Following on from the introduction to inversion layers in a previous post, it seemed appropriate to expand the theme to explain a little better why the effect is significant for noise produced by frost fans;
The acoustical significance of such layers comes from the fact that the speed of sound is higher at higher temperatures. That means that within inversion layers the speed of sound is highest at the top of the layer and lowest at the bottom of the layer.
The consequence of this deflection of skyward-bound sound toward the ground is that the noise levels on the ground can be greater than they would otherwise be if only the direct path along the ground between the source and receptor were available to the sound. One could almost say, by way of an analogy with optics, that the source of the sound is magnified by the temperature inversion.
The reader who has never before taken note of this phenomenon might now try to see if it's 'real'. Just listen to the background noises from distant trains, distant aircraft (just during takeoff runs) and vehicles on distant roadway segments, preferably after dark or shortly before or after dawn, and note the atmospheric conditions. Disregard windy conditions, but take note of the loudness of such noises under all other atmospheric conditions. It should become apparent that the noise levels from distant sources are clearly higher on some days than on others, even though the observations were made at approximately the same time each day. With some effort it should also be apparent that the calm and clear conditions that are said here to give rise to temperature inversions are in effect when the distant sources seem loudest.
So that is all very interesting and technical, but what's the point?
Well, in order to satisfy the requirements to limit the noise produced by a frost fan, they need to be tested. If a frost fan isn't tested in frost conditions with an inversion layer, the noise measurements are incorrect. In other words, if you measure the noise of a frost fan during the day, or at night, but without a frost, those readings will not be accurate.
Therefore they shouldn't be used to demonstrate that the noise they produce is compliant.
Seems simple doesn't it? But that's not what has been happening. Resource consents have been granted for frost fans that have no accurate data on the noise they produce.
If they want to comply with the regulations, they need to be accurately tested. Anything else is either guesswork or attempted deceit.
If a resource consent IS granted for a frost fan without accurate noise measurements, this would open the Council and the applicant to an appeal to the Environment Court on the basis that there has been no accurate evidence that the devices can meet the required level.
Sunday, 31 August 2008
Cartoon of the Day 31 August 2008
Ahh... Those clever policy wonks at the MDC. Always thinking...
Click on the cartoon to see a readable version or click here to see all the cartoons.
Click on the cartoon to see a readable version or click here to see all the cartoons.
Saturday, 30 August 2008
Environment Court Hearing in Blenheim
I note in the Court hearing schedule for the Environment Court that there is a Court hearing date set down for the 1-5 December in Blenheim.
For anyone interested in how the Environment Court operates or contemplating being involved in proceedings at the Environment Court this would be a useful opportunity to get a feel for how thing work.
Of course there are plenty more hearing set up for around the country. If you want to find more details of one happening near you, the following are the contact numbers for the Environment Court Registries. They will be happy to provide hearing dates and times.
Auckland: 916-9091
Wellington: 918-8300
Christchurch: 962-4170
For anyone interested in how the Environment Court operates or contemplating being involved in proceedings at the Environment Court this would be a useful opportunity to get a feel for how thing work.
Of course there are plenty more hearing set up for around the country. If you want to find more details of one happening near you, the following are the contact numbers for the Environment Court Registries. They will be happy to provide hearing dates and times.
Auckland: 916-9091
Wellington: 918-8300
Christchurch: 962-4170
Cartoon of the Day 30 August 2008
I'm a big fan of Kathmandu, but having the Council investing in retail when it effectively acts as competition to other retail industries? Dodgy.
Click on the cartoon to see a readable version or click here to see all the cartoons.
Click on the cartoon to see a readable version or click here to see all the cartoons.
Friday, 29 August 2008
What are cumulative effects?
In layman's terms, a cumulative effect is where a particular effect (lets call it the noise from a frost fan) is increased by virtue of the fact that there is more than one frost fan operating. The net result being a louder noise.
This becomes significant when considering a resource consent, if the applicant wants to put in four frost fans then the cumulative noise from all four will significantly exceed the noise that would have occurred if only one had been operating.
Normally a frost fan will be restricted in terms of the amount of noise it can produce by a consent that says something like it can only produce 55dBA L10 at 300 metres. Now it stands to reason that if you have more than one frost fan operating and each is operating to that one noise standard then the cumulative noise will be greater than the allowable level.
Oddly enough this has not been the position of applicants wanting to install frost fans or their hired consultants. There has however been a judgment from the Environment Court (Maclean vs Marlborough District Council, 2008) that required the applicant to have the noise from their fans considered and measured cumulatively so that the combined noise needed to be under the specified limit.
There is a useful paper on the topic by Philip Milne here.
The realisation that cumulative effects are real is also carried through to the Western Bay of Plenty District Council ‘Land Use Consent for Frost Control Fans’ form which states that;
This becomes significant when considering a resource consent, if the applicant wants to put in four frost fans then the cumulative noise from all four will significantly exceed the noise that would have occurred if only one had been operating.
Normally a frost fan will be restricted in terms of the amount of noise it can produce by a consent that says something like it can only produce 55dBA L10 at 300 metres. Now it stands to reason that if you have more than one frost fan operating and each is operating to that one noise standard then the cumulative noise will be greater than the allowable level.
Oddly enough this has not been the position of applicants wanting to install frost fans or their hired consultants. There has however been a judgment from the Environment Court (Maclean vs Marlborough District Council, 2008) that required the applicant to have the noise from their fans considered and measured cumulatively so that the combined noise needed to be under the specified limit.
There is a useful paper on the topic by Philip Milne here.
The realisation that cumulative effects are real is also carried through to the Western Bay of Plenty District Council ‘Land Use Consent for Frost Control Fans’ form which states that;
If the application is for more than one frost fan on the same property, the technical report is to include the cumulative effects of noise.and
Council’s policy in previous applications for affected persons is for a 500m buffer for one frost fan. This increases to 600m for two, and 650m for three machines, although Council reserves the right to deem any person affected.
Thursday, 28 August 2008
We need environmental experts, not bean counters
The title for this post is the byline for a column from the August 30 edition of The Listener by Sarah Barnett.
Sarah describes the toxic legacy of a shamefully polluted Fruitgrowers plant in Mapua and the equally shameful efforts to clean it up.
Not that cleaning the site up wasn't the right idea, but the the effort itself was beset by a lack of operational experience that points to a need to provide a system of independent experts that are capable of overseeing any future efforts.
I found it interesting that she made the point that currently New Zealand's environment is protected by lawyers and accountants.
Now personally, I'm sure that there are some very decent members of each profession who have the good of the environment at heart. However, that warm glow doesn't pay the bills.
