nebraskans are concerned about the pipeline’s potential impact.

Whether this will force the issue in the legislature remains to be seen. But I’d be surprised if state lawmakers aren’t paying a lot more attention now to where their constituents stand on the pipeline.