Structural Engineering Inspections,Helical Pile Foundation Supports,Carbon Fiber Structural Reinforcement,Stablwall Foundation Bracing Systems,Foundation Repairs,Foundation Underpinning,Pile Caps,Structural Repairs,House Jacking,Floridian Sunrooms,Shoring,Grade Beams,Basement Excavations,Sill Repair,Drain Systems,Title IV Inspections, Kingston, Massachusetts, Cape Cod

Your Neighborhood Convenience Store: Beer & Wine ~ Liquors ~ Cigarettes ~ Lottery ~ Groceries: Monday to Friday: 6:30 to 10:00 ~ Saturday: 7:00 to 10:00 ~ Sunday: 7:00 to 9:00
Support Kingston's Business Community. Please Patronize Local Advertisers.

Published On: Fri, Apr 5th, 2013

“GET OVER IT…PLANT SOME TREES:” Green Energy Comm. castigates wind-turbine critics

greenenergy1TOWN HOUSE- When they weren’t deciding to spend nearly a quarter of their budget on posters and flyers to advertise wind turbines and renewable energy at the landfill on the Sunday before Earth Day, the Kingston Green Energy Committee (GEC) bashed and insulted residents upset about the town’s wind turbines whenever they got the chance.

“People are not used to [the turbine], they’re surprised by it,” GEC-member Pine duBois (pictured) said during last night’s meeting. “Okay. Get over it, plant some trees.”

Only minutes earlier, as the GEC discussed promoting Earth Day with flyers and posters at the landfill, duBois asked if committee members should arrive at the dump dressed like Don Quixote.

“Absolutely, absolutely,” GEC-chairman Mark Beaton said.

GEC-member Antoine Nessralla followed up saying, “I’ll bring my donkey.”

duBois, who was slapped with a $2500 ethics fine in March, said it was important for the GEC to promote Earth Day “to try to educate people about the dangers that they really live in, instead of the ones they’re conjuring up.”


Green Energy Committee Chairman Mark Beaton

Beaton said that “in a perfect world maybe there’d be a flash mob and maybe there’d be 40,000 kids [at the landfill on Earth Day] like it was Woodstock and showing up to save their world.”

Beaton also said he was served a “friendly subpoena” by Boston land court last Thursday in a case brought against the O’Donnell turbines by nine families from Indian Pond Estates.

Beaton, who held back his comments on the case, said the suit alleges that O’Donnell’s turbines are “illegally sited.”

“I’m not going to jeopardize myself and put myself in a position of slander,” Beaton told the GEC and added that he didn’t want to speak on camera.

Beaton did, however, discuss his thoughts on the shadow flicker complaints surrounding the Kingston Wind Independence (KWI) Turbine.


Dan Alves of Leland Road sits in his dining room as flicker from the KWI Turbine penetrates his home in March.

“Flicker is not a health issue,” Beaton defiantly told the Journal.

Beaton also defended the non-site specific flicker literary review, used to meet the flicker guidelines in Kingston’s Wind Overlay Bylaw, in his comments with the Journal. “Flicker is flicker, whether it’s in Holland or it’s in Kingston.”

Over a week ago, Massachusetts Clean Energy Center committed to provide Kingston with a site-specific flicker study for the KWI Turbine.

The Journal first exposed that no site-specific flicker study had ever been completed for either the KWI Turbine or Mary O’Donnell’s three turbines along Marion Drive.

“We didn’t put up that turbine to upset neighbors,” Beaton further said during the GEC meeting. “We put up that turbine to save Mother Earth.”

Beaton also blamed the media for growing public discontent in Kingston towards wind turbines.

“What you’ve seen in the media, all media recently, is just the negative side of it,” Beaton told the GEC. “And we’ve been just basically getting slapped around.”

Beaton also mentioned turbines in surrounding areas and contends that Kingston’s turbines have drawn unique criticism.


KWI Turbine sits atop the town’s capped landfill.

“Hull never had a problem with the flicker…Mass Maritime, they’ve got [a turbine] right on their campus” Beaton said.  “The kids are out there everyday practicing and there’s flicker and there’s sound.”

Beaton continued. “All of a sudden, now we have a problem. Maybe the people in Hull are blind, deaf and dumb.”

Beaton cited “frustrations” and used a recent meeting with State Representative Tom Calter as an example.

“I would guess there were probably about 19 bureaucrats there,” Beaton told the GEC. “One person showed up from the town.”