In my opinion, environmental policy is driven by chequebook toting conglomerates that flog a team of legal and financial mercenaries in front of them. What drives environmental policy is typically the greed to get more for less at the expense of the environment.
What stands in their way are generally shocked ordinary citizens that suddenly find themselves in the glare of the oncoming headlights of big business. These everyday people are woefully equipped to withstand the experience and arrogance of these economic juggernauts and Sarah Barnett's call for independent experts to be employed by the Ministry for the Environment is a well aimed stone, right between the eyes.
Sarah describes the toxic legacy of a shamefully polluted Fruitgrowers plant in Mapua and the equally shameful efforts to clean it up.
Not that cleaning the site up wasn't the right idea, but the the effort itself was beset by a lack of operational experience that points to a need to provide a system of independent experts that are capable of overseeing any future efforts.
I found it interesting that she made the point that currently New Zealand's environment is protected by lawyers and accountants.
Now personally, I'm sure that there are some very decent members of each profession who have the good of the environment at heart. However, that warm glow doesn't pay the bills.
In my opinion, environmental policy is driven by chequebook toting conglomerates that flog a team of legal and financial mercenaries in front of them. What drives environmental policy is typically the greed to get more for less at the expense of the environment.
What stands in their way are generally shocked ordinary citizens that suddenly find themselves in the glare of the oncoming headlights of big business. These everyday people are woefully equipped to withstand the experience and arrogance of these economic juggernauts and Sarah Barnett's call for independent experts to be employed by the Ministry for the Environment is a well aimed stone, right between the eyes.
Cartoon of the Day 28 August 2008
Go the Air Force!
Of course this cartoon would have never been possible without the inspiration of the following 'home grown' music video from the RNZAF.
As always, click on the picture to see a readable version.
Of course this cartoon would have never been possible without the inspiration of the following 'home grown' music video from the RNZAF.
As always, click on the picture to see a readable version.
Wednesday, 27 August 2008
At the far end of town where the Grickle-grass grows.
As a youngster, I remember the story of The Lorax by Dr Seuss well.
Of course, while my mother was hoping to instill a decent set of values in me, I thought the rhyming was clever and I enjoyed the pictures. (the Once-ler was a spooky character).
Little did I anticipate the significance of its message. and the politics of greed and environmental negligence.
I had the occasion to read it again today and the relevance of it's message has changed ( The Once-ler is STILL a spooky character).
I recommend it to all young and old, cynical and righteous. It's still a good read.
Of course, while my mother was hoping to instill a decent set of values in me, I thought the rhyming was clever and I enjoyed the pictures. (the Once-ler was a spooky character).Little did I anticipate the significance of its message. and the politics of greed and environmental negligence.
I had the occasion to read it again today and the relevance of it's message has changed ( The Once-ler is STILL a spooky character).
I recommend it to all young and old, cynical and righteous. It's still a good read.
What is noise pollution?
The following description is extracted form The Noise Pollution Clearinghouse which is a non-profit organization with extensive online noise related resources. I have added a link to their web site on the left hand side of the page.
The word "noise" is derived from the Latin word "nausea," meaning seasickness. Noise is among the most pervasive pollutants today. Noise from road traffic, jet planes, jet skis, garbage trucks, construction equipment, manufacturing processes, lawn mowers, frost fans, and boom boxes, to name a few, are among the audible litter that are routinely broadcast into the air.
Noise negatively affects human health and well-being. Problems related to noise include hearing loss, stress, high blood pressure, sleep loss, distraction and lost productivity, and a general reduction in the quality of life and opportunities for tranquillity.
We experience noise in a number of ways. On some occasions, we can be both the cause and the victim of noise, such as when we are operating noisy appliances or equipment. There are also instances when we experience noise generated by others just as people experience second-hand smoke. While in both instances, noises are equally damaging, second-hand noise is more troubling because it has negative impacts on us but is put into the environment by others, without our consent.
The air into which second-hand noise is emitted and on which it travels is a "commons," a public good. It belongs to no one person or group, but to everyone. People, businesses, and organizations, therefore, do not have unlimited rights to broadcast noise as they please, as if the effects of noise were limited only to their private property. On the contrary, they have an obligation to use the commons in ways that are compatible with or do not detract from other uses.
People, businesses, and organizations that disregard the obligation to not interfere with others' use and enjoyment of the commons by producing noise pollution are, in many ways, acting like a bully in a school yard. Although perhaps unknowingly, they nevertheless disregard the rights of others and claim for themselves rights that are not theirs.
The word "noise" is derived from the Latin word "nausea," meaning seasickness. Noise is among the most pervasive pollutants today. Noise from road traffic, jet planes, jet skis, garbage trucks, construction equipment, manufacturing processes, lawn mowers, frost fans, and boom boxes, to name a few, are among the audible litter that are routinely broadcast into the air.
Noise negatively affects human health and well-being. Problems related to noise include hearing loss, stress, high blood pressure, sleep loss, distraction and lost productivity, and a general reduction in the quality of life and opportunities for tranquillity.
We experience noise in a number of ways. On some occasions, we can be both the cause and the victim of noise, such as when we are operating noisy appliances or equipment. There are also instances when we experience noise generated by others just as people experience second-hand smoke. While in both instances, noises are equally damaging, second-hand noise is more troubling because it has negative impacts on us but is put into the environment by others, without our consent.
The air into which second-hand noise is emitted and on which it travels is a "commons," a public good. It belongs to no one person or group, but to everyone. People, businesses, and organizations, therefore, do not have unlimited rights to broadcast noise as they please, as if the effects of noise were limited only to their private property. On the contrary, they have an obligation to use the commons in ways that are compatible with or do not detract from other uses.
People, businesses, and organizations that disregard the obligation to not interfere with others' use and enjoyment of the commons by producing noise pollution are, in many ways, acting like a bully in a school yard. Although perhaps unknowingly, they nevertheless disregard the rights of others and claim for themselves rights that are not theirs.
Cartoon of the Day 27 August 2008
They're out of control!
Click on the image to view a readable size.
Click on the image to view a readable size.
Tuesday, 26 August 2008
How much does it cost to APPLY to install a frost fan?
OK, so a bit of ringing around and I have begin to get an idea of the costs for building consents for frost fan installations.
First you will to pay for a Project Information Memorandum (PIM). This will be about $300. Then you will need to pay for the building consent itself (that would be another $300). Then there is a $3000 bond that will be used if there is the slighted hint of an objection to your proposed installation (and who wouldn’t want to have a frost fan put up next to them?)
