document_title: Water fluoridation

question_text: when did they start putting fluoride in water

root

text: Water fluoridation

text: Goal

text: The goal of water fluoridation is to prevent tooth decay by adjusting the concentration of fluoride in public water supplies.[2] Tooth decay (dental caries) is one of the most prevalent chronic diseases worldwide.[23] Although it is rarely life-threatening, tooth decay can cause pain and impair eating, speaking, facial appearance, and acceptance into society,[24] and it greatly affects the quality of life of children, particularly those of low socioeconomic status.[23] In most industrialized countries, tooth decay affects 60–90% of schoolchildren and the vast majority of adults; although the problem appears to be less in Africa's developing countries, it is expected to increase in several countries there because of changing diet and inadequate fluoride exposure.[8] In the U.S., minorities and the poor both have higher rates of decayed and missing teeth,[25] and their children have less dental care.[26] Once a cavity occurs, the tooth's fate is that of repeated restorations, with estimates for the median life of an amalgam tooth filling ranging from 9 to 14 years.[27] Oral disease is the fourth most expensive disease to treat.[28] The motivation for fluoridation of salt or water is similar to that of iodized salt for the prevention of intellectual disabilitiy and goiter.[29]

tag: p

text: The goal of water fluoridation is to prevent a chronic disease whose burdens particularly fall on children and the poor.[23] Another of the goals was to bridge inequalities in dental health and dental care.[30] Some studies suggest that fluoridation reduces oral health inequalities between the rich and poor, but the evidence is limited.[3] There is anecdotal but not scientific evidence that fluoride allows more time for dental treatment by slowing the progression of tooth decay, and that it simplifies treatment by causing most cavities to occur in pits and fissures of teeth.[31] Other reviews have found not enough evidence to determine if water fluoridation reduces oral-health social disparities.[9]

text: Its use presents a conflict between the common good and individual rights.[32] It is controversial,[33] and opposition to it has been based on ethical, legal, safety, and efficacy grounds.[34] Health and dental organizations worldwide have endorsed its safety and effectiveness.[3] Its use began in 1945, following studies of children in a region where higher levels of fluoride occur naturally in the water.[35] Further research showed that moderate fluoridation prevents tooth decay.[36]

text: Implementation

text: Fluoridation does not affect the appearance, taste, or smell of drinking water.[1] It is normally accomplished by adding one of three compounds to the water: sodium fluoride, fluorosilicic acid, or sodium fluorosilicate.

text:
Sodium fluoride (NaF) was the first compound used and is the reference standard.[37] It is a white, odorless powder or crystal; the crystalline form is preferred if manual handling is used, as it minimizes dust.[38] It is more expensive than the other compounds, but is easily handled and is usually used by smaller utility companies.[39] It is toxic in gram quantities by ingestion or inhalation.[40]
Fluorosilicic acid (H2SiF6) is the most commonly used additive for water fluoridation in the United States.[41] It is an inexpensive liquid by-product of phosphate fertilizer manufacture.[37] It comes in varying strengths, typically 23–25%; because it contains so much water, shipping can be expensive.[38] It is also known as hexafluorosilicic, hexafluosilicic, hydrofluosilicic, and silicofluoric acid.[37]
Sodium fluorosilicate (Na2SiF6) is the sodium salt of fluorosilicic acid. It is a powder or very fine crystal that is easier to ship than fluorosilicic acid. It is also known as sodium silicofluoride.[38]

tag: ul

text: These compounds were chosen for their solubility, safety, availability, and low cost.[37] A 1992 census found that, for U.S. public water supply systems reporting the type of compound used, 63% of the population received water fluoridated with fluorosilicic acid, 28% with sodium fluorosilicate, and 9% with sodium fluoride.[42]

text: Recommendations

text: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed recommendations for water fluoridation that specify requirements for personnel, reporting, training, inspection, monitoring, surveillance, and actions in case of overfeed, along with technical requirements for each major compound used.[43]

text: Although fluoride was once considered an essential nutrient, the U.S. National Research Council has since removed this designation due to the lack of studies showing it is essential for human growth, though still considering fluoride a "beneficial element" due to its positive impact on oral health.[44] The European Food Safety Authority's Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) considers fluoride not to be an essential nutrient, yet, due to the beneficial effects of dietary fluoride on prevention of dental caries they have defined an Adequate Intake (AI) value for it. The AI of fluoride from all sources (including non-dietary sources) is 0.05 mg/kg body weight per day for both children and adults, including pregnant and lactating women.[45]

text: In 2011, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) lowered the recommended level of fluoride to 0.7 mg/L.[46] In 2015, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), based on the recommendation of the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) for fluoridation of community water systems, recommended that bottled water manufacturers limit fluoride in bottled water to no more than 0.7 milligrams per liter (mg/L)(milligrams per liter, equivalent to parts per million).[47]

text: Previous recommendations were based on evaluations from 1962, when the U.S. specified the optimal level of fluoride to range from 0.7 to 1.2 mg/L (milligrams per liter, equivalent to parts per million), depending on the average maximum daily air temperature; the optimal level is lower in warmer climates, where people drink more water, and is higher in cooler climates.[48]

text: These standards are not appropriate for all parts of the world, where fluoride levels might be excessive and fluoride should be removed from water, and is based on assumptions that have become obsolete with the rise of air conditioning and increased use of soft drinks, processed food, fluoridated toothpaste, and other sources of fluorides.[6] In 2011 the World Health Organization stated that 1.5 mg/L should be an absolute upper bound and that 0.5 mg/L may be an appropriate lower limit.[6] A 2007 Australian systematic review recommended a range from 0.6 to 1.1 mg/L.[11]

text: Occurrences

text: Fluoride naturally occurring in water can be above, at, or below recommended levels. Rivers and lakes generally contain fluoride levels less than 0.5 mg/L, but groundwater, particularly in volcanic or mountainous areas, can contain as much as 50 mg/L.[13] Higher concentrations of fluorine are found in alkaline volcanic, hydrothermal, sedimentary, and other rocks derived from highly evolved magmas and hydrothermal solutions, and this fluorine dissolves into nearby water as fluoride. In most drinking waters, over 95% of total fluoride is the F− ion, with the magnesium–fluoride complex (MgF+) being the next most common. Because fluoride levels in water are usually controlled by the solubility of fluorite (CaF2), high natural fluoride levels are associated with calcium-deficient, alkaline, and soft waters.[49] Defluoridation is needed when the naturally occurring fluoride level exceeds recommended limits. It can be accomplished by percolating water through granular beds of activated alumina, bone meal, bone char, or tricalcium phosphate; by coagulation with alum; or by precipitation with lime.[5]

text: Pitcher or faucet-mounted water filters do not alter fluoride content; the more-expensive reverse osmosis filters remove 65–95% of fluoride, and distillation removes all fluoride.[7] Some bottled waters contain undeclared fluoride, which can be present naturally in source waters, or if water is sourced from a public supply which has been fluoridated.[50] The FDA states that bottled water products labeled as de-ionized, purified, demineralized, or distilled have been treated in such a way that they contain no or only trace amounts of fluoride, unless they specifically list fluoride as an added ingredient.[50]

text: Evidence

text: Existing evidence suggests that water fluoridation reduces tooth decay. Consistent evidence also suggests that it causes dental fluorosis, most of which is mild and not usually of aesthetic concern.[9][11] No clear evidence of other adverse effects exists, though almost all research thereof has been of poor quality.[12]

text: Effectiveness

text: Reviews have shown that water fluoridation reduces cavities in children.[9][15][51] A conclusion for the efficacy in adults is less clear with some reviews finding benefit and others not.[9][51] Studies in the U.S. in the 1950s and 1960s showed that water fluoridation reduced childhood cavities by fifty to sixty percent, while studies in 1989 and 1990 showed lower reductions (40% and 18% respectively), likely due to increasing use of fluoride from other sources, notably toothpaste, and also the 'halo effect' of food and drink that is made in fluoridated areas and consumed in unfluoridated ones.[2]

text: A 2000 UK systematic review (York) found that water fluoridation was associated with a decreased proportion of children with cavities of 15% and with a decrease in decayed, missing, and filled primary teeth (average decreases was 2.25 teeth). The review found that the evidence was of moderate quality: few studies attempted to reduce observer bias, control for confounding factors, report variance measures, or use appropriate analysis. Although no major differences between natural and artificial fluoridation were apparent, the evidence was inadequate for a conclusion about any differences.[12] A 2007 Australian systematic review used the same inclusion criteria as York's, plus one additional study. This did not affect the York conclusions.[52] A 2011 European Commission systematic review based its efficacy on York's review conclusion.[10] A 2015 Cochrane systematic review estimated a reduction in cavities when water fluoridation was used by children who had no access to other sources of fluoride to be 35% in baby teeth and 26% in permanent teeth.[53] The evidence was of poor quality.[53]

text: Fluoride may also prevent cavities in adults of all ages. A 2007 meta-analysis by CDC researchers found that water fluoridation prevented an estimated 27% of cavities in adults, about the same fraction as prevented by exposure to any delivery method of fluoride (29% average).[54] A 2011 European Commission review found that the benefits of water fluoridation for adult in terms of reductions in decay are limited.[15] A 2015 Cochrane review found no conclusive research regarding the effectiveness of water fluoridation in adults.[53] A 2016 review found variable quality evidence that, overall, stopping of community water fluoridation programs was typically followed by an increase in cavities.[55]

text: Most countries in Europe have experienced substantial declines in cavities without the use of water fluoridation.[3] For example, in Finland and Germany, tooth decay rates remained stable or continued to decline after water fluoridation stopped. Fluoridation may be useful in the U.S. because unlike most European countries, the U.S. does not have school-based dental care, many children do not visit a dentist regularly, and for many U.S. children water fluoridation is the prime source of exposure to fluoride.[30] The effectiveness of water fluoridation can vary according to circumstances such as whether preventive dental care is free to all children.[56]

