2
The safety zone should not be reduced or compensated by any fire suppression or automatic failure reducing gadgetry. This equipment
can fail. The hazard zone is established by the manufacturer as a passive safety measure in the event of total catastrophic failure.
Suppression methods and damage control methods (such as on site water supply) should be added to this passive safety measure. If
your car is equipped with an airbag, it doesn't mean you should drive faster and more recklessly. The goal is to reduce overall injuries to
ZERO - not to have one safety measure substitute for another.
"Fires and accidents rarely happen" is not an acceptable way of thinking. Most of us drive airbag equipped cars. The reason we have
airbags is because they are proven to reduce injury and they are there if we need them.
Allowing a wind project within the hazard zone of a residential area would be no different than ordering a new car with no airbags and
hoping for the best.
I don't see how this can be interpreted in any other way. This is clearly safety/hazard issue, not simply a nuisance issue. Further, this
Nordex manual does not take into consideration the heavily wooded site in Douglas. A burning turbine projectile flying 1640 feet could
likely start a forest fire wherever it lands.
Attached is the Vestas Safety Manual for your reference. You already have the Nordex manual.
Best regards,
Chad Pepin
--