Finally, because the process is so convoluted and deliberately obscure you will probably need to hire a resource management consultant. This will be a flat starting fee of about $1500 and the amount will only increase as their work increases (if you call shuffling paper work).
Now, this all started because it might have been an interesting exercise to try and calculate the amount that the Council have gathered as a result of the consent process for frost fans. But in all honesty, it will be difficult to tell since in theory you will be saving money if you are installing more of them.
I.e. you should only need one PIM and building consent for installing two frost fans (so long as there is nothing difficult about the installation (built on a flood plain, unstable ground, that sort of thing).
So for instance for the four frost fans that are intended to be installed opposite the Burleigh dairy (resource consent application U080033). I would anticipate that there will be an easy $600 in PIM and building consent and the $3000 bond will have evaporated pretty quickly because of the objections that should have been laid by the residents of the 70 odd houses that are within 500 metres of the installation.
They may have saved money on the resource consent consultant, because their application was truly one of the worst I have ever seen (if you used a consultant for that, they need to be fired).
However when you put the cost of the process alongside the cost of the machines (approximately $50,000 each) then I suppose who could begrudge the Council and the resource consultants (and probably the lawyers in the case of U080033) getting their fingers into the pot?
A nice little earner since there are 747 frost fans installed. I suppose we won’t need to have a rates rise if we install a few more?
First you will to pay for a Project Information Memorandum (PIM). This will be about $300. Then you will need to pay for the building consent itself (that would be another $300). Then there is a $3000 bond that will be used if there is the slighted hint of an objection to your proposed installation (and who wouldn’t want to have a frost fan put up next to them?)
Finally, because the process is so convoluted and deliberately obscure you will probably need to hire a resource management consultant. This will be a flat starting fee of about $1500 and the amount will only increase as their work increases (if you call shuffling paper work).
Now, this all started because it might have been an interesting exercise to try and calculate the amount that the Council have gathered as a result of the consent process for frost fans. But in all honesty, it will be difficult to tell since in theory you will be saving money if you are installing more of them.
I.e. you should only need one PIM and building consent for installing two frost fans (so long as there is nothing difficult about the installation (built on a flood plain, unstable ground, that sort of thing).
So for instance for the four frost fans that are intended to be installed opposite the Burleigh dairy (resource consent application U080033). I would anticipate that there will be an easy $600 in PIM and building consent and the $3000 bond will have evaporated pretty quickly because of the objections that should have been laid by the residents of the 70 odd houses that are within 500 metres of the installation.
They may have saved money on the resource consent consultant, because their application was truly one of the worst I have ever seen (if you used a consultant for that, they need to be fired).
However when you put the cost of the process alongside the cost of the machines (approximately $50,000 each) then I suppose who could begrudge the Council and the resource consultants (and probably the lawyers in the case of U080033) getting their fingers into the pot?
A nice little earner since there are 747 frost fans installed. I suppose we won’t need to have a rates rise if we install a few more?
Cartoon of the Day 26 August 2008
We have had a bit of rain lately, so I suppose this is relevant.
Click on the picture to view a readable version.
Click on the picture to view a readable version.
How many frost fans are in Marlborough?
By the time you read this figure it will be out of date.
But as of May 2008 there were 747 building consents granted for frost fans in Marlborough.
The following is an excerpt from an Environment Court transcript.
APPELLANT: How many resource consents for a frost fan installation have been granted in Marlborough?
COUNCIL WITNESS: I can’t answer that either.
APPELLANT: No sweat. And in that case you won’t be able to tell me how many have been declined I presume?
COUNCIL WITNESS: No.
APPELLANT: And you will not be able to tell me how many have been installed which did not need resource consent? I think I saw a figure in the paper the day other day, but I’m not sure if it was an accurate one.
COUNCIL WITNESS: I’m informed that there’s 747 building consents for wind machines.
APPELLANT: 747?
COUNCIL WITNESS: Yes.
JUDGE: 747 building consents have been issued?
COUNCIL WITNESS: Yes.
JUDGE: In the whole of Marlborough?
COUNCIL WITNESS: Yes.
JUDGE: For wind machines?
COUNCIL WITNESS: Yes.
JUDGE: But you don’t know how many of those needed resource consent as well?
COUNCIL WITNESS: No, your Honour. I’m afraid I don’t deal with all consents for frost machines. It’s spread amongst a team.
JUDGE: All right.
I don’t mind saying it, but it sounds as if the Judge was having a hard time believing the figure.
And get this… The witness says that they spread the consents amongst a team! I suppose with 747 of them it’s more than a single person could cope with!
Actually, come to think of it, how much does a building consent cost for each of these?
Time to do a little digging…
But as of May 2008 there were 747 building consents granted for frost fans in Marlborough.
The following is an excerpt from an Environment Court transcript.
APPELLANT: How many resource consents for a frost fan installation have been granted in Marlborough?
COUNCIL WITNESS: I can’t answer that either.
APPELLANT: No sweat. And in that case you won’t be able to tell me how many have been declined I presume?
COUNCIL WITNESS: No.
APPELLANT: And you will not be able to tell me how many have been installed which did not need resource consent? I think I saw a figure in the paper the day other day, but I’m not sure if it was an accurate one.
COUNCIL WITNESS: I’m informed that there’s 747 building consents for wind machines.
APPELLANT: 747?
COUNCIL WITNESS: Yes.
JUDGE: 747 building consents have been issued?
COUNCIL WITNESS: Yes.
JUDGE: In the whole of Marlborough?
COUNCIL WITNESS: Yes.
JUDGE: For wind machines?
COUNCIL WITNESS: Yes.
JUDGE: But you don’t know how many of those needed resource consent as well?
COUNCIL WITNESS: No, your Honour. I’m afraid I don’t deal with all consents for frost machines. It’s spread amongst a team.
JUDGE: All right.
I don’t mind saying it, but it sounds as if the Judge was having a hard time believing the figure.
And get this… The witness says that they spread the consents amongst a team! I suppose with 747 of them it’s more than a single person could cope with!
Actually, come to think of it, how much does a building consent cost for each of these?
Time to do a little digging…
Monday, 25 August 2008
Cartoon of the Day 25 August 2008
Tui to Town is an outstanding initiative by the Marlborough District Council.
I encourage all to become involved if possible.
I encourage all to become involved if possible.
What is an inverson layer?
Normally the higher in the atmosphere you go, the colder it gets. However under certain conditions, a temperature inversion can form close to the Earths surface where the temperature goes up as you get higher.
