Windfall - 2012 - Movie Review

7/17/2012

As a skeptical proponent of all things green, I am always excited to stumble upon a harsh critique of renewables. Often articles or documentaries tearing down green energy, especially wind power, have heavy political influence and eventually devolve into the talking points that are recycled throughout the media: it's too expensive, it hurts the economy, and everyone's favorite NIMBY line, it's ugly. Occasionally, you'll find something that really jars your perception and makes you reconsider your previous position. Windfall succeeds at least this far.

There is no shortage of ugly shots of wind turbines in
Laura Israel's Windfall

The main complaint regarding wind farms is basically the aesthetics. I've generally filed these arguments under the "quit whining this is progress" category partly because I doubted the motives of the people promoting these issues and also because I've always thought wind turbines to be quite pleasing to the eye. The noise problems always seemed overblown and about as legitimate as the complaint our neighbor had about our shoe closet being too disorganized outside our own door (all right angles now!). Proponents of wind have quite effectively quieted the opposition with claims like "...if these people own refrigerators, that's probably enough to drown out the 'racket'..."[1], but these claims are based on information like GE's self-motivated estimate of wind turbine noise. The problem with looking at an industry like this is that everybody has a vested interest and it's hard to tell who's right, who's wrong, and who's just flat out lying.

Wind turbine noise is a huge point of contention in the
wind turbine debate, one side claiming refrigerator and the
other claiming freight train. Middle ground?

The Film

Tug Hill residents complain that the 195 turbines have
ruined their vista and sleep patterns, upped by a bait
and switch from a contract for a fraction of that,

Laura Israel, the director, comes at this with an obvious opinion on wind, and it's not positive. The entire documentary is set in the quite, poor town of Meredith, NY, where wind companies have begun to approach people about renting their land to put up turbines, and Tug Hill, where wind companies have already set up shop to the tune of 195 spinning power plants. Israel has been one of the big city commuters that come down to their country house in Meredith, NY from NYC to enjoy the countryside for the last 20 years and went from advocate to critic during this process.

The wind power company Airtricity comes to town and begins offering locals small sums to install turbines on their property. After briefly touching on a few key issues with wind turbines like noise, shadow flicker, and "wind turbine syndrome", the emotional buildup begins. The efficiency with which she builds the emotional argument would make even the highest yield turbines blush with shame. She introduces lovable down-to-earth people around the town, has them tell their articulate and moving story of country, cows, and humble living, and brings the central plot point in: some people want them and some people don't. The film goes on to paint the pro-wind town council and other supporters as being influenced by money from the evil, manipulative wind companies before hitting the viewer with the actual problems:

The Actual Problems

- 400+ foot tall turbines are monstrous eyesores

- A repetitive "whomp" sound drives people crazy

- The shadow of a turbine on a house creates a "shadow flicker", also driving people crazy

- Thousands of birds are killed each year

- Bats are killed as well
- Turbines occasionally catch on fire and throw off big chunks of ice

- It doesn't actually reduce reliance on fossil fuels because wind power's intermittent nature requires constant backup from coal or gas plants

- Wind turbine syndrome causes insomnia, headaches, and various other stress-related health problems
- Wind power companies are predatory corporations that take advantage of poor country folk

Each issue is extensively supported by locals' testimonials in Meredith and in nearby Tug Hill, where 195 wind turbines has turned these rolling fields into the seventh level of hell.

A Conviction Lost

I was convinced. The emotional rollercoaster had come to an end and brought me right where I was supposed to go. The effectiveness of Windfall as a documentary was just one more reason I had to think back on what I had just watched.

Mark Schneider, formerly the electrical engineer for
Airtricity assigned to the project, was the only person
interviewed that had any relation to the wind companies

The proof that bats are being put at risk of extinction by
wind turbines: scientists picking up dead bats in a field

There were no scientists interviewed, locals' opinions offered from only two towns in one state, and the closest thing the wind industry had to a representative was Airtricity's Mark Schneider, the electrical engineer previously assigned to Meredith, NY. Schneider explained how turbines work and played a wonderfully likable "friend" to show the community's unbiased view with his 2 minutes of screen time. (XXX) The main points were mentioned early and revisited as gospel later in the film with no proof presented whatsoever after the well developed heart wrenching sob story. To demonstrate the sound emanating from the turbines and shadow flicker, the middle of the movie basically subjects you to a series of slowly scintillating scenes and the constant "whomp" of the circulating blades, but it is hard to tell the actual level of noise pollution and how annoying the flicker would be in person. There was one example of a turbine exploding and much conjecture regarding "ice throwing". The "proof" that bats lungs explode when flying into the low pressure area surrounding turbines was a short clip of a scientist picking up dead bats in a field; hardly Pulitzer worthy reporting. Wind turbine syndrome was supported by accusing the multiple scientists that debunked the problem of being in cahoots with the evil wind companies and repeating the age-old scientific mantra, "It's real, I seen it!"