text: Fluorosis

text: Fluoride's adverse effects depend on total fluoride dosage from all sources. At the commonly recommended dosage, the only clear adverse effect is dental fluorosis, which can alter the appearance of children's teeth during tooth development; this is mostly mild and is unlikely to represent any real effect on aesthetic appearance or on public health.[11] In April 2015, recommended fluoride levels in the United States were changed to 0.7 ppm from 0.7–1.2 ppm to reduce the risk of dental fluorosis.[57] The 2015 Cochrane review estimated that for a ﬂuoride level of 0.7 ppm the percentage of participants with ﬂuorosis of aesthetic concern was approximately 12%.[53] This increases to 40% when considering ﬂuorosis of any level not of aesthetic concern.[53] In the US mild or very mild dental fluorosis has been reported in 20% of the population, moderate fluorosis in 2% and severe fluorosis in less than 1%.[57]

text: The critical period of exposure is between ages one and four years, with the risk ending around age eight. Fluorosis can be prevented by monitoring all sources of fluoride, with fluoridated water directly or indirectly responsible for an estimated 40% of risk and other sources, notably toothpaste, responsible for the remaining 60%.[58] Compared to water naturally fluoridated at 0.4 mg/L, fluoridation to 1 mg/L is estimated to cause additional fluorosis in one of every 6 people (95% CI 4–21 people), and to cause additional fluorosis of aesthetic concern in one of every 22 people (95% CI 13.6–∞ people). Here, aesthetic concern is a term used in a standardized scale based on what adolescents would find unacceptable, as measured by a 1996 study of British 14-year-olds.[12] In many industrialized countries the prevalence of fluorosis is increasing even in unfluoridated communities, mostly because of fluoride from swallowed toothpaste.[59] A 2009 systematic review indicated that fluorosis is associated with consumption of infant formula or of water added to reconstitute the formula, that the evidence was distorted by publication bias, and that the evidence that the formula's fluoride caused the fluorosis was weak.[60] In the U.S. the decline in tooth decay was accompanied by increased fluorosis in both fluoridated and unfluoridated communities; accordingly, fluoride has been reduced in various ways worldwide in infant formulas, children's toothpaste, water, and fluoride-supplement schedules.[31]

text: Safety

text: Fluoridation has little effect on risk of bone fracture (broken bones); it may result in slightly lower fracture risk than either excessively high levels of fluoridation or no fluoridation.[11] There is no clear association between fluoridation and cancer or deaths due to cancer, both for cancer in general and also specifically for bone cancer and osteosarcoma.[11][12] Other adverse effects lack sufficient evidence to reach a confident conclusion.[12]

text: Fluoride can occur naturally in water in concentrations well above recommended levels, which can have several long-term adverse effects, including severe dental fluorosis, skeletal fluorosis, and weakened bones; water utilities in the developed world reduce fluoride levels to regulated maximum levels in regions where natural levels are high, and the WHO and other groups work with countries and regions in the developing world with naturally excessive fluoride levels to achieve safe levels.[61] The World Health Organization recommends a guideline maximum fluoride value of 1.5 mg/L as a level at which fluorosis should be minimal.[62]

text: In rare cases improper implementation of water fluoridation can result in overfluoridation that causes outbreaks of acute fluoride poisoning, with symptoms that include nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. Three such outbreaks were reported in the U.S. between 1991 and 1998, caused by fluoride concentrations as high as 220 mg/L; in the 1992 Alaska outbreak, 262 people became ill and one person died.[63] In 2010, approximately 60 gallons of fluoride were released into the water supply in Asheboro, North Carolina in 90 minutes—an amount that was intended to be released in a 24-hour period.[64]

text: Like other common water additives such as chlorine, hydrofluosilicic acid and sodium silicofluoride decrease pH and cause a small increase of corrosivity, but this problem is easily addressed by increasing the pH.[65] Although it has been hypothesized that hydrofluosilicic acid and sodium silicofluoride might increase human lead uptake from water, a 2006 statistical analysis did not support concerns that these chemicals cause higher blood lead concentrations in children.[66] Trace levels of arsenic and lead may be present in fluoride compounds added to water, but no credible evidence exists that their presence is of concern: concentrations are below measurement limits.[65]

text: The effect of water fluoridation on the natural environment has been investigated, and no adverse effects have been established. Issues studied have included fluoride concentrations in groundwater and downstream rivers; lawns, gardens, and plants; consumption of plants grown in fluoridated water; air emissions; and equipment noise.[65]

text: Mechanism

text: Fluoride exerts its major effect by interfering with the demineralization mechanism of tooth decay. Tooth decay is an infectious disease, the key feature of which is an increase within dental plaque of bacteria such as Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacillus. These produce organic acids when carbohydrates, especially sugar, are eaten.[67] When enough acid is produced to lower the pH below 5.5,[68] the acid dissolves carbonated hydroxyapatite, the main component of tooth enamel, in a process known as demineralization. After the sugar is gone, some of the mineral loss can be recovered—or remineralized—from ions dissolved in the saliva. Cavities result when the rate of demineralization exceeds the rate of remineralization, typically in a process that requires many months or years.[67]

text: All fluoridation methods, including water fluoridation, create low levels of fluoride ions in saliva and plaque fluid, thus exerting a topical or surface effect. A person living in an area with fluoridated water may experience rises of fluoride concentration in saliva to about 0.04 mg/L several times during a day.[3] Technically, this fluoride does not prevent cavities but rather controls the rate at which they develop.[69] When fluoride ions are present in plaque fluid along with dissolved hydroxyapatite, and the pH is higher than 4.5,[68] a fluorapatite-like remineralized veneer is formed over the remaining surface of the enamel; this veneer is much more acid-resistant than the original hydroxyapatite, and is formed more quickly than ordinary remineralized enamel would be.[67] The cavity-prevention effect of fluoride is mostly due to these surface effects, which occur during and after tooth eruption.[70] Although some systemic (whole-body) fluoride returns to the saliva via blood plasma, and to unerupted teeth via plasma or crypt fluid, there is little data to determine what percentages of fluoride's anticavity effect comes from these systemic mechanisms.[71] Also, although fluoride affects the physiology of dental bacteria,[72] its effect on bacterial growth does not seem to be relevant to cavity prevention.[73]

text: Fluoride's effects depend on the total daily intake of fluoride from all sources.[13] About 70–90% of ingested fluoride is absorbed into the blood, where it distributes throughout the body. In infants 80–90% of absorbed fluoride is retained, with the rest excreted, mostly via urine; in adults about 60% is retained. About 99% of retained fluoride is stored in bone, teeth, and other calcium-rich areas, where excess quantities can cause fluorosis.[61] Drinking water is typically the largest source of fluoride.[13] In many industrialized countries swallowed toothpaste is the main source of fluoride exposure in unfluoridated communities.[59] Other sources include dental products other than toothpaste; air pollution from fluoride-containing coal or from phosphate fertilizers; trona, used to tenderize meat in Tanzania; and tea leaves, particularly the tea bricks favored in parts of China. High fluoride levels have been found in other foods, including barley, cassava, corn, rice, taro, yams, and fish protein concentrate. The U.S. Institute of Medicine has established Dietary Reference Intakes for fluoride: Adequate Intake values range from 0.01 mg/day for infants aged 6 months or less, to 4 mg/day for men aged 19 years and up; and the Tolerable Upper Intake Level is 0.10 mg/kg/day for infants and children through age 8 years, and 10 mg/day thereafter.[74] A rough estimate is that an adult in a temperate climate consumes 0.6 mg/day of fluoride without fluoridation, and 2 mg/day with fluoridation. However, these values differ greatly among the world's regions: for example, in Sichuan, China the average daily fluoride intake is only 0.1 mg/day in drinking water but 8.9 mg/day in food and 0.7 mg/day directly from the air due to the use of high-fluoride soft coal for cooking and drying foodstuffs indoors.[13]

text: Alternatives

text: The views on the most effective method for community prevention of tooth decay are mixed. The Australian government review states that water fluoridation is the most effective means of achieving fluoride exposure that is community-wide.[11] The European Commission review states "No obvious advantage appears in favour of water fluoridation compared with topical prevention".[15] Other fluoride therapies are also effective in preventing tooth decay;[23] they include fluoride toothpaste, mouthwash, gel, and varnish,[75] and fluoridation of salt and milk.[14] Dental sealants are effective as well,[23] with estimates of prevented cavities ranging from 33% to 86%, depending on age of sealant and type of study.[75]

text: Fluoride toothpaste is the most widely used and rigorously evaluated fluoride treatment.[14] Its introduction in the early 1970s is considered the main reason for the decline in tooth decay in industrialized countries,[3] and toothpaste appears to be the single common factor in countries where tooth decay has declined.[76] Toothpaste is the only realistic fluoride strategy in many low-income countries, where lack of infrastructure renders water or salt fluoridation infeasible.[77] It relies on individual and family behavior, and its use is less likely among lower economic classes;[14] in low-income countries it is unaffordable for the poor.[77] Fluoride toothpaste prevents about 25% of cavities in young permanent teeth, and its effectiveness is improved if higher concentrations of fluoride are used, or if the toothbrushing is supervised. Fluoride mouthwash and gel are about as effective as fluoride toothpaste; fluoride varnish prevents about 45% of cavities.[75] By comparison, brushing with a nonfluoride toothpaste has little effect on cavities.[59]

text: The effectiveness of salt fluoridation is about the same as that of water fluoridation, if most salt for human consumption is fluoridated. Fluoridated salt reaches the consumer in salt at home, in meals at school and at large kitchens, and in bread. For example, Jamaica has just one salt producer, but a complex public water supply; it started fluoridating all salt in 1987, achieving a decline in cavities. Universal salt fluoridation is also practiced in Colombia and the Swiss Canton of Vaud; in Germany fluoridated salt is widely used in households but unfluoridated salt is also available, giving consumers a choice. Concentrations of fluoride in salt range from 90 to 350 mg/kg, with studies suggesting an optimal concentration of around 250 mg/kg.[14]

