Anglesey Council's Potential Deafness Problem

Anglesey Council, who initiated their much-vaunted and trademarked 'Anglesey Island' concept many years ago now, may have a big legal problem on their hands if new research is put to the test in Court.

Researchers in Germany have unearthed mechanisms by which the ear's natural sounds are amplified by stimulation by low frequency noise, which campaigners often claim to be emitted by wind turbines.  The paper itself makes no mention of wind turbines.

Sunny and noise-free.  Or so the authorities and developers would like you believe.

Planning consent is such that levels of noise at LF are never taken into consideration, because the frequency and loudness levels are at points of the auditory spectrum where, even if these LF problems were shown to exist, they would never provide a legal basis for planing consent breaches. 

Only by the notoriously difficult-to-demonstrate route of statutory nuisance can LF noise currently be brought to Court.  Local authorities, whilst obliged to order assessments when reasonable complaints arise, are often in friendly liaisons with turbine developers, and in most cases, get the developers themselves to assess the noise.  It's hardly a recipe for objectivity.

But, with this evidence, part of a developing body of research that indicates LF really is a problem and could damage health, those whose lives and property are blighted by wind turbines will feel emboldened.

Anglesey has been an enthusiastic supporter of energy projects, and wind energy insiders report that senior officers are "very keen" when presented with new turbine proposals.  The public, however, have a different view.

The tide has turned against onshore wind farms.  Their proliferation in the crowded UK has become a significant poilitical issue.

For now, it appears that this latest research is one further nail in the coffin of those who have hoodwinked local politicians and the public alike into believing wind turbines never cause health problems.  If they really believed that, then they would embrace LF noise clauses in planning consents.  That this is never the case reveals the true situation with respect to turbine developments.

Indeed, the government fairly recently relaxed limits on noise for wind turbines.  This blogger, who seems to be an ardent supporter of the wind industry and perhaps part of it, claims the German research is "bad science."  As his riposte, he ridiculously posts an online video taken with a simple video device, claiming that the wind farm in question has "no noise."  

Where the blogger is right is in his claim that the term "wind turbine" does not appear in the text of the research report. 

Whilst this is so, it is a bit like saying a research paper reporting that "high energy collisions with the human body cause injury" can't be linked to motor vehicle accidents, and so there's no need for anyone to worry about cars hitting people.  The link to turbines is self-evident and unambiguous through the range of frequencies under consideration.  The paper provides food for further research thought in direct respect of wind turbines.  

Anglesey Council's Ludicrous 'Considerations'

Anglesey Council, hardly the exemplar of local government over the past 30 years, is 'considering' a waste collection option that could see black bins emptied only every three or four weeks.

One can certainly be kind to the council and say they have both legally-enforceable recycling rates to hit, and financial savings to make.

Now it's 1,2,3 weeks per collection, not 3,2,1,!

However, the EU legislation that necessitated recycling targets came into effect a very, very long time ago.  Like many other councils, Anglesey have simply sat on their hands for several years before getting to grips with the problem of waste reduction.

But let's get back to the immediate problem: can a monthly bin collection work?  An analysis of waste going into my black bin casts very serious doubt that it can.

This family recycles all that the council accepts.  This excludes a large number of plastics, notably packaging plastic and films, that the council can't get rid of.  As a result, our bin content over two weeks is currently almost entirely made up of packaging plastic.  All our food waste is composted within our garden.

What this tells you is that, for families, monthly collections will result in ludicrously full bins.  In summer, they will smell, although the reduced amount of food waste put into them should limit this compared to days gone by.

Councils, of course, have never been able - or perhaps willing - to tackle sellers and makers of food on the plastics they produce.  As a result, the manufacturers are able to dispose of the waste they (and not us) createat zero cost to themselves.  This has always been a sore-thumb sticking out in need of attention, but it's remained unresolved.

One might argue that, with monthly bin collections, the pressure will mount on food producers to cut down on the amount of thin and film plastic they use to wrap all our products in.  But it's uncertain.  Plastic bags didn't really become a controlled item until the Welsh Government banned free bags.  I think packaging plastics will have to similarly be controlled through legislation.

So, yes, the Council does have a genuine problem on its hands.  But then, has anyone started to look in depth at the years-long contracts handed out to private companies - who must make a profit - for taking over the waste collection and processing functions in the first place?  Therein must lie some pretty hefty savings - provided you can find good managers that are allowed to manage by Councils.