Nessralla, who lives on Prospect Street himself, said he had not been invited to the meeting with Calter in Boston.

“The people who were at that meeting with Mr. Calter were invited,” Beaton told Nessralla.

The GEC unanimously approved allotting $200 to spend on posters and flyers in an Earth Day standout, which will promote wind turbines and green energy at the Kingston landfill on Sunday, April 21.

Earth Day, which is on April 22, wasn’t chosen as the GEC standout date at duBois’ suggestion. “There’s probably going to be lots more people [at the dump] on Sunday,” duBois said.

Last night, Beaton announced that the GEC budget stands at $810.

Just before adjourning, the Journal asked GEC members to identify themselves by name for purposes of accuracy.


GEC-member Eugene Wyatt refused to identify himself at media requests during Thursday’s meeting.

GEC-member Eugene Wyatt refused to identify himself by name after our inquiries.

“I have a problem with that,” Wyatt said. “[] is going to use this for marketing.”

“That’s their problem,” Beaton responded to Wyatt.

GEC Chairman and former-Selectman Mark Beaton, along with Gerard Walraven and Pine duBois, were the only three GEC members to self identify upon press requests.

Three GEC-members, James Moran, Antoine Nessralla and Eugene Wyatt, refused to self identify to the media on Thursday night.

The Journal invites our loyal readers to watch “THIS IS MY LIFE : What shadow flicker looks like in Kingston, MA.” You can watch the video, filmed in Alves’ Leland Road homestead, by clicking play on the embedded video below!

About the Author

Displaying 30 Comments
Have Your Say
  1. WOW says:

    WOW…and a pulitzer award goes to Brad Randall…get back to you with some feedback on the incredible and outrageous comments made by these board members.

  2. Blind Dwarf says:

    Wow. These town officials walk around like princes. “Who are YOU to ask me this?” If you’re a citizen and you don’t line up, well they no longer represent you. Who are these people? Who knew this was what citizens like me were electing? How revealing.

  3. It's a Nuisance says:

    Beaton’s correct (for a change). Flicker is not a health issue. It’s a nuisance. If you doubt that, check out the video (inside the flicker zone) on this web site. Just like any other nuisance, the BOH needs to address it and eliminate it.
    The GEC is nothing more than a mob of zealots that will do anything for “Mother Earth”, regardless of the cost to our Town’s residents. Very scary.
    Just like shadow flicker, they need to go away.

  4. love the earth, just hate people! says:

    I came away with seriously elevated blood pressure!

    These people seem to LOVE Mother Earth and the Environment so very very much, it’s just the darn people/humans they seem to despise!

    The BOS should demand their resignation immediately, this video shows exactly why you do not have a special interest committee in charge of a major public works (in this case power plants) project. There is not a reasoned one among them…

    To mock the victims just is too much to take… honest debate is healthy… denial, disdain and outright venom is unacceptable.

    By the way Mark, if you check the record Hull does have complaints and you had them on record prior to your permit approval AND so has and does Mass Maritime! P

  5. Blind Dwarf says:

    Ok, these people don’t know what a news organization is or what it does? They don’t understand the concept of reporting and editing? Maybe they do understand it, and have an alternative that they prefer, like, I don’t know, transcribing? They are on a town committee and feel like they don’t have to answer questions from the press. They don’t even have to identify themselves. They think it’s their job to control the media’s coverage. What’s truly revealing is that they are surprised to see journalists working in Kingston. Not accustomed to it, I guess.

  6. Publius says:

    It is apparent from some of the GEC comments that they do not realize that there comments regarding Don Quixote are indeed a compliment to those who have steadfastly sought relief form the adverse effects of the wind turbine.

    Most folks have knowledge retarding this character, but most folks also recall that he was famous for his joust with a windmill. But when Cervantes penned his work he intended to create a character who represented determination no matter what the challenge was, be it a windmill or the hand of his fair Dolcimaya. As Richard Kiley sang in his unforgettable rendition of the unreachable star in Man of LaMancha Don Quixote was on a quest for the unreachable star. It is this same type of determination demonstrated by out neighbors with regard to this pox upon their homes and lives.

  7. j. levesque says:

    Brad, this was very revealing video…the stridency in their convictions sure clouds their ability to show any reasoned thought…nor are they able to summon any compassion at all for their fellow residents.