text: Milk fluoridation is practiced by the Borrow Foundation in some parts of Bulgaria, Chile, Peru, Russia, Macedonia, Thailand and the UK. Depending on location, the fluoride is added to milk, to powdered milk, or to yogurt. For example, milk powder fluoridation is used in rural Chilean areas where water fluoridation is not technically feasible.[78] These programs are aimed at children, and have neither targeted nor been evaluated for adults.[14] A systematic review found low-quality evidence to support the practice, but also concluded that further studies were needed.[79]

text: Other public-health strategies to control tooth decay, such as education to change behavior and diet, have lacked impressive results.[31] Although fluoride is the only well-documented agent which controls the rate at which cavities develop, it has been suggested that adding calcium to the water would reduce cavities further.[80] Other agents to prevent tooth decay include antibacterials such as chlorhexidine and sugar substitutes such as xylitol.[75] Xylitol-sweetened chewing gum has been recommended as a supplement to fluoride and other conventional treatments if the gum is not too costly.[81] Two proposed approaches, bacteria replacement therapy (probiotics) and caries vaccine, would share water fluoridation's advantage of requiring only minimal patient compliance, but have not been proven safe and effective.[75] Other experimental approaches include fluoridated sugar, polyphenols, and casein phosphopeptide–amorphous calcium phosphate nanocomplexes.[82]

text: A 2007 Australian review concluded that water fluoridation is the most effective and socially the most equitable way to expose entire communities to fluoride's cavity-prevention effects.[11] A 2002 U.S. review estimated that sealants decreased cavities by about 60% overall, compared to about 18–50% for fluoride.[83] A 2007 Italian review suggested that water fluoridation may not be needed, particularly in the industrialized countries where cavities have become rare, and concluded that toothpaste and other topical fluoride are the best way to prevent cavities worldwide.[3] A 2004 World Health Organization review stated that water fluoridation, when it is culturally acceptable and technically feasible, has substantial advantages in preventing tooth decay, especially for subgroups at high risk.[8]

text: Usage

text: As of November 2012, a total of about 378 million people worldwide received artificially fluoridated water. The majority of those were in the United States. About 40 million worldwide received water that was naturally fluoridated to recommended levels.[17]

text: Much of the early work on establishing the connection between fluoride and dental health was performed by scientists in the U.S. during the early 20th century, and the U.S. was the first country to implement public water fluoridation on a wide scale.[16] It has been introduced to varying degrees in many countries and territories outside the U.S., including Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Hong Kong, Ireland, Israel, Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Serbia, Singapore, Spain, the UK, and Vietnam. In 2004, an estimated 13.7 million people in western Europe and 194 million in the U.S. received artificially fluoridated water.[17] In 2010, about 66% of the U.S. population was receiving fluoridated water.[84]

text: Naturally fluoridated water is used by approximately 4% of the world's population, in countries including Argentina, France, Gabon, Libya, Mexico, Senegal, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, the U.S., and Zimbabwe. In some locations, notably parts of Africa, China, and India, natural fluoridation exceeds recommended levels.[17]

text: Communities have discontinued water fluoridation in some countries, including Finland, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, and Switzerland.[33] On August 26, 2014, Israel stopped mandating fluoridation, stating "Only some 1% of the water is used for drinking, while 99% of the water is intended for other uses (industry, agriculture, flushing toilets etc.). There is also scientific evidence that fluoride in large amounts can lead to damage to health. When fluoride is supplied via drinking water, there is no control regarding the amount of fluoride actually consumed, which could lead to excessive consumption. Supply of fluoridated water forces those who do not so wish to also consume water with added fluoride. This approach is therefore not accepted in most countries in the world."[85][86] This change was often motivated by political opposition to water fluoridation, but sometimes the need for water fluoridation was met by alternative strategies. The use of fluoride in its various forms is the foundation of tooth decay prevention throughout Europe; several countries have introduced fluoridated salt, with varying success: in Switzerland and Germany, fluoridated salt represents 65% to 70% of the domestic market, while in France the market share reached 60% in 1993 but dwindled to 14% in 2009; Spain, in 1986 the second West European country to introduce fluoridation of table salt, reported a market share in 2006 of only 10%. In three other West European countries, Greece, Austria and the Netherlands, the legal framework for production and marketing of fluoridated edible salt exists. At least six Central European countries (Hungary, the Czech and Slovak Republics, Croatia, Slovenia, Romania) have shown some interest in salt fluoridation; however, significant usage of approximately 35% was only achieved in the Czech Republic. The Slovak Republic had the equipment to treat salt by 2005; in the other four countries attempts to introduce fluoridated salt were not successful.[87][88]

text: History

text: The history of water fluoridation can be divided into three periods. The first (c. 1801–1933) was research into the cause of a form of mottled tooth enamel called the Colorado brown stain. The second (c. 1933–1945) focused on the relationship between fluoride concentrations, fluorosis, and tooth decay, and established that moderate levels of fluoride prevent cavities. The third period, from 1945 on, focused on adding fluoride to community water supplies.[36]

text: In the first half of the 19th century, investigators established that fluoride occurs with varying concentrations in teeth, bone, and drinking water. In the second half they speculated that fluoride would protect against tooth decay, proposed supplementing the diet with fluoride, and observed mottled enamel (now called severe dental fluorosis) without knowing the cause.[90] In 1874, the German public health officer Carl Wilhelm Eugen Erhardt recommended potassium fluoride supplements to preserve teeth.[91][92] In 1892 the British physician James Crichton-Browne noted in an address that fluoride's absence from diets had resulted in teeth that were "peculiarly liable to decay", and who proposed "the reintroduction into our diet ... of fluorine in some suitable natural form ... to fortify the teeth of the next generation".[93]

text: The foundation of water fluoridation in the U.S. was the research of the dentist Frederick McKay (1874–1959). McKay spent thirty years investigating the cause of what was then known as the Colorado brown stain, which produced mottled but also cavity-free teeth; with the help of G.V. Black and other researchers, he established that the cause was fluoride.[94] The first report of a statistical association between the stain and lack of tooth decay was made by UK dentist Norman Ainsworth in 1925. In 1931, an Alcoa chemist, H.V. Churchill, concerned about a possible link between aluminum and staining, analyzed water from several areas where the staining was common and found that fluoride was the common factor.[95]

text: In the 1930s and early 1940s, H. Trendley Dean and colleagues at the newly created U.S. National Institutes of Health published several epidemiological studies suggesting that a fluoride concentration of about 1 mg/L was associated with substantially fewer cavities in temperate climates, and that it increased fluorosis but only to a level that was of no medical or aesthetic concern.[97] Other studies found no other significant adverse effects even in areas with fluoride levels as high as 8 mg/L.[98] To test the hypothesis that adding fluoride would prevent cavities, Dean and his colleagues conducted a controlled experiment by fluoridating the water in Grand Rapids, Michigan, starting January 25, 1945. The results, published in 1950, showed significant reduction of cavities.[35][99] Significant reductions in tooth decay were also reported by important early studies outside the U.S., including the Brantford–Sarnia–Stratford study in Canada (1945–1962), the Tiel–Culemborg study in the Netherlands (1953–1969), the Hastings study in New Zealand (1954–1970), and the Department of Health study in the U.K. (1955–1960).[95] By present-day standards these and other pioneering studies were crude, but the large reductions in cavities convinced public health professionals of the benefits of fluoridation.[30]

text: Fluoridation became an official policy of the U.S. Public Health Service by 1951, and by 1960 water fluoridation had become widely used in the U.S., reaching about 50 million people.[98] By 2006, 69.2% of the U.S. population on public water systems were receiving fluoridated water, amounting to 61.5% of the total U.S. population; 3.0% of the population on public water systems were receiving naturally occurring fluoride.[100] In some other countries the pattern was similar. New Zealand, which led the world in per-capita sugar consumption and had the world's worst teeth, began fluoridation in 1953, and by 1968 fluoridation was used by 65% of the population served by a piped water supply.[101] Fluoridation was introduced into Brazil in 1953, was regulated by federal law starting in 1974, and by 2004 was used by 71% of the population.[102] In the Republic of Ireland, fluoridation was legislated in 1960, and after a constitutional challenge the two major cities of Dublin and Cork began it in 1964;[95] fluoridation became required for all sizeable public water systems and by 1996 reached 66% of the population.[17] In other locations, fluoridation was used and then discontinued: in Kuopio, Finland, fluoridation was used for decades but was discontinued because the school dental service provided significant fluoride programs and the cavity risk was low, and in Basel, Switzerland, it was replaced with fluoridated salt.[95]

text: McKay's work had established that fluorosis occurred before tooth eruption. Dean and his colleagues assumed that fluoride's protection against cavities was also pre-eruptive, and this incorrect assumption was accepted for years. By 2000, however, the topical effects of fluoride (in both water and toothpaste) were well understood, and it had become known that a constant low level of fluoride in the mouth works best to prevent cavities.[103]

text: Economics

text: Fluoridation costs an estimated $1.04 per person-year on the average (range: $0.24–$10.96; all costs in this paragraph are for the U.S.[2] and are in 2016 dollars, inflation-adjusted from earlier estimates[4]). Larger water systems have lower per capita cost, and the cost is also affected by the number of fluoride injection points in the water system, the type of feeder and monitoring equipment, the fluoride chemical and its transportation and storage, and water plant personnel expertise.[2] In affluent countries the cost of salt fluoridation is also negligible; developing countries may find it prohibitively expensive to import the fluoride additive.[104] By comparison, fluoride toothpaste costs an estimated $9–$17 per person-year, with the incremental cost being zero for people who already brush their teeth for other reasons; and dental cleaning and application of fluoride varnish or gel costs an estimated $95 per person-year. Assuming the worst case, with the lowest estimated effectiveness and highest estimated operating costs for small cities, fluoridation costs an estimated $16–$24 per saved tooth-decay surface, which is lower than the estimated $93 to restore the surface[2] and the estimated $158 average discounted lifetime cost of the decayed surface, which includes the cost to maintain the restored tooth surface.[27] It is not known how much is spent in industrial countries to treat dental fluorosis, which is mostly due to fluoride from swallowed toothpaste.[59]