They occur on most calm clear nights and, less frequently, under certain daytime conditions. A principal mechanism whereby they form at night is the movement of heat away from the earth's surface by infrared radiation. These radiation inversions dissipate rapidly when the sun comes up, but during the winter the radiation inversions that form during the night are intense.
These temperature inversions have the effect of making a distant sound appear louder that it would otherwise be.
Funny old thing, frost fans rely on temperature inversions to operate effectively (i.e. pull warmer air down from above to distribute it over a crop). So it should come as no surprise that frost fans are noisier at night under the conditions that they normally operate in than during the day.
This is important, as if a frost fan is being tested to see how noisy it is, this testing needs to be done in the same conditions as it operates in. I.e. at night in a frost with an inversion layer. Otherwise the tests will not show an accurate noise level.
For a little more information see here at the frost fans web site and here at Wikipedia.
They occur on most calm clear nights and, less frequently, under certain daytime conditions. A principal mechanism whereby they form at night is the movement of heat away from the earth's surface by infrared radiation. These radiation inversions dissipate rapidly when the sun comes up, but during the winter the radiation inversions that form during the night are intense.
These temperature inversions have the effect of making a distant sound appear louder that it would otherwise be.
Funny old thing, frost fans rely on temperature inversions to operate effectively (i.e. pull warmer air down from above to distribute it over a crop). So it should come as no surprise that frost fans are noisier at night under the conditions that they normally operate in than during the day.
This is important, as if a frost fan is being tested to see how noisy it is, this testing needs to be done in the same conditions as it operates in. I.e. at night in a frost with an inversion layer. Otherwise the tests will not show an accurate noise level.
For a little more information see here at the frost fans web site and here at Wikipedia.
Sunday, 24 August 2008
Cartoon of the Day 24 August 2008
With suitable apologies to xkcd in who's presence none of us are worthy.
Click on the image to see in a readable size.
Click on the image to see in a readable size.
Saturday, 23 August 2008
Leave a comment.
Just because I found it tricky doesn't mean that you will, but I have to admit to having to look for a few seconds before working out how to leave a comment for a post.
So here's a very short how-to;
At the bottom of each post is a small link that says comments.
If you click on this it will allow you to leave a comment.
The comment can be anonymous and it will always be sent to a moderator (someone who reads it to make sure it's sensible).
Don't be afraid if you want to speak your mind. That's what a blog is for. Getting your message across.
So here's a very short how-to;
At the bottom of each post is a small link that says comments.
If you click on this it will allow you to leave a comment.
The comment can be anonymous and it will always be sent to a moderator (someone who reads it to make sure it's sensible).
Don't be afraid if you want to speak your mind. That's what a blog is for. Getting your message across.
The Department of Labour struggles in the wind
The Department of Labour has distinguished itself in what I believe is a pretty average effort.
The Department of Labour are the people responsible for Occupational Safety and Health. Now that's a pretty important business and to be perfectly honest I normally expect any decisions they make to err on the side of caution and promote personal safety first and ask questions later.
I mean... Better to say "Sorry we were a bit heavy handed there with the regulations" than "Crikey, we thought the odds of that happening we pretty slim".
So it's a bit of a surprise to come across this letter from a Mr Mike Munnelly (Regional Manager (Central) of Workplace Services). In it he is responding to a letter of complaint where a frost fan has been operating during windy conditions.
Wind places stresses on frost fans that they are not designed for and as a result they can be prone to failure (you know, blades separating and flying in all directions sort of thing).
Now Mike Munnelly states that there is no authoritative source that makes a recommendation on a safe speed, so he will have to sit on his hands for a bit longer (read, reviewing and updating documents if necessary).
Well, he might be right... but there is this reference from the University of California which has done a review on frost fan safety and they state "Never operate a wind machine when winds are at 4mph or greater". Wow. A University. Aren't those folks pretty smart? Mabye not. They are American after all, its not like they put men on the moon.
Well perhaps the winegrowers know better... Err.. Actually the draft "Wind machine code of practice" that was put out by the NZ Winegrowers early in 2008 recommended "Avoid operating a wind machine in the following conditions... when winds are 8kph or greater". OK... What would those Winegrowers know about mechanical stresses? They're probably on the second bottle right?
Now if the manufactures had something to say, perhaps Mike Munnelly could be moved? Welll.... Actually the good folks at FrostBoss build an anemometer into some models of their frost fan so that they can be shut down when the wind gets over 10kph You can check here if you want (careful, 2.5Mb download!). Surely they're overreacting?
What if a safety organisation had something to say? Ok, you know where this is going... At this link from THE SAME DEPARTMENT that Mike Munnelly works for we find them saying "Never operate a wind machine when winds are at 7 km/h or greater".
So... This is why I'm confused.
A University says it's unsafe, Winegrowers say it's unsafe, Manufacturers say it's unsafe and the Department of Labour say it's unsafe.
Mike Munnelly's not convinced though.
Good job. Safety first right?
Addendum:
While Googling to find out who Mike Munnelly is, I cam across him as the spokesperson for the Department of Labour, apologising for "the failure of the original investigation to reach what now appears a reasonable conclusion" in the case of the researcher that was infected with meningococcal disease while working at an Institute of Environmental Science and Research (ESR) laboratory. The article is here at Scoop. In the review of the original investigation, it turns out that the Department of Labour concluded that an absence of any reasonable alternative indicated that Dr Adu-Bobie did contract meningococcal disease at the ERR Lab.
So I suppose a conclusion can be made without evidence as well.
But not for frost fans. No... wait.... We have evidence there... Hang on.... I'm getting confused.
But wait there's more
In a prosecution by the Department of Labour of an egg farm and a feed supply company over a worker who was seriously injured after falling from a feed silo, Mike Munnelly, spokesperson for the Department said;
The Department of Labour are the people responsible for Occupational Safety and Health. Now that's a pretty important business and to be perfectly honest I normally expect any decisions they make to err on the side of caution and promote personal safety first and ask questions later.
I mean... Better to say "Sorry we were a bit heavy handed there with the regulations" than "Crikey, we thought the odds of that happening we pretty slim".
So it's a bit of a surprise to come across this letter from a Mr Mike Munnelly (Regional Manager (Central) of Workplace Services). In it he is responding to a letter of complaint where a frost fan has been operating during windy conditions.
Wind places stresses on frost fans that they are not designed for and as a result they can be prone to failure (you know, blades separating and flying in all directions sort of thing).
Now Mike Munnelly states that there is no authoritative source that makes a recommendation on a safe speed, so he will have to sit on his hands for a bit longer (read, reviewing and updating documents if necessary).