    I would like to address a note to Ms DuBois who has advocated for many fine events and worthy projects in the past…on this mission she just has it wrong…I will share 1 of so many references prior to 2010 that were available to the Green Energy Committee but sadly no one either chose to read all of the various cautions on setbacks, or they just did not care…full steam ahead! By the way, I have been in the neighborhood during the strobing/flicker…you don’t get over want to flee from it, kind of hard to do when you live there!

    Dear Ms DuBois: as to your dismissive comment “get over it, plant some trees” had you read the following excerpted from the “Evaluation for the Dutch Hill Wind Project” , available to you all back in January 2007, perhaps you’d understand that your comment is not only mean-spirited, it is also not accurate:

    ” the presence of blade flicker anywhere within a reasonable viewshed of a residence must be considered an environmental nuisance and must be mitigated. Wind turbine blade shadows are not a mere shadow being cast because they will often be moving and creating a highly objectionable nuisance. Also 400’ high turbines on elevated hill ridges will cast distinct shadows for thousands of feet, well above any vegetative screening.”

    Perhaps you’d like to retract your statement and issue a sincere apology to your fellow Kingston residents who have suffered as a result of a sheer lack of due diligence.

  8. J. levesque says:

    Did I hear Mr Beaton mention “Holland”?

    For the sake of clarity, I would like to let Mr. Beaton in on an inconvenient truth, that is Holland (typically referred to as the Netherlands) has adopted the following as their policy on setbacks relative to wind turbines. They state their primary focus is on noise, which tends to eliminate the worry about strobing/flicker. Why is that? Well, because in the Netherlands it appears clear they NEVER would have sited a 402.5 foot turbine, at an elevations of 480 feet above residents living 600 away. I am not fully supporting or endorsing these guidelines, I am simply sharing information Mr Beaton seems unaware of…strobing is not an issue in “Holland” aka the Netherlands from what I gather and, in addition, they do have setbacks more protective than Kingston was unfortunately convinced to write into the town’s “protective by-laws” .

    The Netherlands (excerpt)
    “There are several rules that determine how far wind turbines are located from residences. Developers must demonstrate that their future wind turbine will not exceed yearly average noise limits of 47 dB(A) during the day and 41 dB(A) during the night at the nearest dwelling.

    Setback distances are primarily determined by the noise limits, and the Netherlands government is intending to review their methods for measuring sound from wind turbines shortly. This generally results in a wind turbine setback distance of 4x the height to the hub of the turbine from nearby homes. There are also regulations regarding shadow flicker, but it is generally considered not to be a problem at a distance to reach the noise limit.”

    It appears that if the Green Energy Committee applied the standard from the Netherlands,
    4 x 480 (height including increased elevation above surrounding grade)
    the setback would have been a minimum of = 1,920 feet.

  9. publius says:

    It certainly appears that the folks that constitute the GEC just don’t get it, so here is an example of what happened in Kingston. Take for instance some rare endangered species, like the rare, white, Siberian tiger; definitely an endangered species. Now do I believe they remaining creatures should be preserved, absolutely, do I believe that money, both government and individual, should be spent on preserving the species, you bet. Should habitat for these animals be protected, no doubt about it.

    Now if I come home some night and find one of these tigers on my sofa I would immediately change my mind and do my best to conjure up an AK-47 with a twenty round clip to eliminate the problem. The same thing applys here. Just because people believe that this particular turbine is improperly situated does not make them opposed to saving “Mother Earth”. All they are saying, in my opinion, is take your turbine and accommodate all the interested parties. As is the case sometimes this is a matter in which the idea is something most, if not all people, endorse. The problem is that in this particular situation the project fails to make muster with the “as applied standard” and therefore the problems which arise as the result of this failure must be eliminated.

  10. Marie Jane says:

    A couple of quotes from this story to help me understand better.

    “What you’ve seen in the media, all media recently, is just the negative side of it,” Beaton told the GEC. “And we’ve been just basically getting slapped around.”

    MR BEATON, what exactly, EXACTLY, is the positive side? I need help finding the “positive”. Is it the stellar economics of the industrial wind turbine, is it the industrial wind turbine’s gawkish hovering over the neighborhood that is so appealing, is it the health issues and misery this has caused your neighbors that you feel is positive; please, please identify “positive”. From where I sit, you have been slapping your neighbors around and now your feet are being held to the fire.

    “We didn’t put up that turbine to upset neighbors,” Beaton further said during the GEC meeting. “We put up that turbine to save Mother Earth.”

