Environment FAQ

Local benefits to the community include:

• Safe, pollution-free energy
• Increased, reliable income to leaseholders who accommodate turbines (most of whom are farmers in rural areas) through royalty payments – in total approximately $2 million per year will be paid to local farmers
• Developer spending on goods and services during construction (about $100 million)
• Ongoing spending on goods and services during operations and maintenance
• Creation of direct and indirect, full- and part-time employment during construction (about 300 jobs at peak and 200 on average)
• Creation of direct and indirect employment during ongoing operations (16 to 20 full-time jobs)
• Increased municipal real estate tax revenues (approximately $300,000 annually)
• Increased tourism opportunities when wind farms are promoted as attractions
• Enough electricity to power approximately 80,000 homes
• Renewable, reliable and cost-effective energy production with comparatively minor adverse environmental effects
• Reduced production of greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change

The productivity of wind farms fluctuates with daily and seasonal wind speeds, but most wind farms produce at least some electricity most of the time. Wind farms are virtually always economically viable during the typical 20-year terms of their power purchase agreements. If decommissioning the Gosfield and Comber projects were ever to be necessary, Brookfield Renewable Power would pay for these costs.

The lease agreements with landowners allow for two 20-year operating terms and a 7-year initial development period. The agreements enable landowners to receive royalty payments based on a percentage of the total gross revenue generated by the wind farm and payments for use of their land during construction, for crop losses on any of their property affected by the project and for any increases in property taxes.

The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing has established the value of wind turbine generators to be based on the permanent portion of the equipment – an assessed value of $40,000 plus the value of one acre of land has been applied per MW. This value is multiplied by the local commercial tax mill rate to determine the property tax.

For the 149 turbines on agricultural land, the host municipalities could receive new tax revenue of approximately $300,000 per year, with no additional strain on municipal services.

The project is still being developed, and Brookfield Renewable Power has not yet assigned the on-site project manager who will be in charge of local contracting. As the project advances, there will be further public consultations and announcements regarding the progress and expected schedule of the project.

Property values increase for landowners who receive lease payments for wind turbines on their land.

For the project’s Environmental Screening Report and Impact Statement prepared by the independent experts engaged by Stantec Consulting Ltd., an analysis was conducted of the actual impacts of wind farms on surrounding property values in several countries:

Melancthon Township, Ontario
This review was carried out between November 2004 and November 2005 (before and after construction of the first phase of the wind farm), in two areas (one within the turbine siting area, and one outside the siting area) where 27 properties were sold. The review indicated that the average asking price was similar in the wind turbine siting area when compared to prices outside the area. The average sale price was higher in the turbine siting area. The average difference between asking and sale prices was lower within the siting area (i.e. positive position).

Melancthon and East Luther Grand Valley Townships, Ontario
Sales activity for the two comparable Townships (one with a wind farm, and one without) were analyzed before and after development of the wind farm in 2006. The key conclusions included:

• Prior to construction of the wind farm, property sale price levels were significantly lower in Melancthon than in East Luther Grand Valley.
• Following construction, registered sale prices increased in both Townships, but growth levels were significantly higher in Melancthon, which demonstrated consistent patterns of growth similar to Dufferin County, whereas East Luther Grand Valley demonstrated inferior growth compared to Dufferin County.
• The presence of a wind farm was not seen to have diminished property value, but to arguably have encouraged increases in property value.

Wind farms throughout the US
A comprehensive study, funded by the US Department of Energy, released in December 2009, by the Berkeley National Laboratory. The researchers examined the impact of wind power facilities on residential property values by applying 10 sophisticated models used by economists and real estate professionals to 7,459 property sales near 24 projects in nine states. They compiled data on various types of impacts, from pre-construction to two years after construction. Though they found strong statistical evidence that the quality of scenic vista affects sales prices, the researchers concluded that neither the view of wind facilities, nor the distance of homes to them, had any consistent, measurable and statistically significant effect on sales prices.

United Kingdom
The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors found that no studies within the country suggest an effect on property values either way (2002). At over 70 wind farms in the England, Wales and Scotland, available evidence demonstrates that they have no material effect on house prices.