text: Although a 1989 workshop on cost-effectiveness of cavity prevention concluded that water fluoridation is one of the few public health measures that save more money than they cost, little high-quality research has been done on the cost-effectiveness and solid data are scarce.[2][48] Dental sealants are cost-effective only when applied to high-risk children and teeth.[105] A 2002 U.S. review estimated that on average, sealing first permanent molars saves costs when they are decaying faster than 0.47 surfaces per person-year whereas water fluoridation saves costs when total decay incidence exceeds 0.06 surfaces per person-year.[83] In the U.S., water fluoridation is more cost-effective than other methods to reduce tooth decay in children, and a 2008 review concluded that water fluoridation is the best tool for combating cavities in many countries, particularly among socially disadvantaged groups.[31] A 2016 review of studies published between 1995 to 2013 found that water fluoridation in the U.S. was cost-effective, and that it was more so in larger communities.[106]

text: U.S. data from 1974 to 1992 indicate that when water fluoridation is introduced into a community, there are significant decreases in the number of employees per dental firm and the number of dental firms. The data suggest that some dentists respond to the demand shock by moving to non-fluoridated areas and by retraining as specialists.[107]

text: Controversy

text: The water fluoridation controversy arises from political, moral, ethical, economic, and safety concerns regarding the fluoridation of public water supplies. Those opposed argue that water fluoridation may cause serious health problems, is not effective enough to justify the costs, and has a dosage that cannot be precisely controlled.[108][109][110][111]

text: With regard to ethics, like vaccination and food fortification, fluoridation pits the common good against individual rights.[32][112]

text: Opposition to fluoridation has existed since its initiation in the 1940s.[113] During the 1950s and 1960s, conspiracy theorists claimed that fluoridation was a communist plot to undermine American public health.[114] In recent years water fluoridation has become a pervasive health and political issue in many countries, resulting in changes to public policy regarding water fluoridation.[10][115]

text: Public health authorities find a medical consensus that water fluoridation at appropriate levels is a safe and effective means to prevent suffering and promote oral health, and generally support fluoridation.[116] Opponents of fluoridation include some researchers, dental and medical professionals, alternative medical practitioners, health food enthusiasts, a few religious groups (mostly Christian Scientists in the U.S.), and occasionally consumer groups and environmentalists.[117] Organized political opposition has come from libertarians,[118] the John Birch Society,[119] and from groups like the Green parties in the UK and New Zealand.[120]


document_title: Alpha Kappa Alpha

question_text: who are the founders of alpha kappa alpha

question_tokens: who are the founders of alpha kappa alpha

text: Alpha Kappa Alpha

text: History[edit]

text: Beginnings: 1907–1912[edit]

text: In spring 1907, Ethel Hedgeman led efforts to create a sisterhood at Howard University. Howard faculty member Ethal Robinson encouraged Hedgeman by relating her own observances of sorority life at the Women's College at Brown University, even though she was not a member of any sorority while a student at Brown.[11][12] Hedgeman was also inspired by her mentors at Howard. To implement her idea, Hedgeman began recruiting interested classmates during the summer of 1907.[13]

text: Eventually, nine women including Hedgeman were instrumental in organizing Alpha Kappa Alpha in the fall of 1907.[11][13] With Hedgeman serving as the temporary chairperson,[12] the women wrote the sorority's constitution, devised the motto, chose the favorite colors, and named the sorority Alpha Kappa Alpha.[11] Later in 1908, seven sophomore honor students expressed interest in joining and were accepted without initiation.[11][14] The first initiation was held in a wing of Miner Hall on Howard University on February 11, 1909.[15][16] On May 25, 1909, Alpha Kappa Alpha held its first "Ivy Week," a celebration that included planting ivy at Miner Hall.[17]

text: Struggles and incorporation: 1912–1913[edit]

text: Alpha Kappa Alpha continued to grow at Howard. By the end of the 1911–12 school year, there were more than twenty members of the sorority and the organization had become an influential part of student life at Howard.[18] Following the annual celebration "Ivy Day" on Howard campus in Spring 1912, founder and former Basileus Nellie Quander learned that several other newly initiated members of the sorority planned to change the colors, letters, and constitution of the sorority, and to make it more active outside Howard University. On January 13, 1913, the entire twenty-two-member undergraduate chapter voted to transform the original Alpha Kappa Alpha into Delta Sigma Theta. Quander actively worked to maintain the integrity and tenets of Alpha Kappa Alpha. She, along with the women who had become ΑΚΑs during the four years of the sorority's existence who had since graduated, elected to remain Alpha Kappa Alpha. Quander set up a three-person committee that successfully petitioned to incorporate ΑΚΑ as a perpetual entity. Alpha Kappa Alpha was nationally incorporated on January 29, 1913.[19]

text:
Alpha Kappa Alpha Officer Titles[2]

"Basileus"
President

"Anti-Basileus"
Vice-President

"Grammateus"
Recording Secretary

"Anti-Grammateus"
Assistant Secretary

"Pecunious Grammateus"
Financial Secretary

"Tamiouchos"
Treasurer

"Epistoleus"
Corresponding Secretary

"Hodegos"
Hostess

"Philacter"
Sergeant at Arms

tag: table

text: Expansion and implementation of programs: 1913–1940[edit]

text: Alpha Kappa Alpha continued to grow nationally. A second chapter at the University of Chicago was chartered in fall 1913.[21] In addition, Alpha Kappa Alpha helped to support members by providing scholarship funds for school and foreign studies.[22]

text: Alpha Kappa Alpha began to unite members at the annual Boulé, the sorority's governing body.[2] The sorority's pledge was written by Grace Edwards and was adopted by the 1920 Boulé.[1] In addition, the sorority's crest was designed by Phyllis Wheatley Waters and accepted in the same Boulé.[1] A year later, at the 1921 Boulé, the Ivy Leaf was designated as "the official organ of Alpha Kappa Alpha," and Founders' Week, paying honor to ΆKΆ's founders was established.[1][23] Pearls were first introduced to the sorority in the same year.[1] The sorority membership pin was accepted in the following Boulé in Kansas City, Missouri.[24] At the 1947 Boulé, pins for honorary members were designed and approved.[25]

text: On May 10, 1930, Alpha Kappa Alpha, along with the fraternities Kappa Alpha Psi and Omega Psi Phi and sororities Delta Sigma Theta and Zeta Phi Beta, formed the National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC) at Howard University.[26] Currently consisting of nine predominately black fraternities and sororities, NPHC promotes interaction through forums, meetings, and other mediums for the exchange of information, and engages in cooperative programming and initiatives through various activities and functions.[26]

text: Throughout the Great Migration, members assisted the Travelers Aid Society, to help thousands of Southern Blacks adjust to Northern society, find housing and navigate around the city. They also volunteered at the Freedman's Hospital.[23]

text: In April 1933, during the Great Depression, International President Ida Jackson visited All Saints Industrial School in Lexington, Mississippi. She found difficult conditions in the Mississippi Delta. Some of the teachers did not have an education past the seventh grade. African Americans were trying to make a living sharecropping on plantation land as agricultural prices continued to fall.[27][28] In summer 1934, Ida Jackson initiated the Summer School for Rural Teachers to train future teachers. She worked with a total of 22 student teachers and 243 school children. In addition, she held night classes for 48 adults.[29] By obtaining 2600 books for the school's library, Jackson made it "the largest library owned by white or colored in all Holmes County."[29]

text: In summer 1938, Ida Jackson focused on poverty and established a regional health clinic. She had acquired $1,000 from the Boulé to fund the project in December 1935.[30] The clinic evolved into the Mississippi Health Project, with Dr. Dorothy Boulding Ferebee appointed as the director.[30]

text: The Mississippi Health Project brought primary medical care to the rural Black population across the state for six summers.[31][32] The program has been recognized as the first mobile health clinic in the United States, assisting approximately 15,000 people in the Mississippi Delta.[33] The project was noted for helping to decrease cases diphtheria and smallpox in the region and to improve nutritional and dental practices throughout rural Mississippi.[34][35]

text: Led by incorporator Norma Elizabeth Boyd, the sorority created the National Non-Partisan Lobby on Civil and Democratic Rights (NPC) in 1938, later renamed the National Non-Partisan Council on Public Affairs. It was the first full-time congressional lobby for minority group civil rights.[36][37] Throughout the organization's life, the Non-Partisan Council worked with the NAACP, National Urban League, The United Office and Professional Workers of America, The National Association of Graduate Nurses, the American Federation of Churches, the Colored Women's Club, the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters and Auxiliary, and the New York Voter's League.[38] The NPC was dissolved on July 15, 1948, by twelfth Supreme Basileus Edna Over Gray-Campbell.[37][37] A year later, Alpha Kappa Alpha was the first sorority to apply for life membership in the NAACP.[39]

text: To replace the NPC, in August 1945, Alpha Kappa Alpha established the American Council on Human Rights (ACHR). The council made recommendations to the government concerning civil rights legislation.[40] The ACHR was proposed at the 1946 Boulé.[40] In October 1946, Alpha Kappa Alpha was the first sorority to obtain observer status at the United Nations.[41] On January 25, 1948, Delta Sigma Theta, Zeta Phi Beta, Sigma Gamma Rho sororities and Alpha Phi Alpha and Phi Beta Sigma fraternities were charter members of the ACHR.[42] Kappa Alpha Psi later was included in March 1949.[43][44]