    MR. BEATON, Please no more [WE] “Do this for the greater good”, please no more to save “Mother Earth” comments. The Town of Kingston made a mistake and rather than admit it and take what comes, you are dividing your population, you are making light and laughing at those who have expressed their concerns and pitting neighbor against neighbor. You are investing in more frivolous “studies” arranged behind closed doors to cover your tails. The reality is the victimized are the end result of an experiment gone terribly wrong and do not need more studies. The industrial wind turbine agenda is destructive and in this corner of the world, a failure. I caution everyone to support their neighbors because the next experiment might include you and your home and your family and your peace of mind and the Town fathers might just need an offering from you for “the greater good” or to “save mother earth” or to, simply cover their butts. They have no respect: “Plant some trees”, really? How demeaning!

  11. Any Mouse says:

    Reminds me of the old Charlie Brown cartoon with Snoopy laying atop his doghouse and thinking.

    First panel: “I love mankind.”

    Second Panel: “It’s people I can’t stand.”

  12. Biggus says:

    If any of those enviro Nazi’s is looking for a donkey to ride in on, they can just hop on Beaton’s back. Thank all of these people for keeping your CPA at double what it could have been when Paul Gallagher proposed cutting it in half when the state slashed its matching funds. Beaton was the head sellout when he tried to shove 1021 Kingston Place down this town’s throat and nothing was more pleasant than his giving back the check. The electric golf cart, the charging stations no one uses now this abomination.

  13. Nocebo says:

    Netherlands has lots of experience with wind, go to Google Earth to look at one of the windiest areas. Check out these coordinates 52.557237, 5.580469 you will find a home with a turbine about 250 ft away and with the blades casting shadows on the home. It is a utility scale turbine, though smaller than the Independence turbine in Kingston. That means it likely turns faster so the flicker is faster. His neighbor has one turbine 250 ft from his home and another which appears part of a turbine development about 500 ft from his home. Lots of similar sites.

  14. Nocebo says:

    There have been a number of complaints that there are no flicker studies. There is a good deal of information on the town web site.

  15. Ace from Antwerp says:

    Nocebo- then maybe you should move to the Netherlands and buy that house to prove to us all that flicker isn’t as bad as people say.

    Tell us how it works out for you.

  16. WOW - says:

    So, along comes Nocebo, to rub salt in the wounds and as his best shot at chiming in on this outrageous behavior by the town’s green energy committee is to not only give himself a screen name that essentially means “It’s all in your head” which is a clear reference to saying the residents are fakers BUT he also, as his one fine deed, spends his energy locating a spot in the Netherlands he can point to via google earth to claim there is someone out there allegedly experiencing strobing impacts so then, by deduction, Kingston residents should put up with it too. The lunacy and insults continue! Is this Mr. Beaton? Mr. Wyatt? , Ms Pine? The guy with the donkey?

    A coupple of unanswered questions raised by this poster, and interestingly enough not one kind word for the residents who, not only have been bullied by the turbine but now by almost all members of the Green Energy Committee, who should be dismissed by the Selectmen immediately for violating the code of conduct.

    #1 concern with the netherland “example”, Question: is the home sited, by design, so that the strobing does not impact the home perhaps the turbine was located with attention to mitigation and elimination of strobing as it can be done, if you read the Kingston by-law it points out significant flicker impacts can be mitigated by siting the turbine properly. In our case, that was not done anyone could have understood a 480 ft tall turbine (including elevation) was going to impact homes to the east when the sun is low in the sky in the west (sept oct nov late jan feb march).
    #2 if these are utility scale turbines then the homeowners are using them for their own purposes so it was liekly THEIR CHOICE TO SITE THESE TURBINES a whole different ballgame than what you are trying to point out

    Also, didn’t your mother ever mention that 2 WRONGS do NOT EVER MAKE RIGHT? If there is an examply you can point to at the far ends of the earth, or even around the corner then it still does not justify what was done here on Prospect Street, Leland Road and Schofield Road.