Well, he might be right... but there is this reference from the University of California which has done a review on frost fan safety and they state "Never operate a wind machine when winds are at 4mph or greater". Wow. A University. Aren't those folks pretty smart? Mabye not. They are American after all, its not like they put men on the moon.
Well perhaps the winegrowers know better... Err.. Actually the draft "Wind machine code of practice" that was put out by the NZ Winegrowers early in 2008 recommended "Avoid operating a wind machine in the following conditions... when winds are 8kph or greater". OK... What would those Winegrowers know about mechanical stresses? They're probably on the second bottle right?
Now if the manufactures had something to say, perhaps Mike Munnelly could be moved? Welll.... Actually the good folks at FrostBoss build an anemometer into some models of their frost fan so that they can be shut down when the wind gets over 10kph You can check here if you want (careful, 2.5Mb download!). Surely they're overreacting?
What if a safety organisation had something to say? Ok, you know where this is going... At this link from THE SAME DEPARTMENT that Mike Munnelly works for we find them saying "Never operate a wind machine when winds are at 7 km/h or greater".
So... This is why I'm confused.
A University says it's unsafe, Winegrowers say it's unsafe, Manufacturers say it's unsafe and the Department of Labour say it's unsafe.
Mike Munnelly's not convinced though.
Good job. Safety first right?
Addendum:
While Googling to find out who Mike Munnelly is, I cam across him as the spokesperson for the Department of Labour, apologising for "the failure of the original investigation to reach what now appears a reasonable conclusion" in the case of the researcher that was infected with meningococcal disease while working at an Institute of Environmental Science and Research (ESR) laboratory. The article is here at Scoop. In the review of the original investigation, it turns out that the Department of Labour concluded that an absence of any reasonable alternative indicated that Dr Adu-Bobie did contract meningococcal disease at the ERR Lab.
So I suppose a conclusion can be made without evidence as well.
But not for frost fans. No... wait.... We have evidence there... Hang on.... I'm getting confused.
But wait there's more
In a prosecution by the Department of Labour of an egg farm and a feed supply company over a worker who was seriously injured after falling from a feed silo, Mike Munnelly, spokesperson for the Department said;
"Accidents on farms can cost the farm enterprise dearly in the loss of production and the need to find temporary or replacement staff. Farm managers should be aware that good health and safety is not just good for their staff, but good for their business. Farms ‘win’ by acting in a socially responsible way because it is also the economically sensible thing for them to do."I hope your all listening to Mr Munnelly. Farms ‘win’ by acting in a socially responsible way!
Conflict of Interest?
Now darn it, I'm a pretty simple fellow and I don't pretend to know a lot about all things.
But I tend to think of common sense as being a bit like art. I may not know if its art or not, but I know what I like.
So imagine my surprise to find in the Thursdays Marlborough Express, an application under the Resource Management Act for a water permit.
Now this sort of thing is pretty normal, people do it all the time.
But in the case of Application U080625 the applicant is the Marlborough District Council.
They are applying to themselves for a permit to draw water from a well to irrigate 24 hectares of grapes.
Eh?
Firstly, I suppose the ratepayers should be grateful that they asked. But in fairness they will always operate in a correct manner.
But hang on...
What are the odds of them turning themselves down?
If someone objects and the resource consent is granted anyway, how can they prove that there wasn't a conflict of interest?
And lastly... I can presume from this that the Marlborough District Council is in the business of growing grapes.
Err.... does that mean that they have a vested interest in allowing activities that support / promote grape growing in the region?
Umm... if someone applies for a resource consent for an grape related activity, are they more inclined to approve?
Wait... does this mean that they are more likely to find against any application for other vineyards? (I mean competition and all...)
It feels like conflict of interest. It smells like conflict of interest. It tastes like conflict of interest.
I suppose its ok though.
But I tend to think of common sense as being a bit like art. I may not know if its art or not, but I know what I like.
So imagine my surprise to find in the Thursdays Marlborough Express, an application under the Resource Management Act for a water permit.
Now this sort of thing is pretty normal, people do it all the time.
But in the case of Application U080625 the applicant is the Marlborough District Council.
They are applying to themselves for a permit to draw water from a well to irrigate 24 hectares of grapes.
Eh?
Firstly, I suppose the ratepayers should be grateful that they asked. But in fairness they will always operate in a correct manner.
But hang on...
What are the odds of them turning themselves down?
If someone objects and the resource consent is granted anyway, how can they prove that there wasn't a conflict of interest?
And lastly... I can presume from this that the Marlborough District Council is in the business of growing grapes.
Err.... does that mean that they have a vested interest in allowing activities that support / promote grape growing in the region?
Umm... if someone applies for a resource consent for an grape related activity, are they more inclined to approve?
Wait... does this mean that they are more likely to find against any application for other vineyards? (I mean competition and all...)
It feels like conflict of interest. It smells like conflict of interest. It tastes like conflict of interest.
I suppose its ok though.
Friday, 22 August 2008
Frost fans web site set up.
Every day you learn something new.
Today I found out that Google has an outstanding service called Google Sites.
This has allowed me to put together a simple web site that will allow hosting information in a more static manner and allow the blog to link to documents as required.
So, while it will change radically in the near future, there is nothing to be lost in having a quick look at the Frost Fans web site.
Nice one Google!
Today I found out that Google has an outstanding service called Google Sites.
This has allowed me to put together a simple web site that will allow hosting information in a more static manner and allow the blog to link to documents as required.
So, while it will change radically in the near future, there is nothing to be lost in having a quick look at the Frost Fans web site.
Nice one Google!
What are special audible charcteristics?
Special audible characteristics are described in the New Zealand Standard for the Assessment of Environmental Sound (NZS 6802:1991) as noise that is tonal or impulsive and is likely to arouse adverse community response at lower levels than noise without such characteristics.
Frost fans typically exhibit these characteristics. In a quote from a 2004 Marshal Day report (04W142) on an Amarillo frost fan;
The reason that this is important is that a 5dB penalty on the noise level is warranted if the frost fan exhibits a special audible character (at least in Marlborough). This is following the guidelines of the NZS 6802.
Frost fans typically exhibit these characteristics. In a quote from a 2004 Marshal Day report (04W142) on an Amarillo frost fan;
"The blade noise is characterised by a "chopping" sound which would generally be interpreted as having special audible character. The degree of chop varies with rotation, ranging from mild (about 70% of the rotation period) to distinct (about 25% of the rotation). The remaining 5% of the rotation the blade noise is barely audible and no chop is heard."and
"At 513rmp blade speed, the blade noise is significantly reduced, as is the amount of chop. With less blade noise, the engine note is predominant, and is tonal by the definition of NZS 6802:1999"This nicely describes the noise as being both 'impulsive' (chop) and 'tonal' (engine). For this reason the report found that the frost fan exhibited special audible characteristics.