A baseline ambient noise survey was conducted within the Gosfield and Comber project study areas to substantiate the provincial regulatory sound level limit requirements for the project. According to the Environmental Noise Impact Assessment conducted by Aercoustics Engineering Ltd. for the recent Environmental Screening Report and Impact Statement:

• Noise impacts of the project’s wind turbines and transformer stations (with noise barrier walls) were predicted using acoustic modeling.
• The analysis showed that the impacts do not exceed the most restrictive night-time noise limits that apply for Class Rural areas as defined by the Ministry of Environment, and consequently, there is no need for application of additional mitigation measures.

Ministry of Environment staff have reviewed the sound assessment and found the results met all requirements.

As a responsible developer of renewable energy projects, Brookfield Renewable Power wants to ensure that the Gosfield and Comber Wind Projects provide for the protection, conservation and wise management of the surrounding natural, socio-economic and physical environments.

Brookfield Renewable Power retained independent consultants of Stantec Consulting Ltd. (Stantec) to conduct an Environmental Screening Process as required under Ontario Regulation 116/01 of the Environmental Assessment Act.

In December 2007, Brookfield Renewable Power completed the Environmental Screening Report (ESR). The public and agency review period ended February 1, 2008 without any “Requests to Elevate” being received.

For more information on the ESR, click here.

Turbines make mechanical noise, and an aerodynamic, “swoosh” noise when the blades pass the tower. However, recent advancements in turbine configurations, materials and blade geometry have made turbines relatively quiet.

Noise from a wind turbine is typically 35-40 decibels (dBA) at a distance of 300 metres with a wind speed of 8 metres/second. This compares to the noise of an office (35-50 dBA) or inside a residence (25-45 dBA). You can stand beneath an operating turbine and have a normal conversation (55-65 dBA) without raising your voice.

Blade noise increases with wind speed, but so do offsetting natural background noises such as “swishing or whistling” wind, rustling leaves or lapping waves.

Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Arlene King, issued a report in May 2010 entitled The Potential Impact of Wind Turbines. The report is based on scientific evidence such as published papers in peer-reviewed scientific journals and reviews by internationally recognized health authorities. It was prepared in consultation with the Ontario Agency of Health Protection & Promotion, the Ministry of Health and Long-term Care, and the Council of Ontario Medical Officers of Health. The main conclusions are:

• 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.
li>
• 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 fluctuating nature of wind turbine sound rather than to the intensity of the 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 from 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. These factors deserve greater attention in future developments.

An expert panel also concluded in early 2010 that wind turbine noise does not pose risks to people’s health. They reported there is no evidence that the audible and sub-audible sounds emitted by wind turbines have any direct adverse physiological effects, indoors or outside. The seven-member panel of medical doctors, audiologists and acoustical professionals from the US, Canada, Denmark and the UK undertook an extensive review and assessment of a significant amount of peer-reviewed, published scientific reports and epidemiological evidence about the potential impacts of wind turbines on human health, particularly concerning sound. The panel’s report states:

• “The ground-borne vibrations from turbines are too weak to be detected by, or to affect, humans. Sub-audible, low frequency sound and infrasound from wind turbines do not present a risk to human health. The low frequency sound emitted could possibly be annoying to some when winds are unusually turbulent, but there is no evidence that this could be harmful to health. Sound levels from wind turbines pose no risk of hearing loss or any other non-auditory effect.”
• “A small minority of people exposed to turbines report annoyance and stress associated with turbine noise perception. Annoyance, however, is not a pathological entity; it is a subjective response that varies among people to many types of sound. Although it may be a frustrating experience, annoyance is not considered an adverse health effect or disease. Studies have shown that people’s attitude toward wind turbines may affect the level of annoyance that they report. Stress associated with annoyance, exacerbated by rhetoric, fears and negative publicity generated by wind turbine controversy may contribute to the reported symptoms described by some people living near turbines.”
• “The nocebo effect is a worsening of mental or physical health based on fear or belief in adverse effects. It is associated with certain personal psychological characteristics such as anxiety, depression and the tendency to express psychological factors as physical symptoms. The symptoms described as so-called “wind turbine syndrome”, an unproven hypothesis coined by book author Nina Pierpont, are all common in the general population, and no evidence has been presented that they are more common in persons living near wind turbines. Pierpont’s case series of self-selected patients does not constitute evidence of a causal connection. The large amount of media coverage devoted to alleged health effects understandably creates an anticipatory fear in some that they will experience adverse effects.”