    Last, Just provide the Flicker study that was done as Mark Beaton has assured over and over and over that showed when the impacts would be, how long they would be and where they would be…do not point anyone to the town web site that does NOT provide that KEY piece of missing evidence…all the talk of flicker on the web site is just that…talk…discussion…not helpful at all

  17. Jim Wiegand says:

    “We didn’t put up that turbine to upset neighbors,” Beaton further said during the GEC meeting. “We put up that turbine to save Mother Earth.”…………The truth about wind turbines is that they save nothing and come at a terrible price. Read below:

    Your community should plant some trees but for different reasons. You should also get a moratorium in place and then get to work on your state’s renewable energy mandates. Communities have to do this in order to protect yourselves from these corporate raiders. The renewable mandates are part of the scam and the wind industry’s trump card. They guarantee that there will be a demand for these useless behemoths and that the taxpayers will pay through the nose. In return the folks behind these turbines not only get to sell them to your communities but they will also get a cut from the energy produced (Production tax credits) and then rewarded again with carbon credits. Why? These turbines can not ever remove carbon from our atmosphere or produce oxygen. Any reasonable person should be able to see the stupidity behind this crooked arrangement.

    For those that believe in wind energy and the proliferation of industrial wind turbines, I always hear the same arguments used to rally the ignorant. “Wind is the future”, “it is green”, “we will be fixing climate change”, “we are backed with peer reviewed studies”, “it is a citizens duty to address this noble cause”, “wind creates badly needed jobs”, “it will get us off our dependence on Middle Eastern oil”, and when addressing the terrible impacts from these projects………. we represent the “greater good”. All of the people that make these claims might as well say that wind energy will cure warts, because it is all lies anyway. Wind energy actually solves none of the problems it is supposed to address. It does create some jobs but there would be far more jobs if society would concentrate on real solutions. Another point to never forget is that the titans of industry behind wind energy are lifetimes away from being altruistic. One of their commandments is to create as few jobs as possible so they can keep more for themselves. Automation, killing employee benefits, and outsourcing are perfect examples of this behavior.

    Here is the reality behind “green” wind turbines. Wind energy is a business with a product to sell, turbines. In order to sell this product it has to be promoted. In doing so it has relied upon a very deceptive game plan. Here is a look at some of these tactics: (1)The industry is saturated with 30 years of rigged studies, (2) Wind energy is supported by agency collusion, (3) Wind energy has created a world wide genocide to bats and birds but this has been kept hidden by rigging studies and avoiding others, (4) Wind turbines will cause the extinction of rare species but this fact has never been revealed to the public, (5 ) wind energy destroys property values from industrial squalor but the industry hides this fact with rigged appraisals, (6) Wind creates the permanent destruction of habitat, and ecosystems, (9) Turbines cause personal agony for close inhabitants but this again is hidden with rigged studies, (10) wind is robbing taxpayers, creating huge debt, and driving up energy costs, (11) has a devastating mortality footprint of thousands of miles for all migrating bird and bat species but the public had to hear this from people like me instead of from the agencies entrusted to protect these species, (12) wind energy is supported by media manipulation otherwise the outage developing across the world would be reported on by mainstream media outlets, and (13) wind is being sold to Americans by our trusted leaders and sell-out conservation groups which are nothing more than industry mouthpieces.

    This unaccountability has created profits in the billions and an industry that exudes a truly disgusting arrogance. Europe was the industry’s guinea pig. It is a complete failure. They now have 15 times installed capacity of wind turbines as US does but nothing has been solved for their climate changed or their energy problems. In fact it does not matter how many of these turbines are installed, these problems will still be here. Now these counties have to live with the terrible burden and destruction from installing all these turbines.

    Besides the US and Canada, Scotland is the next European country about to raided, plundered, and pillaged in the name of profits. They have some open space the industry wants to exploit. I predict this raid will be met with resistance never seen before.

  18. Beaton's offer of $$$ help...stil waiting! says:

    Another Mark Beaton quote of note:
    from the article:
    The GEC unanimously approved allotting $200 to spend on posters and flyers in an Earth Day standout, which will promote wind turbines and green energy at the Kingston landfill on Sunday, April 21.

    June 2012 Kingston Wind Aware Forum: Mr Beaton offered Green Energy Committee Money to HELP the residents who were suffering…her we are 10 months later and he has not agreed to spend one thin dime on helping the neighbors at all…YET he votes to spend $200 for posters and flyers for upcoming Earth Day ????

    Does he not have the decency to see where an Earth Day in your face at the turbine site is most disgusting given the situation as it continues to unravel???

    Maybe give $200 to Ed so he can pay his vet for the visits to care for his dog who has been driven nuts by the flicker! Or how about money to those that have had to seek medical care???

    Who is going to reel in this guy?