The reason that this is important is that a 5dB penalty on the noise level is warranted if the frost fan exhibits a special audible character (at least in Marlborough). This is following the guidelines of the NZS 6802.
Thursday, 21 August 2008
Is the use of helicopters a permitted activity? And why is this significant?
A permitted activity is one that is permitted by a District Plan or that has already been consented to.
The argument has been made in Resource Consent hearings that since it is permitted for helicopters to hover over a vineyard to control frost (by performing the same physical action that a frost fan does), then a frost fan can be permitted since the noise from a helicopter is greater than a frost fan.
This argument has been tested in the Environment Court and is not valid.
In Maclean vs Marlborough District Council (C 081/2008, para 25) the Court found that;
Likewise the Civil Aviation Act only regulates in matters of aircraft safety, not noise levels.
As it was put by the Court of Appeal in Queenstown Lakes District Council vs Hawthorn Estate Limited (2006, NZRMA 424 at para 65);
It may be valid using the argument of the 'receiving environment', but that post will have to wait for another day.
The argument has been made in Resource Consent hearings that since it is permitted for helicopters to hover over a vineyard to control frost (by performing the same physical action that a frost fan does), then a frost fan can be permitted since the noise from a helicopter is greater than a frost fan.
This argument has been tested in the Environment Court and is not valid.
In Maclean vs Marlborough District Council (C 081/2008, para 25) the Court found that;
"The use of helicopters as wind machines is not said to be permitted by the resource management plan or by any resource consent. It therefore cannot be part of the permitted baseline."The Resource Management act cannot be used in respect of noise emitted by any aircraft being operated during, or immediately before or after, flight (RMA 326(1)(a)).
Likewise the Civil Aviation Act only regulates in matters of aircraft safety, not noise levels.
As it was put by the Court of Appeal in Queenstown Lakes District Council vs Hawthorn Estate Limited (2006, NZRMA 424 at para 65);
"It is well to remember what the "permitted baseline" concept is designed to achieve. In essence, its purpose is to isolate, and make irrelevant, effects of activities on the environment that are permitted by a district plan, or have already been consented to. Such effects cannot then be taken into account when assessing the effects of a particular resource consent application."So, the upshot of it all is that if the argument is made that since helicopters can be used to fight frost, frost fans should be able to, there is a precedent that says that the argument cannot be made on the grounds that helicopters form a permitted baseline.
It may be valid using the argument of the 'receiving environment', but that post will have to wait for another day.
How fast do the blades rotate?
Each different model will rotate at a different speed.
They will be designed to operate at a particular speed to maximise aerodynamic efficiency. If they operate below this speed efficiency drops away VERY quickly (I believe its the function of a cube root).
Typically it will be about 550 rpm, but this will vary significantly and the rate may even need to be set to enable the machine to meet a noise level.
This can be a significant value for a frost fan and it is important to use it correctly.
For instance, one of the requirements under the Marlborough District Council's Proposed Wairau Awatere District Plan requires frost fans to maintain the speed of the blade under the speed of sound (this is to prevent a particularly nasty noise from resulting).
Two resource consents (U70017 and U70190) were granted by the Marlborough District Council where proof that the blades would not exceed the speed of sound was given by reproducing the rpm value of the fan.
This is an inept attempt at providing the required information as there is no means of knowing if the blades will exceed the speed of sound if you are only given the rpm (you would also need to know the blade length and this was not provided). The only sadder part is that the Councilors accepted the values as correct and granted the consent. This is the sort of thing you will have to deal with.
They will be designed to operate at a particular speed to maximise aerodynamic efficiency. If they operate below this speed efficiency drops away VERY quickly (I believe its the function of a cube root).
Typically it will be about 550 rpm, but this will vary significantly and the rate may even need to be set to enable the machine to meet a noise level.
This can be a significant value for a frost fan and it is important to use it correctly.
For instance, one of the requirements under the Marlborough District Council's Proposed Wairau Awatere District Plan requires frost fans to maintain the speed of the blade under the speed of sound (this is to prevent a particularly nasty noise from resulting).
Two resource consents (U70017 and U70190) were granted by the Marlborough District Council where proof that the blades would not exceed the speed of sound was given by reproducing the rpm value of the fan.
This is an inept attempt at providing the required information as there is no means of knowing if the blades will exceed the speed of sound if you are only given the rpm (you would also need to know the blade length and this was not provided). The only sadder part is that the Councilors accepted the values as correct and granted the consent. This is the sort of thing you will have to deal with.
What models of frost fans are there?
There are three predominant brands of frost fans in New Zealand.
Orchard-Rite: http://www.wilket.co.nz/windmachines/default.htm
Amarillo: http://www.amarillowind.com/information.htm
Frost Boss: http://www.frostboss.co.nz/
These machines are not all created equally... More to follow...
Orchard-Rite: http://www.wilket.co.nz/windmachines/default.htm
Amarillo: http://www.amarillowind.com/information.htm
Frost Boss: http://www.frostboss.co.nz/
These machines are not all created equally... More to follow...
Are frost fans safe?
Big question.
They consist of a large mass of metal spinning at high speed, so there is an inherent risk if there is a structural failure.
This risk will be affected by the quality of the components, design, installation, maintenance and hours of operation of the frost fan.
However, airplanes fly every day with propellers managing to stay attached to their engines and helicopters (which are probably the closest analog to a frost fan) are pretty reliable pieces of machinery.
Of course the aviation industry has enormously stringent safety regulations which frost fans are not obliged to follow.
Recognising that there is a risk associated with operation of a frost fan the Department of Labour has released an 'Accident Alert' in February 2006 (http://www.osh.govt.nz/publications/series/aa09-windmachines-safeoperation.html). This is designed to provide a guidance for safe operation of frost fans. Their guidelines are as follows;
They consist of a large mass of metal spinning at high speed, so there is an inherent risk if there is a structural failure.
This risk will be affected by the quality of the components, design, installation, maintenance and hours of operation of the frost fan.
However, airplanes fly every day with propellers managing to stay attached to their engines and helicopters (which are probably the closest analog to a frost fan) are pretty reliable pieces of machinery.
Of course the aviation industry has enormously stringent safety regulations which frost fans are not obliged to follow.