text: On September 1, 1945, Alpha Kappa Alpha established The National Health Office in New York City.[33] The National Health Office coordinated activities with local chapters and worked with the ACHC to promote health initiatives before Congress, increase the number of student nurses, and improve the state of health programs at historically Black Colleges and Universities.[45] The National Health Office was dissolved in 1951, as its goals were incorporated into the sorority's international program.[46]

text: Civil rights and educational training: 1950–1970[edit]

text: Throughout the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, members helped to sponsor job training, reading enrichment, heritage and youth programs. By encouraging youth to improve math, science, and reading skills, the sorority continued a legacy of community service and pledged to enrich the lives of others. Financially, Alpha Kappa Alpha expanded funding for projects in 1953 through the creation and trademark of a fashion show called Fashionetta.[25][47] Politically, ACHR continued lobbying for equality concerning civil rights during the 1950s and 1960s. According to Collier-Thomas, the ACHR drew attention to legislation concerning education, transportation, employment, and improving equality in the armed forces and public places.[48] The ACHR participated in filing civil rights cases in amicus curiae with Bolling v. Sharpe and 1954's Brown v. Board of Education.[49] However, as a whole, ACHR voted to dissolve operations in 1963.[49]

text: Alpha Kappa Alpha contributed programs for inner city youth by capitalizing on political gains in the White House. On August 20, 1964, President Lyndon Johnson signed the Economic Opportunity Act, which allowed the creation of the Job Corps.[50] The sorority wanted to operate a job training center for students. Led by president Julia Purnell, ΆKΆ negotiated with the Office of Economic Opportunity to operate a women's center from October 1964 to January 1965.[50] Alpha Kappa Alpha was awarded a US$4 million grant to operate the Cleveland Job Corps on February 12, 1965, becoming the first sorority to operate a federal job training center.[32][50] Beginning in 1965, the Cleveland Job Corps trained female high school dropouts, aged 16 to 21, with job and educational skills. In 1976, the Cleveland Job Corps accepted males.[32] The sorority operated the Cleveland Job Corps until 1995.[51]

text: The sorority educated the community through highlighting the accomplishments of notable individuals by publishing The Heritage Series between 1968 and 1972.[16] These pamphlets were a series of biographies of top African-American women. Altogether, the entire collection contained "Women in the Judiciary," "Women in Politics," "Women in Medicine," "Women in Business," and "Women in Dentistry."[52] Alpha Kappa Alpha also donated $20,000 for preserving Martin Luther King, Jr.'s birthplace in Atlanta, Georgia, in the early 1970s.[53] In 1978, during the sorority's seventieth anniversary, the Memorial Window at Howard University was dedicated to the founders of Alpha Kappa Alpha. Surviving founders Lavinia Norman and Norma Boyd attended the celebration of unveiling the Memorial Window, designed by Lois Mailou Jones.[54]

text: Bridging toward the twenty-first century: 1980–2007[edit]

text: Soon after the sorority's 75th anniversary, Alpha Kappa Alpha contributed funds to decrease Africa's poverty with the establishment of African Village Development Program (AVDP).[55] As a conjoint program with Africare, the sorority sought to decrease poverty in African villages.[32][55] In collaboration with the International Foundation for Education and Self-Help (IFESH), the sorority built ten schools in South Africa after apartheid ended, and it donated computer technology to the region.[32][56]

text: Throughout the 1990s, the sorority continued to provide after-school mentoring programs, such as ON TRACK.[32] ON TRACK, an acronym which stands for "Organizing, Nurturing, Team building, Respecting, Achieving, Counseling and Knowing," was designed to help the progress of 20,000 third graders who were at-risk of failing their education.[57] Sponsored by Daimler Chrysler, ON TRACK was designated to "improve communication, academics, physical and emotional health, peer leadership, etiquette, and interpersonal relationships."[32][57] In addition, programs such as the Ivy Reading AKAdemy and Young Authors Program improved elementary reading comprehension skills, while P.I.M.S. highlighted programs in math and science.[32]

text:
The purpose of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority is to cultivate and encourage high scholastic and ethical standards, to promote unity and friendship among college women, to study and help alleviate problems concerning girls and women in order to improve their social stature, to maintain a progressive interest in college life, and to be of service to all mankind.

Sorority Creed[59]

tag: div

text: The sorority responded to the call for help in fall 2005 after Hurricane Katrina, by raising money for a disaster relief fund.[55] In July 2007, through Habitat for Humanity, the sorority helped build a house in New Orleans for a family that survived Hurricane Katrina.[60]

text: In addition to educational programs, Alpha Kappa Alpha contributed to drawing awareness to health-related issues, such as AIDS, sickle cell anemia, breast cancer, and the importance of staying in shape.[55][61][62] Recently, the sorority has supported the efforts of justice for the Jena Six.[63] Also, the sorority connects to the past by partnering with African Ancestry.[64] Sorority members may use African Ancestry's DNA testing to find genealogical data for themselves and their families. The purpose of the partnership is to help members trace family connections through the world as well as in Africa, to embrace African-American culture and the larger community.[65]

text: Centennial celebration: 2008[edit]

text: Alpha Kappa Alpha celebrated its centenary with a year-long commemoration in 2008. The celebration coincided with the sorority's biennial Boulé.[66] Internationally, some Alpha Kappa Alpha members began marking the festivities by making a pilgrimage to Howard University from January 12 to January 15, 2008.[66][67] The activities included sorority members financially donating $1 million in scholarship funds to Howard University,[68] contributing libraries for Middle School for Mathematics and Science and Asbury Dwelling for Senior Citizens, and unveiling a digital version of the entire Ivy Leaf publication.[69] In addition, sorority undergraduate and graduate members who were not available to attend ceremonies in Washington, D.C., held celebrations in local cities.[70][71] On July 11 to July 18, 2008, Alpha Kappa Alpha held their 63rd Boulé. A town hall meeting with the public, a unity march in conjunction with other NPHC members, and a concert featuring R&B Grammy Award winning singer Patti LaBelle were some of the events which occurred at the centennial Boulé.[72] On July 17, 2008, Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority set a Guinness World Record when 16,206 members set a record by having the largest-ever silver service sit-down dinner in a convention.[73]

text: Alpha Kappa Alpha's accomplishments were heralded by the United States Congress, with U.S. Senator Hillary Clinton and sorority member U.S. Representative Sheila Jackson-Lee, who both agreed to pass legislation in both houses of the United States Congress to commemorate the sorority's founding.[74] In addition, the toy company Mattel designed a Barbie collectible doll fashioned with a pink and green evening gown.[75][76]

text: Lawsuits, forensic audits, and IRS review of former president[edit]

text: On June 20, 2009, eight Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority members filed a complaint in D.C. Superior Court demanding that International President Barbara McKinzie be fired for improper use of sorority funds and the money be returned to the sorority.[77] The lawsuit claimed that Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Incorporated's Executive Board approved the spending of substantial amounts on McKinzie's costs of living, including commissioning an expensive wax model of McKinzie, which cost $900,000. In response, McKinzie denied the allegations, describing them as "without merit." The memberships of the eight AKAs who filed the complaint were revoked by the sorority in retaliation for the lawsuit but later forced to be reinstated by a judge.[78][79][80][81]

text: In February 2010, the Superior Court of the District of Columbia dismissed the lawsuit.[82][83] On August 18, 2011, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals reversed the previous decision.[84][85]

text: On March 22, 2012, a forensic audit of Alpha Kappa Alpha's 2010 financial records revealed troubling concerns with past president, Barbara McKinzie's development and access to a "secret" bank account. The audit of the sorority led to findings that supported the claims in the previous lawsuit. The audit also found two former officials continued to use sorority credit cards after their service ended, failing to appropriately document charges. Another lawsuit against the organization, the former president McKinzie and other officials contained similar allegations. The audit found that McKinzie and the other officials secretly created a second set of financial books to get around the sorority's accounting policies. According to the audit, "(n)early $1.7 million in payments were made to the former president, Barbara McKinzie, without authorization. Approximately $282,000 in credit card charges on a second set of books appear to be fraudulent, including personal charges the sorority wasn't reimbursed for."[86] The sorority later expelled McKinzie[87] and won an arbitration award of $ 1.6 million against her, which (as of January 2017) was challenged by McKinzie in court.[88]

text: Also the sorority's tax returns were audited by the Internal Revenue Service. As of December 2010[update] the audit was expected to be concluded sometime in January 2012.[86]

text: CSULA hazing death lawsuit[edit]

text: On September 9, 2002, pledges Kristin High (22 years old mother of one) and Kenitha Saafir (24 years old) from California State University – Los Angeles (CSULA), were pronounced dead as a result of an illegal and dangerous pledging ritual. The women were instructed by members of Alpha Kappa Alpha to perform a series of activities blindfolded on Dockweiler State Beach when a high tide came and eventually drowned both of them. The next day when sorority members brought Kristin's car and cellphone to her mother, she noticed Kristin's pledge journal always kept in her car suddenly missing and numbers deleted from her cellphone. Prior to Kristin's death, Kristin's mother encouraged her to fully disassociate herself from the sorority after Kristin discussed unsisterly behavior displayed by members of AKA such as disrespecting pledges and forcing them to run late night errands for AKA members. A year after the tragic incident, the families of the deceased settled with Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority Incorporated after filing a $100 million wrongful death lawsuit. The sorority initially denied having an active chapter at CSULA in an effort to deny responsibility for the deaths but evidence and sworn testimonies proved otherwise so the court dismissed their claim and held the whole sorority accountable.[89]

text: Alpha Chapter hazing lawsuit[edit]