  19. nocebo says:

    There is a lot of personal and pejorative dialog. I chose my screen name to make my position clear. Based upon my discussions with people in Hull and talking to others who have interviewed the folks in Hull and my visits to a number of operating utility scale turbines, I think this is about 90% Nocebo and about 10% real. I posted the Netherlands information so that you can see for yourself that those folks are not getting very upset about the turbines either noise or strobing. I am wondering if Wow bothered to click on the link. The home that that takes you to is getting strobed. And if you zoom out there are many sites with turbines close to the homes. There have been a number of posters who have pointed to European practices as what we should emulate due to their experience. So I have provided clear examples of what their practices are. Now the response is “move to the Netherlands”. Suddenly nobody is interested in what they do in Europe after all.

    I am a renewable energy advocate and have been for years. The reason is exactly because I want to see the screwing of US citizens minimized. I have read about the coal miners with black lung, the disasters after oil spills, the destruction of entire communities in the Appalachian region, the concerns about fracking and in comparison this is minimal. This is about accountability. New England communities have the unusual opportunity that we can, with what many consider to be little impact, take responsibility for a significant portion of our energy. I would love to see those who are putting so much effort into protecting someone who can’t be bothered to pull their blinds a couple of days a week during two months of the year, to instead channel it into real energy reform. Really learn about energy in this country and how hard real solutions are. How difficult it is to find places to site renewable energy or other source for that matter. Provide alternatives. Instead of just saying these turbines were sited poorly complete the sentence with “and here are some locations that would work better”. When you put some time and effort into that then criticize your renewable energy committee. After you have tried to do that, in a volunteer capacity, then blast them for getting angry at a biased reporter who is making every effort to smear them personally. Try looking at the big picture and how hard it is to reach solutions that work. Then maybe you can come to the table with the understanding that even if you disagree with the officials who allowed the turbine to be sited there, at least you may be able to drop some of your cynicism and realize that they are likely motivated by doing a good thing even if you disagree with their means to that end. Maybe they aren’t evil people, maybe they are doing the best that they can. And no – I am not one of them.

  20. Nocebo says:

    @Wow – The link I provide has several items on the turbine’s flicker. The last item is a flicker contour. It shows pretty clearly the annual exposure. That is all I need to have a pretty good understanding of the exposure. If you need more than that then the discussion is about the quality of the study not whether it is there or not.

    Regarding 2 wrongs, I pretty much agree with you. But I think the part where we disagree is that as soon as we use electricity in our homes we have chosen to be part of a system that is harming others. I am not willing to forgo my car or my electricity and I own that and am clear about it. So I look to mitigate my harm to others, I drive the most energy efficient vehicle I can find and I implement lots of energy efficiency in my home, my office and anywhere else I have influence. I promote Renewable energy in what I believe to be responsible ways.

    How about you. You done anything lately or do you just want to jump on a self righteous bandwagon and complain about something?

  21. Any Mouse says:

    Here is the list of junk files referenced by Nocebo in her post about flicker where she says, “There is a good deal of information on the town web site”.

    Community Wind – The Future of Wind Energy for Kingston: Outdated and not relevant to KWI. This is an October 2008 paper issued by the Green Energy Committee for a turbine in the center of the transfer station. The turbine project was scrapped at that site after strong objections from the Sewer Commission.

    Community Wind, Health and Safety: an early analysis of a Wind Energy Project in Barrington Rhode Island – The wind turbine project has received staunch opposition and according to some studies is not considered to be economically viable.

    Flicker Information Memo (from Town Planner to BOH and Building Inspector): A catch-22 memo from the town planner explaining that in July 2010 the Kingston Planning Board approved a site plan application for a wind turbine on the capped Kingston Landfill. The applicant was the Town of Kingston. And no flicker study was required because towns are exempt under the bylaw and no one had been selected at that time. Then 4 months later when Kingston Wind Independence (KWI) was selected as the turbine vendor in November of 2010 no flicker study was required because KWI was not the site plan applicant. Besides, according to the memo, “there was relatively little discussion about the issue due to its transitory nature and the lack of any known health effects from shadow flicker from turbines… ”

    Flicker Analysis (document supplied by KWI): An utterly useless and self-serving document submitted by KWI without any data references, engineering stamp, or peer review.

