Pro wind farms. Let's be "for" something for a change!
Government seriously considering u-turn on wind; wind companies' investment on hold due to uncertainty; well-funded anti-campaigns. Is the viability of life on earth more important than a view?
Herbert Eppel commented
Jazz, with regard to your comment on "greenies (read, wet behind the ears) want to take the UK back to pre-industrial days", which I received my e-mail but which doesn't appear to have made it onto the website yet (or perhaps you saw sense and deleted it?), see http://prowa.org.uk/files/Mercury_FirstPerson_HE_6March09.jpg
Wendé Anne Maunder commented
I'm very for this already and I agree absolutely and completely with Lynn Davies and all the negative comments, quite frankly, shock me.
Jessy - I used to play a game, timing every anti-windfarm idiot I talked to to see how long they could go without mentioning Jane and Julian Davis. I also kept a tally of anti-windfarm frauds who claimed to have been to the Davises' place at Deeping St Nicholas and to have "heard" the turbines, when they quite clearly hadn't. So, for the record - the Davises claimed to have heard the turbines when they weren't even operational. They claimed to have heard them when they were more than five miles away. They claimed to have been forced to leave their home - while their in-laws remained living in the same property. Their local council sent acoustic engineers and noise officers to spend upwards of three weeks at the Davis property, night and day, during which time they were completely unable to hear, trace or record any sound from the turbines. Are you surprised that the Davises settled out-of-court? If they'd had a strong enough case, they'd have won.
In terms of acoustics, wind turbines are relatively simple. At 300 metres, they are no louder than a domestic fridge. So stop trying to spread your brainless scare stories. Do some proper research. Or failing that, why don't you just stay in the echo-chamber with your fellow fanatics and stop trying to brainwash those of us who know a damn sight better. Why do you NIMBYs believe that you have the right to try and shout down people who actually have a conscience? Is it because you're terrified that, without your incessant flood of false facts and misinformation, Britain might actually make some progress? Or are you simply incapable of admitting that you are wrong?
Dear Anonymous - if that is the level of your knowledge on the subject, god help us.
Wind energy can NEVER replace, coal, gas or nuclear. As for Japan, the tsunami killed
a lot of people. However, the old nuclear station killed none, despite its age
I would rather have wind or solar than nuclear, those against wind need to look at what happened in Japan last year.
Hazel Buswell commented
I am in favour of wind farms, all proposed wind farms and this campaign.
Lynn - have checked out your Shropshire "wind farm" - 2 x 73m turbines. First of all, I wouldn't think those particular turbines will matter much soon, against the string of giant pylons planned to bring the (small amount) of electricity produced by many planned wind farms in Wales over to England (via Shropshire) - thousands of "NIMBYS" in Wales are demonstrating about the devastation to landscape and environment there. Secondly, most "NIMBYS" are concerned with the big wind farms - over 126.5m turbines. Have you heard of The Isles project? 45 huge turbines up in County Durham, which by the way, is no longer called the Land of the Bishops but the Land of the Turbines. Guess they won't be noisy either?
Oh and Lynn, it is reported in the Times today that by 2020 the government will be handing over £100 million a year in rent to landowners (mostly the aristocracy) including David Cameron's father-in-law) simply for the right to put wind turbines on their turf. Do the peasants/NIMBYS I should say not have the right to object?
I have noticed that mostly you do not answer any questions I ask and then just call me a NIMBY again! First of all did you check out about the sea eagles? Did you answer how at present we are going to export wind energy?
Our "Byzantine" planning process has been the envy of the world but if this government continue then that is set to change so you will be happy with that. We have managed to protect the countryside to some degree so far. Perhaps you would like the diplomacy of China or somewhere similar where local people have no say whatsover and, to be fair, are too busy trying to survive each day to care.
Really, I am not talking here about community owned wind farms - they may have a small place (by the way how big were these turbines?) and are still heavily subsidised and only work when the wind blows etc etc. I am talking about the foreign owned multinational companies who are out to make profit only. They are the ones going door to door asking farmers and landowners to sign contracts ("grab and hold" land). They are, I have to say, getting desperate as all the more windy places have gone so now they are concentrating on the not so windy areas as it really doesn't matter to them, the subsidies are still there.