Recognising that there is a risk associated with operation of a frost fan the Department of Labour has released an 'Accident Alert' in February 2006 (http://www.osh.govt.nz/publications/series/aa09-windmachines-safeoperation.html). This is designed to provide a guidance for safe operation of frost fans. Their guidelines are as follows;
- Thoroughly read and understand information provided in the wind machine operator’s manual. Pay particular attention to descriptions of safety procedures.
- Before using the machine each frost season, always inspect for damage or disrepair and make sure that all drive train covers are securely in place. Always check gearbox oil levels prior to use and lubricate according to the manufacturer’s instructions.
- If a wind machine fails the pre-use inspection, remove the equipment from service until repairs have been carried out using lockout procedures.
- Keep vineyard sprays from hitting wind machine engines and towers.
- Shield wind machine engines from irrigation sprinklers. Operating precautions
- Never operate a wind machine when winds are at 7 km/h or greater.
- Always stand outside of the plane of rotation of the fan blades. When near the wind machine, keep the wind machine tower between yourself and the fan shaft.
- Never operate a wind machine during foggy conditions.
- Only authorised and suitably trained people should climb wind machine towers. Where practicable, use an elevating work platform.
- Wind machine repairs and seasonal maintenance shall be performed by the vendor or vendor-approved contractor.
- Never run the wind machine engine for more than one minute with the clutch not engaged.
- Always run the engine throttle at fast idle for five minutes before operating the wind machine at full speed.
- Wind machine shut-down procedures include returning the engine throttle to fast idle for two to three minutes followed by reducing the engine speed to idle, disengaging the clutch, and shutting the engine off. After the fan blades have stopped turning, re-engage the clutch.
- Never allow the fuel tank to run out of fuel when a wind machine is operating.
- Do not make adjustments, alterations or modifications to the machine without first consulting the supplier.
How do I get a copy of the Resource Management Act?
The Resource Management Act (RMA) is available from www.legislation.govt.nz
Specifically the Act can be viewed as a web page (.html) at the following site;
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1991/0069/latest/DLM230265.html
Or it can be downloaded as a pdf from the same page.
I recommend that if you need to consult it (and that's a good idea) that you download your own copy for reference.
The RMA is the Act that the Council will need to ensure that it abides by when making a decision on a resource consent.
One of the best ways of making a good point when submitting to the Council on a Consent is to demonstrate that it breaches the RMA. It is a pretty weighty tome, and can be as confusing as a legal document normally is, but if you want to get the attention of a Hearing Committee, let them know that the application violates a portion of the RMA.
Given that this will be a legal matter, it would be beneficial to have a legal opinion on the matter. However, there is a better than average chance that the Committee hearing the application will take you seriously if they realise that you have done your homework, irrespective of whether or not you've consulted a lawyer (make sure your argument is sound!).
In the event that there is some doubt about the application of the RMA to the resource consent application, it also warns all involved that you could be preparing to appeal the decision if you believe that thee is a case to be heard in the Environment Court. This is a good thing as they are far more likely to take your issues seriously if they think that they will get pulled up in Court over it.
Specifically the Act can be viewed as a web page (.html) at the following site;
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1991/0069/latest/DLM230265.html
Or it can be downloaded as a pdf from the same page.
I recommend that if you need to consult it (and that's a good idea) that you download your own copy for reference.
The RMA is the Act that the Council will need to ensure that it abides by when making a decision on a resource consent.
One of the best ways of making a good point when submitting to the Council on a Consent is to demonstrate that it breaches the RMA. It is a pretty weighty tome, and can be as confusing as a legal document normally is, but if you want to get the attention of a Hearing Committee, let them know that the application violates a portion of the RMA.
Given that this will be a legal matter, it would be beneficial to have a legal opinion on the matter. However, there is a better than average chance that the Committee hearing the application will take you seriously if they realise that you have done your homework, irrespective of whether or not you've consulted a lawyer (make sure your argument is sound!).
In the event that there is some doubt about the application of the RMA to the resource consent application, it also warns all involved that you could be preparing to appeal the decision if you believe that thee is a case to be heard in the Environment Court. This is a good thing as they are far more likely to take your issues seriously if they think that they will get pulled up in Court over it.
What standards do frost fans have to meet to be installed without a resource consent?
This information can be found in a Council's District Plan.
For the Marlborough District Council, they have two plans and the one that I am most familiar with contains the following rules;
In plain speak a wind machine needs to;
Also the noise measurement has an additional caveat that it must meat the requirements of the definitions for noise measurement (also in the Proposed Wairau Awatere District Plan, Volume 2, Definitions Section (towards the end of that section)).
This definition states that (Amongst other things);
There is more in this section to read, however, this means that if a measured noise has a "Special Audible Characteristic" the noise level that it must meet needs to be 5dB lower (in this case 55dBAL10).
It so happens that All frost fans that have been tested to my knowledge exhibit these Special Audible Characteristics. If this is the case in the one that you are interested in then the noise limit that it must be under will be 55dBAL10.
For the Marlborough District Council, they have two plans and the one that I am most familiar with contains the following rules;
1.4.2.3 Wind machines for Frost ControlThis is from the Proposed Wairau Awatere District Plan, Volume 2, Rural Section, 1.4.2.3
Any wind machine used for frost control shall be so constructed and operated that any noise emission measured at a distance of 300 meters shall not exceed 60 dBA L10 provided that:
- The wind machine will be allowed to operate during the frost danger period until the leaves of the plant are dry and the air temperature has reached 2°C.
- The speed of the wind machine must be governed such that the top speed of the rotor does not exceed the speed of sound.
- The wind machine be located no closer than 500 meters to any residential zone, or within 100 meters of a dwelling house not located on the property.
In plain speak a wind machine needs to;
- Produce less that 60dBAL10 at 300 meters (a noise specification that I will explain in another post)
- They can only operate when there is a danger of frost.
- The rotor blades cannot exceed the speed of sound.
- The machine must be at least 100 meters from a residence (not located on the same property) if that residence is in a Rural zone and /or 500 meters away from a Residential zone
Also the noise measurement has an additional caveat that it must meat the requirements of the definitions for noise measurement (also in the Proposed Wairau Awatere District Plan, Volume 2, Definitions Section (towards the end of that section)).
This definition states that (Amongst other things);
"Adjustments for special audible characteristics, if present, as provided for in clause 4.3 and 4.4, shall apply and will have the effect of imposing a numerical noise limit 5 dB more stringent than those L10 numerical limits stated in the plan."
There is more in this section to read, however, this means that if a measured noise has a "Special Audible Characteristic" the noise level that it must meet needs to be 5dB lower (in this case 55dBAL10).
It so happens that All frost fans that have been tested to my knowledge exhibit these Special Audible Characteristics. If this is the case in the one that you are interested in then the noise limit that it must be under will be 55dBAL10.