text: Two Howard University seniors filed a lawsuit against Alpha Kappa Alpha Incorporated in 2013. The women accused the sorority of barring them from membership through the most prestigious chapter of the sorority, Alpha Chapter, despite being "legacies" (their mothers are Alpha Chapter initiates) and in retaliation for exposing illegal hazing. The mothers initially had their AKA memberships revoked for supporting their daughters in the litigation process against the sorority, months later a judge reinstated their memberships citing that it was illegal for AKA to revoke their paid memberships for simply filing a lawsuit against their own sorority. In the lawsuit, the two students stated as prospective members of the Alpha Chapter they were verbally abused by women of the sorority, could not wear sorority colors or any colors that could be blended into pink or green, they could not wear pearls, they were forced to run errands and buy items for sorority members, they could not publicly socialize with their non-AKA affiliated friends, they were often humiliated in front of other students, they could not eat at a popular lunch spot on campus, they could not use the same doors as sorority members, and at one point they had to call their designated "big sisters" daily or suffer some type of consequence. The women were denied their only opportunity to join the Alpha Chapter before they graduated because the chapter was suspended from bringing in new members following an investigation of hazing allegations their previous eligible years.[90]In 2015, a federal judge denied the plaintiffs' request for equitable remedies and dismissed the lawsuit.[91]

text: Membership[edit]

text: Alpha Kappa Alpha reports a membership of over 283,000 women internationally. The sorority has over 65,000 active members with many different backgrounds and professions.[3] Graduate members constitute the largest percentage of membership.[6] Alpha Kappa Alpha has 992 chapters, located in the United States, the Caribbean, Canada, and South Africa.[92]

text: The term soror, derived from the Latin for "sister",[93] is used between members of the sorority. Membership of the Directorate includes the Board of Directors. For graduate chapters, "Omega" is added to distinguish those which consist of college graduates from undergraduate chapters. "Supreme," as a term, is preposed to the title of an international officeholder, such as Supreme Basileus.[2] Deceased members are referred to as "Ivies Beyond the Wall".[2]

text: Honorary membership[94] is Alpha Kappa Alpha's highest honor.[6] For example, Jane Addams, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, is among the first honorary members.[95] Eleanor Roosevelt, a former First Lady and wife of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, was made an honorary member. United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former Senator and First Lady, and wife of President Bill Clinton, accepted honorary membership into Alpha Kappa Alpha.[96] However, Clinton later declined initiation into the organization due to the sorority's exclusive requirement preventing acceptance into other Pan-Hellenic organizations, and desired her membership in Alpha Kappa Alpha to be "non-exclusive."[96][97]

text: Membership interest and intake[edit]

text: The Ivy Leaf Pledge Club was the official pledge club of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Incorporated.[98] Potential candidates who were interested in joining the sorority would join the pledge club before being inducted into the sorority.[99]

text: In Our Kind of People: Inside America's Upper Class, Lawrence Otis Graham tells of his aunt's experience in joining the Ivy Pledge Club:

text:
“
We had to learn a lot more about the historic beginnings of the AKAs, and we did it by writing long letters of application to the Ivy Leaf Pledge Club—the senior wing of the sorority that regulated the admissions process—and then attending monthly meetings where the older students tutored us on the history.[100]
”

text: In addition, according to Graham, the sorority would have "Pledge Week", a period where a candidate's grades and behavior were reviewed by chapter members. Candidates who withstood this period were initiated into the sorority.[100] Membership interest is processed by an interest meeting, known as a "rush". After the candidate receives an official letter from the sorority, she can participate in the membership intake process. Prospective members must have a C+ average or better prior to their membership submission, as well as a record of community service. If a prospective member has graduated, that member could be invited to join the sorority at the discretion of the graduate chapter.[101]

text: Leadership: founders and executive directors[edit]

text: The leadership of the sorority in the early years was derived from three separate groups—the original group, the sophomores and the incorporators, who together were known as "The Twenty Pearls."[2][102] The Executive Director position has been held by eight members since the office's creation on October 9, 1949.[103]

text:
Original group of 1908:

Anna Easter Brown
Beulah Elizabeth Burke
Lillie Burke
Marjorie Hill
Margaret Flagg Holmes
Ethel Hedgeman Lyle
Lavinia Norman
Lucy Diggs Slowe
Marie Woolfolk Taylor

Sophomores of 1910:[14]

Norma Elizabeth Boyd
Ethel Jones Mowbray
Alice P. Murray
Sarah Meriweather Nutter
Joanna Berry Shields
Carrie Snowden
Harriet Josephine Terry

Incorporators of 1913:[104]

Nellie Quander
Julia Evangeline Brooks
Nellie Pratt Russell
Minnie B. Smith

text: Executive Directors:[105]

text:
Carey B. Maddox-Preston (1948–1974)
Anne Mitchem-Davis (1974–1980)
Earnestine G. McNealey (1980–1985)
Barbara McKinzie (1985–1987)
Nan D. Johnson (1987–1988)
Alison Harris (1989–1996)
Emma Lilly Henderson (1997–1998)
Carey B. Maddox-Preston (1998–1999)
Betty N. James (1999–2009)
Deborah Dangerfield (2009–2013)
Cynthia Howell (2013–Present)

tag: ol

text: International Presidents[edit]

text: Listed below are the twenty-nine International Presidents since the 1913 institution of the office.[106]

text:
Nellie Quander (1913)
Loraine R. Green (1919)
L. Pearl Mitchell (1923)
Pauline S. Puryear (1925)
B. Beatrix Scott (1927)
Maudelle B. Bousfield (1929)
Maude B. Porter (1931)
Ida L. Jackson (1933)
Margaret D. Bowen (1936)
Dorothy B. Ferebee (1939)
Beulah T. Whitby (1941)
Edna O. Campbell (1946)
Laura Lovelace (1949)
Arnetta G. Wallace (1953)
Marjorie H. Parker (1958)
Julia B. Purnell (1962)
Larzette Hale (1966)
Mattelia B. Grays (1970)
Bernice I. Sumlin (1974)
Barbara K. Phillips (1978)
Faye B. Bryant (1982)
Janet Jones Ballard (1986)
Mary Shy Scott (1990)
Eva L. Evans (1994)
Norma S. White (1998)
Linda White (2002)
Barbara A. McKinzie (2006)
Carolyn House Stewart (2010)[107]
Dorothy Buckhanan Wilson (2014)[108]

text: Boulé[edit]

text: The Boulé[A] is the regulating institution of the sorority and currently meets every two years.[2] Throughout the years, notable individuals such as civil rights activists Martin Luther King, Jr. and Roy Wilkins were speakers at past Boulé conferences.[16]

text: Regions[edit]

text: After the establishment of 32 graduate and undergraduate chapters in 1924, Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority organized chapters according to their regions in the United States and abroad. The Boulé determines the boundaries of the regions.[110] The ten regions are each led by a regional director, where she serves a member of the sorority's Board of Directors. In addition to serving on the sorority's Board of Directors, the regional director also follows guidelines, program targets set by the International President, as well as procedures.[110] Almost two-thirds of the sorority's regional directors have been elected international presidents.[110] A comprehensive list of regions is shown below:

text:
Far-Western
Mid-Western
South Central
Central
South Eastern

South Atlantic
Mid-Atlantic
North Atlantic
Great Lakes
International

text: National programs[edit]

text: Educational Advancement Foundation[edit]

text: Alpha Kappa Alpha's Educational Advancement Foundation (EAF) is a separate and tax-exempt branch of the sorority, which "provide[s] financial support to individuals and organizations engaged in lifelong learning."[111] The foundation awards academic scholarships (for undergraduate members of the sorority, as well as non-members), fellowships, and grants for community service.[112]

text: History and donations[edit]

text: The foundation was the brainchild of Constance Holland, the sister of former Alpha Kappa Alpha International President Dr. Barbara Phillips, in 1978. The foundation had official beginnings in 1980 and the sorority donated US$10,000 for the project. Eight years later, the organization first awarded $10,000 to fourteen students. In 1991, EAF first awarded mini-grants to community organizations. In 1998, EAF provided the first Youth Partners Accessing Capital (PAC) award to an undergraduate member.

text: At the organization's twentieth anniversary in 2000, EAF published Perpetuating Our Posterity: A Blueprint for Excellence. The book served as a comprehensive history of the organization and as a source of advice for other beginning philanthropies. EAF went online with a website in 2003.

text: The organization celebrated a silver anniversary in Nassau, Bahamas, in 2005. EAF is incorporated into International President Barbara A. McKinzie's centennial program for funding under Excellent Scholarly Performance. Overall, EAF has donated more than $200,000 in grants and awarded 1,400 students with scholarships.[113] Other major donors to EAF include Continental Airlines and Northern Trust.[114]

text: Projects[edit]

text:
Advocates for Black Colleges – The purpose of the Advocates for Black Colleges is to raise $100,000 for a selected historically black college and university, to support the institution's scholarships and program grants. Corporations as well as minority graduates of historically black colleges are encouraged to donate funds as well. The first college receiving aid is Stillman College in Tuscaloosa, Alabama.[115]
Howard University Fund – Alpha Kappa Alpha is celebrating the centennial of the sorority's founding by donating $2 million to Howard University though two facets. First, the Moorland-Spingarn Research Center houses the historical artifacts, photographs, documents, and recordings of Alpha Kappa Alpha's contributions to community service. One million dollars will be used to improve Alpha Kappa Alpha's archives. In addition, one million dollars will be donated to the Nellie M. Quander Scholarship Fund. The fund will be used to finance partial or full scholarships for Howard University women in their junior and senior years.[115]
Chapter Scholarships – Undergraduate and graduate members of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority's chapters send separate dues to the Educational Advancement Foundation to fund local scholarships.[115][116] Depending on the size of the contributions by the chapter, the scholarships generally range from $100 to $500. For a chapter to donate under the EAF's Endowment Fund, a chapter needs to raise $20,000.[117]

text: The Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority Traveling Exhibit chronicles achievements of Alpha Kappa Alpha members through the organization's one-hundred years. The exhibit appears in several cities across the nation from 2006 to 2008.[118]

text: Ivy Acres[edit]