An Ontario acoustics expert defended the province’s guidelines on turbine noise at a Town of Essex meeting in February 2009. Brian Howe, a consulting engineer in acoustics for 20 years, reported that Ontario’s guidelines for turbine noise are adequate and consistent with Health Canada studies as well as guidelines for other industrial sources in the province. They’re also in line with the internationally recognized standards of the ISO and recommendations of the World Health Organization.

A Quebec review found no detrimental impacts from wind farms in November 2009. The review was undertaken by Québec’s Institute of Public Health to provide regional health authorities with the most complete information on concerns raised during public hearings into wind energy project proposals. The review looked at data from scientific journals, conference presentations, Canadian and international government agency documents, experts in relevant fields and various websites. The agency’s report concluded:

• Construction disturbances, sound, infrasound, shadow flicker and electromagnetic fields have been shown to have no negative impact on human health.
• The main health concern arising from wind farms is annoyance. “Annoyance due to sound may be accentuated by the visual intrusion of wind generators.”
• Under certain conditions, wind turbines emit sound that some people find difficult to ignore, but sound levels fall short of being harmful.
• “Wind turbine sound intensity is insufficient to negatively affect the hearing of nearby residents.”
• Moving shadows or flickers caused by turbines can create some discomfort, but do not cause convulsive seizures or other health issues.

The US National Health Services has openly criticized the research and conclusions of New York pediatrician Nina Pierpont in her book about “wind turbine syndrome”. The NHS reported that no firm conclusions can be drawn from her study as its design was weak, based on only 38 questionably selected participants, and the fact there was no comparison (control) group. It notes that of the 38 participants:

• 23 of them, from only 10 families, were interviewed by phone,
• information about the other 15 was obtained indirectly from those interviewed,
• many participants had conditions before the turbines were installed such as mental disorders (7), migraine disorders (8), permanent hearing problems (8), tinnitus (6) and other health problems,
• 12 had been previously exposed to significant noise, and
• 18 were motion sensitive.

Also critical of the book was Grist magazine, a U.S. non-profit, online magazine that publishes environmental news and opinion articles. According to the article, a professional acoustician says Pierpont has clearly misunderstood the acoustic material she refers to. It also pointed out that her work has not been accepted by any peer-reviewed scientific journals (a standard first test in publishing original research) and that Pierpont’s small editorial board consists of herself, her husband, a professor of literature, and an ecologist/psychologist.

In 2008, Dr. David Colby, Chatham-Kent’s acting Medical Health Officer reported to the county’s Board of Health and to its Municipal Council on various health concerns regarding wind farms. Colby stated in his comprehensive report that:

• As long as Ontario Ministry of Environment’s conservative guidelines for the setback of wind turbines are followed, there will be negligible health impacts on Chatham-Kent citizens….opposition to wind farms on the basis of potential adverse health consequences is not justified by the evidence….there is no published evidence of any detriment to humans.
• The United Nations and the World Health Organization have identified wind power as a clean, renewable energy source that has no known emissions, waste products or harmful pollutants.
• One modern turbine can save over 4,000 tonnes annually of carbon dioxide emissions, which contribute to global warming.
• There have been more than 68,000 wind turbines installed worldwide over the last 25 years, but there have been no documented injuries to the public resulting from failure of a turbine.

And according to a report written by Ryerson Professor Dr. Ramani Ramakrishman for the Ontario Ministry of Environment and posted on the Environmental Registry in April 2008, there is no currently available scientific data indicating that wind turbines make disturbing levels of noise, and Ontario’s noise guidelines are reasonable.

Ontario's MOE applies some of the strictest noise guidelines for wind turbines of any jurisdiction in Canada.

The sound limits in decibels depend on the average wind speed and on type of urban or rural area. The sound limits in the interpretation document are consistent with the MOE criteria set in the technical publications titled "Sound Level Limits for Stationary Sources in Class 3 Areas (Rural) – Publication NPC-232" and "Sound Level Limits for Stationary Sources in Class 1 & 2 Areas (Urban) – Publication NPC-205", both available in the "publications" section of the Ministry of the Environment website.

Specific guidance is given in a document titled "Interpretation for applying MOE Technical Publications to Wind Turbine Generators". Click here for a copy of the document.

No – The sound limits apply for continuous operation any time of day or night. The Ministry recognizes that the more sensitive times for sound impacts typically occur during evening and night-time hours, so sound from wind turbines is limited to the maximum set for night-time hours in publications NPC-205 & NPC-232.