Why is it important what zone I live in?
Because the zone you live in affects the distance that a frost fan can be installed without requiring a resource consent.
If you live in a 'Rural' zone that distance is 100 meters.
If you live in a 'Residential' zone the distance is 500 meters.
Now this will differ from district to district, because each has to make its own rules. The have to make sure those rules comply with the Resource Management Act.
The rules above are relevant to the Marlborough District Council's Proposed Wairau Awatere Resource Management Plan (It says proposed, but it's the one they use (more legal beagle machinations that can be ignored in this case).
Not it gets tricky.
To make matters more difficult there are a multitude of different zones. including 'Rural Residential'. The levels of grey can sometimes appear never ending.
The basics are still the 500 meter and 100 meter rule (in Marlborough).
Let's not forget that there are other standards that they must also meet before they can be installed! But I will have to save that for another post...
If you live in a 'Rural' zone that distance is 100 meters.
If you live in a 'Residential' zone the distance is 500 meters.
Now this will differ from district to district, because each has to make its own rules. The have to make sure those rules comply with the Resource Management Act.
The rules above are relevant to the Marlborough District Council's Proposed Wairau Awatere Resource Management Plan (It says proposed, but it's the one they use (more legal beagle machinations that can be ignored in this case).
Not it gets tricky.
To make matters more difficult there are a multitude of different zones. including 'Rural Residential'. The levels of grey can sometimes appear never ending.
The basics are still the 500 meter and 100 meter rule (in Marlborough).
Let's not forget that there are other standards that they must also meet before they can be installed! But I will have to save that for another post...
How will I typically become involved in this sort of thing?
It will depend a lot on where you live (what zone you are in (if you don't know give the council a call, they will be happy to tell you)). The obvious way is that you will be kept awake at night by the sound of a frost fan and you'll decide enough is enough. At this stage however you'll be asking yourself "What can I do?".
Then one day an application for resource consent will arrive and it will say that someone is planning to erect a frost fan close to your home.
Typically this will be within 500 meters of your house, but strangely enough even if it is closer than that the Council and the Applicant are not obliged to inform you (more on that later).
You will be able to read through the application and if you disagree with the installation you have the opportunity to submit a written statement saying so. There is an official form for replying to an application for resource consent and it will normally be included with the notification that you will have received. However you can download one from your local Council web site or pick on up from them (the Marlborough District Council has one here).
One of the most important things that you need to decide on is whether or not to appear at the Council and to speak in opposition to it. Although I will cover how this works later, let me emphasize now that in my opinion, it is important that you speak at the hearing if you oppose the installation. It is designed to be a fairly painless process and you will certainly feel better for it :-)
Then one day an application for resource consent will arrive and it will say that someone is planning to erect a frost fan close to your home.
Typically this will be within 500 meters of your house, but strangely enough even if it is closer than that the Council and the Applicant are not obliged to inform you (more on that later).
You will be able to read through the application and if you disagree with the installation you have the opportunity to submit a written statement saying so. There is an official form for replying to an application for resource consent and it will normally be included with the notification that you will have received. However you can download one from your local Council web site or pick on up from them (the Marlborough District Council has one here).
One of the most important things that you need to decide on is whether or not to appear at the Council and to speak in opposition to it. Although I will cover how this works later, let me emphasize now that in my opinion, it is important that you speak at the hearing if you oppose the installation. It is designed to be a fairly painless process and you will certainly feel better for it :-)
Wednesday, 20 August 2008
Are frost fans bad?
Definitely not.
They are (in my humble opinion) an effective form of frost control.
However, they are REALLY NOISY!
So noisy that when placed alongside people they are more than a simple nuisance, they can and do prevent sleep and adversely affect health.
The legal beagles can argue as much as they want over what constitutes a 'reasonable noise'. The fact of the matter is that some people will not be able to sleep with a wind machine rotor turning through the night outside their house (seems simple to me, but I'm a simple person).
When that person tries to function after a night of poor sleep, they will not be capable of performing to the same level.
Now that might not sound like such a big deal, but what if that person drives to work?
What if they drive a taxi or a bus?
What if they operate heavy machinery?
What if they are a surgeon operating on you?
Frost fans are not bad, but their effects can be if they are not managed properly. It's the irresponsible use management and monitoring of them that has given them a bad reputation.
They are (in my humble opinion) an effective form of frost control.
However, they are REALLY NOISY!
So noisy that when placed alongside people they are more than a simple nuisance, they can and do prevent sleep and adversely affect health.
The legal beagles can argue as much as they want over what constitutes a 'reasonable noise'. The fact of the matter is that some people will not be able to sleep with a wind machine rotor turning through the night outside their house (seems simple to me, but I'm a simple person).
When that person tries to function after a night of poor sleep, they will not be capable of performing to the same level.
Now that might not sound like such a big deal, but what if that person drives to work?
What if they drive a taxi or a bus?
What if they operate heavy machinery?
What if they are a surgeon operating on you?
Frost fans are not bad, but their effects can be if they are not managed properly. It's the irresponsible use management and monitoring of them that has given them a bad reputation.
Why a blog?
Funny you should ask.
I live in a wine producing area of New Zealand and as such my family and I are exposed to the increasing prevalence of frost fans being used to combat damage to grape vines from frosts.
Now, This is obviously not an unusual situation, but I am of the belief that there has been an over emphasis of tolerance for these machines being permitted to be co-located with residential activity.
This has caused a great deal of debate and discussion and even a bit of legal action in New Zealand (and I presume around the World) and I kind of see a blog providing a bit of an outlet for myself and maybe a source of information for others.
I live in a wine producing area of New Zealand and as such my family and I are exposed to the increasing prevalence of frost fans being used to combat damage to grape vines from frosts.
Now, This is obviously not an unusual situation, but I am of the belief that there has been an over emphasis of tolerance for these machines being permitted to be co-located with residential activity.
This has caused a great deal of debate and discussion and even a bit of legal action in New Zealand (and I presume around the World) and I kind of see a blog providing a bit of an outlet for myself and maybe a source of information for others.
Tuesday, 19 August 2008
First past the post
Ok... Since this is my first blog post, I suppose I should take the opportunity to say something witty, pithy, controversial and thought provoking....
Sadly, the only thing I can think to say is that I am glad that Blogger has a built in spell checker, otherwise the word 'controversial' above would have been a bit of a let down.
Sadly, the only thing I can think to say is that I am glad that Blogger has a built in spell checker, otherwise the word 'controversial' above would have been a bit of a let down.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)