Noise Nuisance From Wind Turbines – A Recent Case

Renewable energy including onshore and offshore wind turbines play a vital part of the country’s decarbonisation and energy security strategy. According to RenewableUK, there are nearly 9,000 onshore wind turbines in the UK, across 2,631 projects.   

In England, onshore wind farms are subject to planning restrictions and need to be identified in local or neighbourhood plans and receive community backing. In Wales, the position is more favourable to large-scale wind energy developments with areas identified at a strategic level as suitable for development, with a presumption in favour of planning consent unless local circumstances dictate otherwise. In Northern Ireland, each planning application, including an accompanying Environmental Assessment in the case of more substantial wind turbines and wind power developments, is judged on its own merits, and local planning authorities should grant permission so long as wind turbines will ‘not result in an unacceptable adverse impact’. However, recent public consultation by the Department for Infrastructure on proposed reforms to the planning system could result in future changes with regards to renewable energy. 

There is mixed support from communities when it comes to wind farm developments.  On one hand they see wind turbines as unsightly and noisy, while on the other, value their low carbon credentials together with the enticement of lower energy bills. 

There have been extremely few cases of wind turbine noise nuisance proceeding to the courts, so there is little legal examination for this specific potential nuisance. However, a recent case heard in the Irish High Court examined the issue in some detail, and according to the Judge, Ms Justice Emily Egan, was the first private nuisance claim from wind turbine noise to run in either Ireland or the UK.  

David Holmes, one of our RIAMS specialists, discusses the case and how it may be useful to EHPs: 

Two cases were brought by two couples living in the vicinity of two wind turbines. The cases were heard together in the High Court of Ireland, with the judgment delivered on the 8 March 2024. 

Although this case, Webster & Anor v Meenacloghspar [Wind] Limited; Shorten & Anor v Meenacloghspar [Wind] Limited, was heard in the Irish High Court, it may prove to be extremely helpful in any investigation for nuisance from wind turbines.  

Irish common law is based on British common law, and although there is some divergence and it does not constitute case law in the UK, many of the basic principles concerning nuisance are the same.  

The case revolved around whether two wind turbines, installed with planning consent, were giving rise to private nuisance to the occupiers of two nearby properties. The judgment includes a detailed examination of the issues around noise from wind turbines – in particular, amplitude modulation (AM). AM in relation to wind turbines relates to the change in amplitude (loudness) as the blades rotate – often described as a swish or whoosh, equivalent to the rotational speed, times the number of blades on the turbine.    

This was the key feature in the noise that the plaintiffs claimed gave rise to the nuisance, rather than the absolute noise level. In the judgment, the judge found that the noise was a nuisance due to the substantial interference with the plaintiffs’ use and enjoyment of their land, particularly at night and at weekends. The judge set out a detailed rationale explaining this finding, which can be found here. 

The judgment examined the evidence-gathering process, the strength of the evidence gathered and many of the guidance documents that exist, including the ETSU guidance (Department of Trade and Industry, 1996), A Method for Rating Amplitude Modulation in Wind Turbine Noise (Institute of Acoustics (IOA), 2016) and the Wind Farm Noise Statutory Nuisance Complaint Methodology (Defra, 2011).  

The court decided that BS 4142 (Methods for rating and assessing industrial and commercial sound) was not an appropriate standard to use for wind farm noise investigations, nor was the WHO 2018 guidance Environmental Noise Guidelines for the European Region of assistance. However, the Defra 2011 guidance proved especially useful.  

It also decided that monitoring the noise indoors was an acceptable method of establishing the character of the noise, in this case the AM, if not the level. The court went further and examined the use of the IOA 2016 guidance on AM in indoor measurements, rather than the more normal external measurement locations, and determined that whilst it would not be appropriate for planning condition purposes, it could be used to assist in the establishment of nuisance. 

For any EHP investigating noise nuisance complaints from wind turbines, the case is well worth reading. The detailed examination of the available guidance and the expert evidence, including noise measurements (the case ran for over 50 days) could be of considerable assistance in seeing how a court may approach any evidence and the noise measurements that are made. It is worth noting that the judge gave considerable weight to noise nuisance diaries that were kept by the plaintiffs. The court also examined the role of the noise experts and the limitations of their opinions.   

A dedicated procedure on this subject is ‘Investigation of Noise Complaints from Wind Energy Developments’, which can be found in RIAMS Libraries. 

Up-to-date, easy-to-access procedures and guidance are available on RIAMS Libraries, supporting environmental health practitioners across all specialisms to work smarter, network and share good practice.   

Contact us on [email protected] for more information, and join the conversation for free on RIAMS Communities.  

Visit RHE Training for a variety of training opportunities in specialist environmental health subjects, including nuisance.