How funny - after all your research, don't you know that noise from industrial wind farms is INCREDIBLY complicated? It really isn't as simple as standing beneath, or indeed inside one. It is known that some people will be unaffected by the noise but many are. The internet is littered with personal stories of complete distress - are they ALL liars/NIMBYS/backed by the oil/gas/nuclear industry?
Here is just one article for you http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/windpower/8901431/Switch-off-for-noisy-wind-farms.html
Similarly perhaps you could google Jane and Julian Davis who had to abandon their home because of noise. I am sure they would love to hear you say wind farms aren't noisy. They went to court and have settled out of court but silenced from talking about it. Interestingly, they did not complain about the wind farm initially - believing it to be "green".
And if noise isn't a problem please tell me what you deduce from your research regarding Australia? There, they ARE imposing minimal distances because of adverse health effects. Of course, Australia is a big country, unlike England and they can protect their residents (or should I call them NIMBYS?) unlike here which should show that rural England is totally unsuitable for huge wind farms.
As for the ASA - many groups HAVE taken out successful "claims" against wind farm companies.
I am not a landowner, I live in a small village. I do not have a view. To be honest, the view is the last of my worries. Perhaps I should remind you that the coutryside is for ALL of us, not just the ones who live in it. There are many people who live in cities who depend upon their visits to the countryside or the hills to recharge their batteries. Seeing 32,000 turbines plus pylons may upset them a bit too.
"It would be an act of national insanity to undermine this elegant, efficient, rational, attractive, safe, clean and economically competitive resource just because a few liars don't like them".
If you have done your research Lynn, you will surely know that every single adjective describing wind farms here can be disputed! Don't know where you get your research from - must be RenewableUK or WWF or Greenpeace etc etc!!!
As far as I know, the "rest of the world" are waking up big time to the ineffectiveness of wind energy at last and starting to turn their backs on it except Germany of course which is a different story. They are encountering their own problems.
As for your children and grandchildren, I would be more concerned about how they are going to be fed. Once those 32,000 turbines go up with their accompanying infrastructure, especially the concrete they stand on, the land is ruined and then designated brownfield. These turbines are going up on prime agricultural land often. Population growth is demanding more and more food and energy. Which one will win out I wonder?
Having had the misfortune of living through a NIMBY nightmare, I can assure you, Jessy, that the wind farm developers played by the rules throughout. A tiny cabal of locals (most of them newcomers to the village) decided however to oppose the plans. They published a whole pack of lies (which they called "FACTS") designed only to terrify their neighbours. They formed an noisy and aggressive mob which regularly and repeatedly disrupted parish council meetings, finally forcing one parish council to resign (this allowed them to pack it with their own NIMBY activists). Locals who disagreed with their tactics or claims were threatened and abused. One lifelong resident - a retired schoolteacher - complained to me that the NIMBYs had instigated "mob rule". They were, in her words, "rabid". They had harrassed and victimised her because she had visited several wind farms in France, spending time at each one to get the feel of the place, and came back with the news that wind farms are not "noisy" (and, indeed, they're not) and are actually quite pleasant places. Of course, no one was allowed to challenge the NIMBY lie machine in the village, and so she was made to pay for telling the truth.
And yes, our NIMBY group, having been caught out publishing lies, insisted that they had had a complaint against the developer upheld by the ASA. But they hadn't. They had complained about the cover image of a leaflet produced by the developer (which showed one of the wind farms in their fleet). There had been no attempt to mislead, and the case was thrown out. I daresay that this was one of those cases which your friends have told you about - but the complaint was not successful. Just another NIMBY lie, I'm afraid.
In France, by the way, they just build the wind farms, and the locals throw a party when it starts operating. Here, NIMBY groups take advantage of our Byzantine planning processes to mount campaigns based entirely on lies and intimidation.