text: Ivy Acres will be a retirement center located in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. The retirement center is sponsored by Senior Residences, Incorporated, a subsidiary of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority.[119] Ivy Acres will be one of the first retirement centers founded by African-Americans and minorities in the United States. It will offer assisted or individual living for individuals who are over fifty-five, regardless of background, ethnicity or religion.[119][120] Barbara K. Phillips, former Vice-President and Project Coordinator for Senior Residences, Incorporated, explains the purpose of Ivy Acres, "We determined that there is a need out there, but this will be open to all. We want to be diverse, we want to be multicultural. Anyone who wants to come will be welcome."[119]

text: The gated community will be located on a 48-acre (190,000 m2) site. The planning for Ivy Acres cost approximately $32 million USD.[119] In addition, according to Business Wire, Ivy Acres will comprise "188 independent residential units, which will be both apartments and cottages, forty assisted-living apartments and twenty private accommodations for skilled nursing care."[119] Residents are expected to pay $1,890 to $2,890 per month for services.[119]

text: Ivy Reading AKAdemy[edit]

text: The Ivy Reading AKAdemy provides programs that encourage the entire community to become involved. The concept serves as an educational and human resource center for programs provided by Alpha Kappa Alpha. Working with No Child Left Behind in mind, "The Ivy Reading AKAdemy," a reading initiative, focuses on early learning and mastery of basic reading skills by the end of third grade. The Ivy Reading AKAdemy has a $1.5 million proposal pending with the United States Department of Education to fund a three-year nationwide after-school demonstration project in low-performing, economically deprived inner city schools in 16 sites within the continental United States.[32]

text: Leadership Fellows Program[edit]

text: The Leadership Fellows Program is a fully funded event in which thirty Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority sophomore and junior undergraduate members worldwide are individually trained for professional leadership roles. In addition, the fellows contribute to community service for one week. One of the selection criteria is that members must have at least a 3.0 GPA.[121] The program initially was planned in 1978. In the following year, the first program was held in Indiana with twenty-nine students.[32] Various cities around the United States have held the Leadership Fellows Program. In the past, Alpha Kappa Alpha has sponsored the event through the Educational Advancement Foundation. Also, the program has been financed by Pillsbury, Tyson Foods, Johnson & Johnson, and most recently General Electric.[122][123][124]

text: Partnerships in Mathematics and Science[edit]

text: Partnerships in Mathematics and Science (PIMS) began in Eva Evans's administration in 1994, and was a part of the SPIRIT program during the Linda White administration.[125] Eva Evans mentioned the need for a math and science program, "As a college sorority, we've always advanced an educational agenda. We always had high GPA requirements. And more than ever, we're pushing the importance of math and science for our girls. We need more black women in those fields."[126] The program's purpose is to increase the successes of youth in mathematics and science, as well as technology. Campaigns to highlight the program's importance were sponsored by the National Science Foundation and historically black colleges from across the country.[125] Several chapters provided two-week math and science summer camps on college and day school campuses, which consisted of hands-on-learning through laboratory interactions, field trips to important sites, youth camps, and speeches from influential experts in specific areas of studies.[32][57] For example, a PIMS program at Park Street Elementary School in Marietta, Georgia, consisted of third through fifth grade girls and provided educational field trips in order to stimulate involvement in math and science.[115][127] Also, a national P.I.M.S. Olympiad, deriving from knowledge of math and science, in conjunction with the PIMS Community Parade was held at the 58th Boulé in Dallas, Texas.[32][57]

text: Young Authors Program[edit]

text: In Linda White's administrations, the Young Authors Program was born. The purpose of the program is to encourage and raise involvement in reading and writing in kindergarten through third grade school children. Each of the ten regions in the sorority had the opportunity to choose a child's story to be published in a two volume anthology entitled, The Spirit Within: Voices of Young Authors.[32] In 2004, twenty children were honored in the first anthology.[128] The authors were recognized and performed book signings in the 2004 and 2006 Boulés.[32] At the 2004 Boulé in Nashville, Tennessee, former Department of Education Secretary Rod Paige attended. On July 15, 2004, First Lady Laura Bush spoke on the Ivy AKAdemy's dedication to reading initiatives, "Teaching our children to read is the most critical educational priority facing our country. Children who do not learn to read by third grade continue to find reading a challenge throughout their lives. These expectations increase in amount and complexity each year."[128][129]

text: Legacy[edit]

text: The sorority is featured on the documentary series Profiles of African-American Success.


document_title: Wind power in India

question_text: name two places where wind energy power plants are situated in india

text: Wind power in India

text: Installed capacity[edit]

text: The table below shows the India's year on year installed wind power, annual wind power generation and annual growth in wind power generation since 2006.[7]

text:
Installed wind power capacity and generation in India since 2007

Financial year

06-07
07-08
08-09
09-10
10-11
11-12
12-13
13-14
14-15
15-16
16-17
17-18

Installed capacity (MW)

7,850
9,587
10,925
13,064
16,084
18,421
20,150
22,465
23,447
26,777
32,280
34,046[8]

Generation (GWh)

28,214
28,604
46,011
52,666

text: History[edit]

text:
Installed Wind Power Capacity

Fiscal

Year End Cumulative Capacity (in MW)

2005

6,270

2006

7,850

2007

9,587

2008

10,925

2009

13,064

2010

16,084

2011

18,421

2012

20,149

2013

21,264

2014

23,354

2015

26,769

2016

32,280

2017

34,046

text: Development of wind power in India began in December 1952, when Maneklal Sankalchand Thacker, a distinguished power engineer, initiated a project with the Indian Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) to explore the possibilities of harnessing wind power in the country.[9] The CSIR established a Wind Power Sub-Committee under P. Nilakantan, which was assigned the task of investigating the available resources that could be practically utilized, along with researching the economic possibilities of wind energy.[10] With assistance from the Indian Meteorological Department, the Sub-Committee extensively reviewed available data on surface winds in India and their velocity duration, and began detailed surveys of promising sites for harnessing the optimum amount of wind energy; it also successfully developed and tested large wood-and-bamboo windmills.

text: In September 1954, a Symposium on Solar Energy and Wind Power organised by the CSIR and UNESCO was held in New Delhi; among the attendees was E. W. Golding, a British power engineer and authority on wind energy generation.[9] Convinced of the potential of wind power in India, he recommended continued and extensive wind velocity surveys in different regions of India, the full-time assignment of staff to experimental wind power studies, the establishment of a dedicated research laboratory and development of small to medium-sized wind-powered electrical generators. Golding's recommendations were adopted by the CSIR in 1957.[9] By this time, regions of Saurashtra and around Coimbatore had been identified as promising sites for generating electricity from wind power, and the Wind Power Sub-Committee had begun to erect 20 wind velocity survey stations across India, in addition to testing its indigenously designed windmills and obtaining a 6 kw. Allgaier wind turbine, which was presented to India by the West German government; experiments at Porbandar with the latter had commenced by 1961.[10][9] The Indian government also considered a proposal to erect over 20,000 small to medium-sized wind-powered electrical generators in rural districts, to be used for powering water pumps and supplying electricity for remotely situated structures such as lighthouses.[10]

text: In 1960, the CSIR established a Wind Power Division as part of the new National Aeronautical Laboratory (NAL) in Bangalore, which was founded that year.[9] From the 1960s into the 1980s, the NAL and other groups continued to carry out wind velocity surveys and develop improved estimates of India's wind energy capacity.[11] Large-scale development of wind power began in 1986 with the first wind farms being set up in coastal areas of Maharashtra (Ratnagiri), Gujarat (Okha) and Tamil Nadu (Tirunelveli) with 55 kW Vestas wind turbines. These demonstration projects were supported by the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE).

text:
The potential for wind farms in the country was first assessed in 2011 to be more than 2,000 GW by Prof. Jami Hossain of TERI University, New Delhi.[12]
This was subsequently re-validated by Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory, US (LBNL) in an independent study in 2012.
As a result, the MNRE set up a committee to reassess the potential[13] and through the National Institute of Wind Energy (NIWE, previously C-WET) has announced a revised estimation of the potential wind resource in India from 49,130 MW to 302,000 MW assessed at 100 m hub height.[14] Wind turbines are now being set up at even 120 m hub height and the wind resource at higher hub heights of around 120 m or more that are prevailing is possibly even more.

text: In 2015, the MNRE set the target for Wind Power generation capacity by the year 2022 at 60,000 MW.[1][15]

text: East and North east regions have no grid connected wind power plant as of December 2017.

text:
No offshore wind farm is under implementation as of December 2017.[16]
However, an Offshore Wind Policy was announced in 2015 and presently weather stations and LIDARs are being set up by NIWE at some locations.[17]
The first offshore wind farm is planned near Dhanushkodi in Tamil Nadu.[18]

text: Electricity generation[edit]

text:
Wind power accounts for nearly 10% of India's total installed power generation capacity and generated 52.67 TWh in the fiscal year 2017-18, which is nearly 3% of total electricity generation.[19] The capacity utilisation factor is nearly 16%  in the fiscal year 2017-18 (19.62% in 2016-17 and  14% in 2015-16). 70% of wind generation is during the five months duration from May to September coinciding with Southwest monsoon duration.
In India, solar power is complementary to wind power as it is generated mostly during the non monsoon period in daytime.[20]

text:
Monthly Electricity Generation in India April, 2017 - March, 2018[21]

Month
North
West
South
East
North East
Total (GWh)[19]

April 2017
683.42
1,969.05
937.55
-
-
3,590.03

May 2017
717.09
2,473.51
1,792.32
-
-
4,982.92

June 2017
819.78
2,688.93
3,720.42
-
-
7,229.12

July 2017
719.68
3,793.41
5,341.25
-
-
9,858.30

August 2017
833.87
2,466.19
4,212.02
-
-
7,512.16

September 2017
399.34
983.83
2,513.94
-
-
3,897.08

October 2017
207.32
700.08
1,966.15
-
-
2,873.55

November 2017
230.64
884.86
1,320.38
-
-
2,435.91

December 2017
410.07
1,510.46
1,179.33
-
-
3,099.86

January 2018
-
-
-
-
-
2,007.53

February 2018
279.42
778.29
1,211.62
-
-
2,272.87

March 2018
357.52
1,303.87
1,245.37
-
-
2,906.76

Total (GWh)
-
-
-
-
-
52,666.09

text: Wind power by state[edit]

text: There is a growing number of wind energy installations in states across India.