No, waivers and other legal agreements of this type are beyond the scope of the ministry’s interpretation document for wind turbines. Consequently, no other sound limits are accepted.

A landowner’s residence on the same property as a wind turbine(s) is not a Point of Reception as defined by the Ministry of the Environmentsound guidelines. Consequently, since that residence would be considered as part of the facility containing the wind turbine(s), no sound limit would apply. The newest Point of Reception is located on a neighbouring property.

No, the Certificate of Approval application would only be posted if the wind turbine project was not subject to the Environmental Assessment Act (i.e. if the project is less than 2 MW in nameplate capacity).

In a 2010 Technical Bulletin, the Ontario Ministry of Environment established setbacks under the Renewable Energy Approval Regulation (O. Reg. 359/09) as they apply to locating wind turbines. Setbacks are specified minimum horizontal separation distances between the base of a turbine and a noise receptor, property line, or road or railway right of way. Setbacks have been established to protect the environment, through conservative, science-based calculations. This enhances transparency and clarifies expectations while reducing burden on applicants to perform separate assessments for every project.

Further detail on the rationale and modeling methodology used to arrive at noise setbacks is provided in the Ministry of the Environment’s 2009 publication “Development of Noise Setbacks for Wind Farms”.

Many factors can influence sound impacts due to wind turbine operations, including wind gradient (speed and direction at various elevations), temperature inversions, ground effects such as topography, receptor height, molecular absorption in air, acoustic shielding, and reflections, amongst others.

Planning authorities (including municipalities and planning boards) may require additional assurances under the Planning Act, beyond what is required by provincial environmental legislation and guidelines. Most developers try to coordinate provincial and municipal sound requirements and address them in one sound assessment study and report.

No – There is no evidence that current wind turbine generators present any problems related to the generation of infrasound/low frequency sound. These sound emissions occurred with some early wind turbine models; however, this was attributed to early turbines with their blades downwind of the support tower. These emissions do not occur with modern upwind turbines with the blades upwind of the tower.

There is no evidence to indicate that modern wind turbines cause vibration. A failure of mechanical components may result in adverse mechanical sound and/or vibration. However, these are detected by turbine monitoring and notification devices and Brookfield Renewable Power will be performing regular inspection and maintenance of the turbines, to prevent or correct such conditions.

Residents should contact Brookfield Renewable Power (see contacts) or their local Ministry of Environment District Office, which can be found on the Ministry of the Environment website at http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/org/op.htm.

In Spring 2010, the National Wind Coordinating Collaborative summarized in a fact sheet its research work on a wide variety of wind turbine interactions with birds, bats and their habitats.

According to the US National Wind Coordinating Committee, an average 2.3 birds and 3.4 bats died per turbine per year at 12 wind farms studied across the country.

Another US study revealed that wind farms kill less than 1 bird for every 5,500 killed by reflective windows, 1,000 killed by domestic cats, 800 by high tension wires, 700 by vehicles, 700 by pesticides, and 250 by communication towers.

Also, the US National Audubon Society supports wind power rather than other types of power generation because its clean energy reduces pollution, acid rain, global warming – the most significant threats to birds and other wildlife.

Existing studies of wildlife and natural habitats similarly indicate minimal impacts.

Turbine technology has improved for avian species, with slower blade rotation speeds and tubular rather than lattice towers. Many studies of bird mortality and wind turbines indicate that the potential for bird mortality is low.

Gosfield and Comber wind projects
The following are conclusions drawn from 14 months of field studies in 2004 and 2005 in the project’s study area, additional studies conducted during the breeding season of 2007, and radar studies in 2005 and 2007, for the recent Environmental Screening Report and Impact Statement prepared by the independent experts engaged by Stantec Consulting Ltd:

• Scarcity of natural habitat generally results in low bird use in the project study area (i.e. the area does not support concentrations of wintering birds, nor significant concentrations of staging spring or fall migrants; flight activity during migration is approximately 25% lower than the North American average; over 80% of nocturnal migrants travel above the height of turbine blades),
• Given this scarcity and the minimum 17.5 km distance between the proposed turbines and known staging and stopover habitat, turbines in the study area are not expected to interfere with migrants’ ascent and descent,
• As a result, no significant direct mortality to migrants is anticipated.

