“There has been pretence that there is no evidence of harm at the levels of infrasound and low-frequency noise being emitted. This is untrue. There is an extensive body of research conducted by NASA and the US Department of Energy 30 years ago, which: established direct causation of sleep disturbance and a range of physiological effects euphemistically called ‘annoyance’,”

– Dr. Sarah Laurie CEO, Waubra Foundation. Testimony before the Australian Senate Select Committee on Wind Turbines, June 29, 2015.

Considerable evidence of negative effects to health was recorded during the Australian Senate’s call for testimonies and evidence to its Select Committee on Wind Turbines.

The following testimony of Dr. Sarah Laurie, complementing the testimony reproduced yesterday by Robert McMurtry at MasterResource, contradicts that of Australian Wind Alliance national co-ordinator Andrew Bray who testified that people living near wind facilities experience no health problems.…

“I have no kind words for people who attempt to trivialise what my family and I have tolerated since a large wind farm started operating near us. We don’t see them from our home (trees), and we rarely hear them but the infrasonic emissions incite a repeating, subtle noise and vibration in our home. Used to live across from a truck yard and it did not bother me, but I cannot ignore ringing ears, severe dizziness, pressure in head, difficulty concentrating and hypertension…. We need protection just the same as any person deserves.”

– Wind victim, Mike Jankowski, in response to an article summarizing the Senate Hearings in Austalia.

Considerable evidence of negative effects to health was recorded during the Australian Senate’s call for testimonies and evidence to its Select Committee on Wind Turbines which has accumulated 471 submissions from individuals and organizations around the world, many with lengthy additions, and attachments.…

“There is evidence that experience reduced the scope and se­verity of earlier errors [with the Strategic Petroleum Reserve]–that the 1981–84 perfor­mance was superior to the 1977–79 performance. But new facets of the pro­gram have brought new problems.”

“Combined with the $5 per barrel handling and storing expense [as of 1984], the overall market value of SPR oil is billions of dollars less than its embedded average cost of over $35 per barrel.”

A sacred cow of U.S. energy policy is the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The case for the reserve assumes that another energy crisis lies around the corner, the reserve will be efficiently managed during the crisis to alleviate the emergency, and private inventories and entrepreneurship alone would be inadequate. The reserve is seen by proponents as the nation’s insurance policy against the inherent instability of the world oil market.…

The Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) is in play. The 695 million barrel inventory, stored in four storage locations in Texas and Louisiana with a capacity of 713.5 million barrels, never found its purpose; it is still waiting for the third oil crisis (after the 1973/74 Arab Embargo and the 1979 Iranian Revolution). Not surprisingly, the SPR is on the verge of becoming a piggy-bank offset for lawmakers. At $50 per barrel, SPR inventory is worth about $35 billion.

This week, MasterResource reviews the history of state and federal oil (and natural gas) storage regulation and ownership. Part I today is early (pre-SPR) regulation. Part II tomorrow will review the prehistory and beginnings of the SPR.

Part III will examine early problems with the federal storage program; Part IV early fill and financing controversies.…