Creeping Doubt

Even after breaking down all of these points into what seems like mere anti-green propaganda, there still remained an inkling of a doubt that wind turbines might actually be that bad for one new reason: they just seem bad. When I was watching the film, I was annoyed by the sound and the flicker. The people in Tug Hill didn't seem coerced or persuaded into their opinions, they seemed to be genuinely distraught by their new neighborhood additions. Like the mass introduction of many new technologies, even though wind turbine syndrome has been debunked as nonexistent, there is too little research on the subject to really accept that as a certainty.

The power companies may be singularly focused on trying to save the planet, but in this capitalist world with investors like Goldman Sachs forking up the cash it seems unlikely. The standard $5,000 per year rate that wind companies generally pay land owners for using their property pales in comparison to the roughly $450,000 that is earned from each 2MW per turbine each year (assuming a realistic 15% efficiency[2] and $50,000 annual operating costs[3]). The turbines cost somewhere around $1.9 million[4], so the average 2MW turbine pays itself off in about 4 years and lasts more than 20. With these numbers it is easy to see that this is a big money business and these investments pay off handsomely, regardless of the actual effect on the environment. The confidentiality agreements mentioned in the film also make it believable that the wind companies' strategy is to divide and conquer, giving each person as little negotiating power and compensation as possible.

Living the Nightmare

While reading up on this after watching the documentary, I came across a wide variety of reviews and analysis of the film. Many, like NPR, the Wall Street Journal and Treehugger, take this film as proof of wind power's evident fallibility without question, while others, like the NYTimes, question the lack of evidence and representation from wind power companies, but the one consistent response I saw in many of the comment sections are real life testimonials. The proclivity for these "wind victims" to come out of the woodwork and tell their horror stories are ample enough evidence to at least warrant further research.

At this point, it is simply the word of the enemies of progress vs the word of corporate evil incarnate. I myself am planning on taking this question to the field to see this quandary in person.

The Obvious Solutions That This Film Ignores

The High Seas

Offshore wind isn't mentioned in Windfall, but solves
nearly every problems mentioned in the film

The major issue surrounding the "turbines are horrendous abominations" argument is the obvious solution: offshore wind. Although the documentary doesn't address this at all, it really should have as it automatically solves the problems brought on by unsightly monstrosities in your backyard, the annoying sound, shadow flicker, wind turbine syndrom, bat deaths, bird deaths (more than 10km off the coast), and corporate predation (the ocean isn't privately owned).

The only remaining issue is the intermittency of wind.

A Vitriolic Solution

The convincing centerpiece of the entire two hour diatribe is that wind power doesn't even help the earth. It unfortunately makes great sense that any new wind power installations would have to be backed by a more constant and reliable power source such as coal or oil to avoid blackouts. Simultaneously experiencing a peak in power use and a lull in wind, likely frequently due to the fact that it feels hotter with less wind and up goes the air con, would create serious problems in managing a wind-based electric grid.

Professor Donald Sadoway's liquid metal battery is modular
 for stacking into mass energy storage units; a possible
solution for wind's intermittency[5]

As batteries have increasing their potential and presence on the market, portable electronics have evolved from their bulky predecessors and mass production electric vehicles have become a developing reality. The next generation of batteries is already in the works with mass energy storage in mind, such as in the case of Professor Donald Sadoway of MIT's Liquid Metal Battery Corporation. The design stores much more than current lithium batteries, charges faster, last longer, and is based on elements much more readily accessible than lithium such as magnesium, antimony, and salt. They are also modular to allow flexible size installations that can be expanded to match demand. Industrial size batteries, if delivered as promised, could allow wind power (and solar for that matter) to charge up during times of high wind and have enough stored to meet needs when the wind dies down.

References

[1] http://www.treehugger.com/renewable-energy/how-quiet-wind-turbine.html

[2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-12985410
[3] http://www.wind-energy-the-facts.org/en/part-3-economics-of-wind-power/chapter-1-cost-of-on-land-wind-power/operation-and-maintenance-costs-of-wind-generated-power.html
[4] http://www.wind-energy-the-facts.org/en/part-3-economics-of-wind-power/chapter-1-cost-of-on-land-wind-power/cost-and-investment-structures/

[5] http://lmbcorporation.com/files/flyerFinal.pdf