Erie Shores Wind Farm 
The following are actual results from the post-construction avian monitoring program conducted by Dr. Ross James – former chief of ornithology at the Royal Ontario Museum. The wind farm is located near Port Burwell (south of Tillsonburg), where its 66 turbines are located within 3 km of the shores of the lake. Dr. James undertook 2 years of post-construction monitoring, revealing these findings:

• Swans, geese and ducks returned to the area in usual numbers during spring migration. Swans flew through the wind farm daily when present, and easily found fields to forage in. In the autumn, upwards of 300 geese daily fly from Lake Erie into or through the wind farm to forage in fields. They are often seen in the same fields as the turbines. No waterfowl have been found dead, although many geese have been seen flying past operating turbines within 100 m of them. 
• Bald Eagles nested just north of the wind farm in 2006 and raised two young to fledging. They returned to nest again in 2007. Immature and adult eagles fly back and forth daily as they forage along the lakeshore past the nearest turbines, often within 200 m of them. 
• Breeding bird surveys have not revealed any decrease in numbers of breeding birds adjacent to turbines. Smaller birds have readily nested close to turbines if there was suitable habitat. Killdeers, for example, were attracted to the new access roadways and nested as close as 4 m from the towers. Savannah Sparrows nested within 16 m, Vesper Sparrows within 30 m, Warbling Vireos within 24 m, Horned Larks within 15 m and Baltimore Orioles within 40 m. All of these under or nearly under the extent of the turbine blades. Among the larger birds, Mallards nested within 100 m, Red-tailed Hawks and Cooper's Hawks within 200 m. 
• The autumn migration of diurnal raptors has not been hindered in the least. Despite having watched thousands fly through the wind farm, only three dead in two years of searching were found. The turbines have not been the cause of any serious mortality. Very few raptor migrants ever get close enough to be at risk, although many may fly past within 100 m of the blades. The numbers of diurnal raptors flying past Hawk Cliff, a short way west of the wind farm was higher in 2006 than in previous years, indicating no change in migration numbers along the Lake Erie shores. 
• Hundreds of gulls daily fly along the lakeshore bluffs past the nearest wind turbines. At times hundreds are seen flying inland over and through the wind farm. Hundreds have been seen in fields, often the same fields as turbines, yet, in two years of searching there has been only one recorded death.
• Smaller diurnal migrants, such as jays, goldfinches, waxwings, buntings and blackbirds fly through the wind farm in the thousands each autumn, undeterred by the presence of the turbines. Despite the thousands seen in migration, not a single diurnal migrant has been found dead during the migration season. 
• As has been the case with any wind power installation, the majority of casualties are from the small nocturnal migrants. But the mortality at the Erie Shores site was not considered unusual by Dr. James. It will probably work out to be near the average found at other carefully studied North American installations. While that level of mortality may be regrettable, it is not a serious casualty rate, particularly when compared to far more serious things such as windows, house cats, or habitat loss. Searches were made at all turbines weekly, or more often, over 6 weeks in spring and over 7 weeks so far this autumn. Yet the number of dead birds incidentally identified on the roads this year, where no regular systematic surveying was done, has been three times higher than the number found under the turbines. 
• In two years of searching every turbine at least once a week, some more often, no mortality was observed at half the turbines.
• Over two years there have been birds found at 19 of the 66 turbines each year, and at only two of them was there mortality both years.
• Nearly half of all birds found were within 10 m of a tower (whether on the roads, at turbines where fields can be walked all year, or considering everything found), meaning there is a high probability of finding anything if it is there.
• At the 9 turbines nearest the shore, where mortality might be expected to be somewhat higher, birds were found at 5 turbines in 2007, and at only 2 turbines for both years.
• During 30% of the time spent searching during migration seasons (18 weeks), no birds were found at all.
• The unadjusted mortality rate for the Erie Shores Wind Farm, based on two years of post-construction monitoring, is estimated at 0.45 birds per turbine - small samples all around.

Alberta wind farms
A study of over a million, night-time flight paths in three dimensions at six Alberta wind farms and six control/non-windfarm sites in 2004 revealed that birds and bats detected wind turbines and flew higher and slower while approaching turbines.

Wind farms throughout the US
According to the US National Wind Coordinating Committee, an average 2.3 birds and 3.4 bats died per turbine per year at 12 wind farms studied across the country.