text:
Installed wind capacity by state as of 31 March 2018[3]

State

Total Capacity (MW)

Tamil Nadu

8,197

Gujarat

5,613

Maharashtra

4,784

Karnataka

4,509

Rajasthan

4,298

Andhra Pradesh

3,963

Madhya Pradesh

2,520

Telangana

101

Kerala

53

Others

4

Total
34,043

text: Tamil Nadu[edit]

text:
Tamil Nadu's wind power capacity is around 29% of India's total.[when?]
The Government of Tamil Nadu realized the importance and need for renewable energy, and set up a separate Agency, as registered society, called the Tamil Nadu Energy Development Agency (TEDA) as early as 1985.
Now,[when?] Tamil Nadu has become a leader in Wind Power in India.
In Muppandal windfarm the total capacity is 1500 MW, the largest wind power plant in India. The total wind installed capacity in Tamil Nadu is 7633 MW.[22]
During the fiscal year 2014-15, the electricity generation is 9.521 GWh, with about a 15% capacity utilization factor.[23]

text: Maharashtra[edit]

text: Maharashtra is one of the prominent states that installed wind power projects second to Tamil Nadu in India. As of end of March 2016, installed wind power capacity is 4655.25 MW[citation needed]. As of now[when?] there are 50 developers registered with state nodal agency "Maharashtra energy Development Agency" for development of wind power projects. All the major manufacturers of wind turbines including Suzlon, Vestas, Gamesa, Regen, Leitner Shriram have presence in Maharashtra.

text: Gujarat[edit]

text: Gujarat government's focus on tapping renewable energy has led to sharp rise in the wind power capacity in the last few years. According to official data, wind power generations capacity in the state has increased a staggering ten times in just six years. ONGC Ltd. has installed a 51MW wind energy farm at Bhuj in Gujarat. Renewable energy projects worth a massive Rs 1 lakh crore of memorandums of understanding (MoUs) in the Vibrant Gujarat Summit in 2017.[24]

text: Rajasthan[edit]

text: 4031.99 MW wind power installed as per 31.03.2016.[citation needed]

text: Madhya Pradesh[edit]

text: In consideration of unique concept, Govt. of Madhya Pradesh has sanctioned another 15 MW project to Madhya Pradesh Windfarms Ltd. MPWL, Bhopal at Nagda Hills near Dewas under consultation from Consolidated Energy Consultants Ltd. CECL Bhopal. All the 25 WEGs have been commissioned on 31.03.2008 and under successful operation.[25]

text: Kerala[edit]

text: 55 MW production of wind power is installed in Kerala. The first wind farm of the state was set up 1997[when?] at Kanjikode in Palakkad district.[citation needed]

text: The agency has identified 16 sites for setting up wind farms through private developers.[citation needed]

text: Odisha[edit]

text: Odisha a coastal state has higher potential for wind energy. Current installation capacity stands at 2.0 MW. Odisha has a windpower potential of 1700MW. The Govt of Odisha is actively pursuing to boost Wind power generation in the state. however it has not progressed like other states primarily because Odisha having a huge coal reserve and number of existing and upcoming thermal power plants, is a power surplus state.[26]

text: West Bengal[edit]

text: The total installation in West Bengal is 2.10 MW till Dec 2009 at Fraserganj, Distt- South 24 Paraganas. More 0.5 MW (approx) at Ganga Sagar, Kakdwip, Distt - South 24 Paraganas. Both the project owned by West Bengal Renewable Energy Development Agency (WBREDA), Govt. of WB and project was executed on turnkey basis by Utility Powertech Limited (UPL).[citation needed]

text: Jammu and Kashmir[edit]

text: The Kargil, Ladakh,  occupied Gilgit and China occupied Aksai Chin regions of Jammu and Kashmir state are potential wind energy areas, which are yet to be exploited.[14] Wind Speeds are higher during the winter months in the state, which is complimentary to the hydro power available during the summer months from the snow melt water. Being a Himalayan state located at higher altitude, the heating energy requirements are high which can be met by the renewable energy resources such as wind, solar and hydro power. The state is yet to open its account in grid connected wind power installations.

text: Projects[edit]

text: India's largest wind power production facilities (10MW and greater)[27]

text:
Rank
Power plant
Producer
Location
State
MWe

1
Muppandal windfarm[28]
Muppandal Wind
Kanyakumari
Tamil Nadu
1500

2
Jaisalmer Wind Park[29]
Suzlon Energy
Jaisalmer
Rajasthan
1064

3
Brahmanvel windfarm[30]
Parakh Agro Industries
Dhule
Maharashtra
528

4
Dhalgaon windfarm[31]
Gadre Marine Exports
Sangli
Maharashtra
278

5
Vankusawade Wind Park
Suzlon Energy Ltd.
Satara District.
Maharashtra
259

6
Vaspet
ReNew Power
Vaspet
Maharashtra
144

7
Beluguppa Wind Park
Orange Renewable
Beluguppa
Andhra Pradesh
100.8

8
Mamatkheda Wind Park
Orange Renewable
Mamatkheda
Madhya Pradesh
100.5

9
Anantapur Wind Park
Orange Renewable
Nimbagallu
Andhra Pradesh
100

10
Damanjodi Wind Power Plant
Suzlon Energy Ltd.
Damanjodi
Odisha
99

11
Jath
ReNew Power
Jath
Maharashtra
84

12
Welturi
ReNew Power
Welturi
Maharashtra
75

13
Acciona Tuppadahalli
Tuppadahalli Energy India Pvt Ltd
Chitradurga District
Karnataka
56.1

14
Dangiri Wind Farm
Oil India Ltd.
Jaiselmer
Rajasthan
54

15
Bercha Wind Park
Orange Renewable
Ratlam
Madhya Pradesh
50

16
Cape Comorin
Aban Loyd Chiles Offshore Ltd.
Kanyakumari
Tamil Nadu
33

17
Kayathar Subhash
Subhash Ltd.
Kayathar
Tamil Nadu
30

18
Jasdan
ReNew Power
Jasdan
Gujarat
25.2

19
Ramakkalmedu
Subhash Ltd.
Ramakkalmedu
Kerala
25

20
Gudimangalam
Gudimangalam Wind Farm
Gudimangalam
Tamil Nadu
21

21
Shalivahana Wind
Shalivahana Green Energy. Ltd.
Tirupur
Tamil Nadu
20.4[32]

22
Puthlur RCI
Wescare (India) Ltd.
Puthlur
Andhra Pradesh
20

23
Lamda Danida
Danida India Ltd.
Lamba
Gujarat
15

24
Chennai Mohan
Mohan Breweries & Distilleries
Chennai
Tamil Nadu
15

25
Shah Gajendragarh
MMTCL
Gadag
Karnataka
15

26
Jamgudrani MP
MP Windfarms Ltd.
Dewas
Madhya Pradesh
14

27
Jogmatti BSES
BSES Ltd.
Chitradurga District
Karnataka
14

28
Perungudi Newam
Newam Power Company Ltd.
Perungudi
Tamil Nadu
12

29
Kethanur Wind Farm
Kethanur Wind Farm
Kethanur
Tamil Nadu
11

30
Shah Gajendragarh
Sanjay D. Ghodawat
Gadag
Karnataka
10.8

31
Hyderabad TSRTC
Telangana SRTC
Hyderabad
Telangana
10

32
Muppandal Madras
Madras Cements Ltd.
Muppandal
Tamil Nadu
10

34
Poolavadi Chettinad
Chettinad Cement Corp. Ltd.
Poolavadi
Tamil Nadu
10

text: Offshore wind power plants[edit]

text: India started planning in 2010 to enter into offshore wind power,[33] and a 100 MW demonstration plant located off the Gujarat coast began planning in 2014.[34]   In 2013, a consortium (instead of group of organizations), led by Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC) started project FOWIND (Facilitating Offshore Wind in India) to identify potential zones for development of off-shore wind power in India and to stimulate R & D activities in this area.[35] The other consortium partners include the Centre for Study of Science, Technology and Policy (CSTEP), DNV GL, the Gujarat Power Corporation Limited (GPCL) and the World Institute of Sustainable Energy (WISE). The consortium was awarded the grant of €4.0 million by the delegation of the European Union to India in 2013 besides co-funding support from GPCL. The project action will be implemented from December 2013 to March 2018.

text:
The project focuses on the States of Gujarat and Tamil Nadu for identification of potential zones for development through techno-commercial analysis and preliminary resource assessment. It will also establish a platform for structural collaboration and knowledge sharing between stakeholders from European Union and India, on offshore wind technology, policy, regulation, industry and human resource development. FOWIND activities will also help facilitate a platform to stimulate offshore wind related R&D activities in the country. The consortium published initial pre-feasibility assessment reports for offshore wind farm development in Gujarat and Tamil Nadu on 16 June 2015.[36][37]
In September 2015, the India's cabinet has approved the National Offshore Wind Energy Policy. With this, the Ministry of New & Renewable Energy (MNRE) has been authorized as the Nodal Ministry for use of offshore areas within the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)[38]

text: India seems pacing up rapidly towards offshore wind energy development as the Nodal Ministry (MNRE) & Nodal Agency (NIWE) calls with the Expression of Interest (EoI) [39] inviting the bidders for development of first 1000MW commercial scale offshore windfarm in India, near the coast of Gujarat. The EoI published on 16th Apr 2018, specifies the proposed area identified under the FOWIND & FOWPI study funded by European Union. The proposed location of the offshore windfarm could be 23-40km off the coast from the Pipavav port, Gulf of Khambhat. The proposed area covers about 400sq km. The wind measurements & other data collection are under progress under the supervision of NIWE.