    Webinar on Shadow/Flicker (document supplied by KWI): A generic discussion of flicker regulations or lack thereof. Many of the points raised by the power point presentation were obviously not followed in Kingston – No shadow flicker at an existing residential structure – Typically shadow flicker is addressed through pre-construction – Mitigation if impacts are above 20 hours per year – Maximum flicker of 30 minutes per day

    Flicker Contour (document supplied by KWI): A rank armature work (including misspellings) of questionable value. Fllicker (sic) Contour for Independence WT – Prepared by Kingston Wind Independence. This unsigned document was apparently produced as a site specific flicker study but was completed two years too late. The date of the Google map photo is dated 2012. No engineering stamp is provided nor are the calculations sourced. Sean and Doreen Reilly’s house is marked in a zone receiving less than 10 hours per year of flicker

  22. Marie Jane says:

    Nacebo, Nacebo…..if you are not one of them, then you are one of us.The battle lines are clearly marked.There is no half way. And, your percentages are off, way off. If one person suffers it is 100% real! And, you Mr. or Ms. Nacebo, “look at the big picture and how hard it is to reach solutions that work”. If it is not good for everyone, it is not good and it does not work, if it is not economically sound, it does not work;if you are reading year ot two year old findings, you are reading ancient history.

    The day the City and Town fathers and the State government supported the wiggling, bending, rearranging of and removal of private property rights in the form of protective zoning to allow 50-story edifices in residential areas and any other location where no 50-story building would be allowed,the “officials”, as you call them, were no longer doing the best they could. You can damn coal, gas, oil, nuclear, hydro, etc., etc., BUT note that you do that after each has served and served well and each is efficient beyond industrial wind turbines to ever be so. Today you have the opportunity to avoid similar errors in judgement by damning the industrial wind turbine before, in not too many years, you are damning iwts and wondering what to do with 60-tons of toxic hulks. Start thinking beyond your green nose and think of future. The industrial wind turbine is destructive not progressive. These people are not self-righteous, they are trying to open your eyes. The industrial wind turbine agenda is not about the greater good or saving Mother Earth. It is about greed and skimming the cream of the top; you/we will be left with the toxic dregs. As for the media, they wore blinders for a very long time and, today, they are seeing the truth and reporting both sides. So, Nocebo, are you one of them or one of us

  23. NOCEBO this is not about you! says:

    when a poster (nocebo in this case) starts challenging other posters on the “choices” they make in life and tries to change the subject matter, well that sure does not seem helpful.

    Why can’t we start with the premise we are all good people, and sometimes good people make mistakes especially when they are blinded by a vision of what they think is “clean” and “green”. Sadly, wind technology is neither of those things…maybe someday the technology will change.

    The fact remains, in THIS case many facts and cautions were either ignored or set aside for, as Ms Du Bois articulated, “the greater good”, not sure town meeting EVER was presented the sacrifice of certain resident scenario…

    There have been world wide calls from professionals in acoustics and in the field of medicine for protective setbacks in excess of 1 mile or more since at least 2004.

    Here we are talking about a permit issued in 2010 for 600 feet! Need we say more, need we bicker over a never performed “flicker study”? I think not…

    In this case, the subject at hand is the obvious error in agreeing to site a 2MW turbine, at an elevation of 480 feet, above innocent and unaware residents living 600 feet away

    Remember also, the town was assured by an acoustical firm (who performed a flawed pre-construction study) that there would be no “problems” . Now that there are obvious noise problems, rather than deal with reality and help their neighbors, the Green Energy with the help of apologists like nocebo, choose to malign the suffering residents.

    The story here is that the Green Energy Committee engaged in this behavior on Thursday night, on town property, as part of their public meeting.

    For this story, it is only about the Green Energy Committee and their incredible insensitivity and deliberate bashing of residents who are clearly and justifiably in distress…a clear violation of any standard of behavior for public officials, even thos who volunteer their time to make the world a better place…in this one effort they need to face up to the harm and stop blaming the victims and discontinue trying to change the narrative.

  24. Not a mouse says:

    Why are you referring to notebook as a woman? I assume you are attempting to be clever?

    In any event, what misspellings are you referring to in the flicker contour? Am I missing something? Maybe I did?

    It really does not matter. The real opponents of this turbine don’t want truth. They just want the turbine gone. They don’t want mitigation. They want it gone and they don’t really care what the consequences are for the rest of the Town. It’s a shame really.

  25. If I were a Mouse says:

    to not a mouse:

    In all seriouslness when has mitigation ever been offered to the residents in any detail or in sincerity?