Another US study revealed that wind farms kill less than 1 bird for every 5,500 killed by reflective windows, 1,000 killed by domestic cats, 800 by high tension wires, 700 by vehicles, 700 by pesticides, and 250 by communication towers.

Also, the US National Audubon Society supports wind power rather than other types of power generation because its clean energy reduces pollution, acid rain, global warming – the most significant threats to birds and other wildlife.

Existing studies of wildlife and natural habitats similarly indicate minimal impacts.

See results of two year monitoring survey conducted by Natural Resource Solutions in 2006-2008.

Of course, the amount of power generated by a wind turbine depends on wind speed, and generally the higher above ground, the faster the wind. That is why modern on-grid turbines are built with towers that are 75 to 100 metres in height. And the longer the rotor blades of a wind turbine, the more wind power it harnesses – another reason why turbines are high up. To capture more wind safely at greater heights, wind turbines are designed to be big and weather resistant, for several decades.

The turbine layouts for the Gosfield and Comber projects has been developed based on the preferences of landowners, the location of homes and roads, the presence of wetlands and other sensitive natural habitats, topography, optimal clustering and spacing between turbines, scenic view sheds, and many other factors. Setback distances from houses will be imposed to respect strict sound restrictions established by Ontario's Ministry of the Environment. Also, the Town of Lakeshore has established wind farm zoning regulations with the following minimum setbacks: 600 metres from any residential or institutional zone, 450 m from any industrial or commercial zone, 300 m from an off-site residential dwelling, and the greater of 1.25 times the height of the turbine or 250 m from an on-site residential dwelling. Brookfield Renewable Power will attempt to mitigate significant, negative visual impacts from important viewpoints that are raised, before construction, to the extent possible.

Research indicates that shadow flicker can be a nuisance but is not a health issue. And it can be alleviated with proper setbacks and planting trees.

A shadow flicker simulation analysis was undertaken for the Gosfield and Comber projects by AWS Truewind. Results indicated that 5 receptors within the project study area would be exposed to shadow flicker equal to or greater than 30 hours per calendar year (a prominent standard in use throughout the world). Additional study of these receptors will be conducted, and if necessary, mitigation measures will be developed (such as evergreen screens/buffers or operational curtailment).

Transport Canada imposes aviation warning lights, and has developed new standards for wind turbines. It is anticipated that at most 35 of the 94 Gosfield and Comber turbines will require medium intensity, red, fading on and off beacons.

The safety of the general public and employees are the highest priority for Brookfield Renewable Power. During the construction period, Brookfield Renewable Power and its contractors will implement road and construction site safety policies, plans, programs, procedures and measures.

Once constructed, modern wind turbines are so safe that they operate in both densely populated and rural settings. In over 25 years, with 85,000 turbines operating worldwide, relatively few deaths have been reported.

The Gosfield and Comber turbines are designed to withstand wind speeds of up to 215 km/hr – equivalent to a Level F2 tornado or Category 3 hurricane, and at wind speeds over 87 km/hr, the turbines shut themselves down through blade pitch controls and shaft brakes. The underground, steel-reinforced, concrete foundation of a turbine and the earth covering it will weigh four times more than the turbine tower, nacelle and blades above ground. The turbines will have sophisticated wind measurement devices and controls to slow down or stop blade rotation if the wind blows too hard, or if too much ice builds up on the blades.

The turbines of will be located to minimize interference with moving farm equipment and aircraft. Some turbines will be equipped with flashing light beacons to warn airplane pilots. Conforming to strict provincial and municipal government guidelines, they will be set back from residences and roads.

And the turbines, transformers and substations will be fabricated with mostly steel, fireproof materials.

Modern turbines are programmed to shut down when too much ice builds up on their blades, and maintenance workers examine the ice conditions before starting the turbines up again.

When ice melts off of blades, it typically falls within a circular area downwind that is less than twice the rotor blade-swept area, which will not be problematic with typical sound setbacks.

The Gosfield and Comber projects will have sufficient setbacks from sensitive residential and institutional land uses to provide safety from falling ice.

Interference of this sort is rarely a problem. To mitigate the impact of sound, turbines will have to be positioned a minimum distance away from residences and a minimum distance from residential areas. Any interference that does occur can be easily resolved by improving a receiver's antenna or installing relays to transmit signals around wind farms.