    You accuse the residents all? of simply wanting the turbine gone…let’s start with the question, why have they not been offered or provided mitigation of any sort.
    The turbine operator, Mr Ruiz, was asked and refused, the BOH refuses to insist as they have the authority to do.
    why hasn’t the turbine operator already mitigated this clear “nusiance”?
    why hasn’t the BOH taken action to regulate ALREADY, no delays or excuses?
    why hasn’t the BOH declared strobing a “nsuisance” as it clearly is and abated it?
    why hasn’t the state DEP done complaince testing as they promptly do with other types of industrial noise complaints?
    why hasn’t the BOH insisted on shut down in highwind, full power mode such as in NEMO when the neighborhood was under full noise assault?

    So, not a mouse…you are adding, just like the green energy committee did on Thursday night, to the marginalization of the residents…it comes down, in your view to the residents as being unreasonable…you have it backwards.

    The DEP study showed quite clearly via graph that a 2MW turbine (nevermind 4 in the same vicinity with noise compounded in certain weather and wind directions) that at a distance of 600 feet the turbine can NOT possibly be in compliance…why do you think the DEP has resisted testing…they know the answer and are hiding from it at the residents expense!

    not a mouse is looking to find fault with valid observations and then as an added tact is insulting the residents who deserve all of our support.

    so, not a mouse, what specific mitigation measures do you support? specifically????

    the only way to mitigate invasive noise is to eliminate it…and that may just require removing this negligently sited 2MW turbine…

    by the way, if the impacts are as testified to why shouldn’t the residents deserve to have the turbine removed? are you saying you don’t believe your neighbors OR you think they should take a personal hit for someone else’s agenda?

    the bottom line is in over a year for some and coming up on a year for others nothing has been offered or done to provide relief…so why come out on this story’s comments to add insult to injury?

  26. PUblius says:

    NOCEBO, or whatever, your attitude to the problems we have with the KWI turbine are myopic at best, dangerous at worst. You need only look to the available evidence to realize that problems with flicker and noise are real, immediate and of concern to the general public. Why do you believe that residents of communities from Massachusetts, to Hawaii, to the Netherlands and most everywhere in between have discovered these problems and taken steps to address them, it is because the problems the folks in the Prospect Street area have are just a microcosm of the systemic problems all those adversely affected by this entity endure.

    You state that you have had conversations with Hull residents regarding flicker and noise from their facility. Did you take into consideration that at least one of our Green Committee has alleged that they are “deaf and “blind”. You also allege that the school in close proximity to the turbine does not appear to adversely affect that institution. Could you kindly advise how many people reside in that school.

    All your online verbiage appears to be stale, out dated and reeks of brinksmanship for an entity that, from the time it commenced spinning in the wind has wrecked havoc on out community and the length and breath of the comments posted hereunder is a testimonial to that fact.

  27. Not Opposed to turbine, OPPOSED to the impacts on my friends! says:

    I have a quick note for “not a mouse”
    your words:
    “The real opponents of this turbine don’t want truth”

    You are so very WRONG!

    They have been living a “truth” no one should be made to!

    The “truth” is this turbine (its emissions via noise and strobing) has been hurting my friend’s family over and over and over again. This fine family includes both precious, innocent children and respectful loving hard-working parents.

    I look forward to the day when the “rest of the town” understands the “truth” about the “consequences” to them! “Consequences” have been happening TO THEM and their neighbors, no one else!

    There are no other considerations to be made; our community’s health and safety is priority #1, not imagined financial gain from an outright bully. At the distance to our friends property this turbine IS A BULLY…it was never meant to be this close to people, that is the “truth”.

  28. Marie Jane says:

    If you are interested, here is a dose of reality:

    Wind Wise-MA executive committee member Eleanor Tillinghast will be interviewed on Emily Rooney’s Greater Boston (WGBH-TV- Channel 2).

    The show airs at 7 p.m., Monday, April 8. Prior to the interview, a video will feature Sue Hobart and Neil Andersen. They will talk about the wind turbine issue in Falmouth and the impact of the wind turbines on their health and lives. Sue will be interviewed at her abandoned Falmouth home.

  29. Concerned says:

    Once again, the fact that we have uneducated homers sitting in these positions of importance is noone’s fault but our own. I’m new to town and will be sure to start voting all of these idiots out. Uneducated fools were taken advantage of by savvy business people and now the town is in the poistion it’s in. Why don’t you list the resumes of people on the BOS, BOH, etc. and lets see the experience of the numbskulls making decisions that impact our town.

  30. Merry says:

    Beaton and Dubois need to go, they are on the side of big moneym not on the side of Kingston residents.