An example: a community-owned "wind farm" of two turbines is currently being opposed by wealthy property-owners in Shropshire. They have claimed that it will "devastate" the local tourism industry. Ten miles down the road, the same group of protesters gave evidence at a planning inquiry that a nine-turbine wind farm would attract "thousands of tourists" to the area (this, they said, was based on the experiences of four other wind farms). So, their own research exposed the lie they'd been telling ten miles away! And yet, I'm sure you've heard nothing but silly stories about wind farms scaring away the tourists!
Just so you know, I have been researching wind energy and keeping up to date with developments ever since my own community was wrecked, not by a wind farm, but by an evil, arrogant, selfish and fanatical cabal of NIMBYs. I've heard all the myths and I've researched the facts. I have yet to find a single NIMBY anti-wind farm story that stood up to scrutiny. Rather, I have found only evidence from all around the world that wind power is going to be one of the priincipal energy sources of the 21st Century. And I welcome that, because having visited many working wind farms, I have seen the positive effect they have on people - even those who were initially hostile to the idea. I have even stood inside a turbine mast - and they're not even noisy there!!!
It would be an act of national insanity to undermine this elegant, efficient, rational, attractive, safe, clean and economically competitive resource just because a few liars don't like them. I suppose you feel that the UK should allow the rest of the world to forge ahead with renewables, and wind power especially, while we sit around telling each other tall stories about them. But, you see, that's the difference between us. I'm thinking of the local, the national and the international interest - the planet and the future for my children and grandchildren. You, I suspect, are just thinking about the view.
I tell a lie! RSPB does sometimes research and object!
This is Norway but I guess even you might presume the same is happening in Denmark
This is the RSPB, I am very shocked by this as they wholeheartedly support wind farms most of the time (as long as they are sited appropriately) This means that birds have to be of international importance, all the other poor sods don't matter.
As I say, if you are ever lucky enough to see a sea eagle, take note as they will be gone before too long (guess that is scare-mongering though)
Bird deaths worldwide are being reported regularly due to onshore and offshore windfarms. Bird fatalities are supposed to be monitored by wind farm developers but they rarely do that, instead preferring to bury the birds at the site. Of course, you will say that is a lie generated by the oil/gas/nuclear lobby. Additionally, if you rely on the RSPB for your info then you won't hear much of that (they have something called RSPB energy (green, allegedly) so they won't say anything much against wind farms. I could direct you to an independent website for more info but it is pointless as you will say they are biased. I know nothing of the seals you mention but there were recent reports of cockles in Lincolnshire being affected by the offshore wind farms there (fishermen there already having difficulties because of EU quotas), but then again, like you say, anything could be killing them off so that is pointless too.
We cannot yet export wind-generated electricity because we don't have the super-grid (which i do know about from Herbert and my own research previously). This would be hugely expensive and is a long way off.
I do know that Germany is causing havoc with their neighbours' grids because of exporting their excess. Yes, Scotland - I believe a pipe or whatever is in the pipeline at great expense to ship their excess to England. What is never mentioned is that Scotland will be receiving energy from us when the wind doesn't blow or their other renewables just don't supply their needs.
Likewise Lynn, I am afraid that the wind farm companies too have frequently been taken to the ASA for publishing false information and misleading, unsubstantiated scare stories but mostly truly fudging photomontages - oh do you mean, by the way the problem with NOISE (check out the new Fullabrook wind farm in Devon, not yet commissioned and yet causing huge problems). If you think we are a minority, you clearly aren't reading all the press/media these days. But there again, guess you think they are all NIMBYS and biased too? As for unscupulous? You clearly have had nothing to do with wind farm companies yet...... give it time though, 32,000 turbines is a huge number. Before long you too may be that NIMBY (Next Idiot May Be You). Then you will discover the meaning of unscrupulous.
Re: your "reports" about sea-eagles off the Danish coast - I wonder if these are in any way similar to the reports that seals were dying because of the Sheringham Shoal Offshore Windfarm (when in fact the seals were dying before the windfarm was even built)? And why should you think that we can't export our wind-generated electricity? That's pretty much what we did when France had to shut down most of its nuclear fleet because of high summer-time temperatures, and Scotland fully expects to continue as a net exporter of electricity when it is 100% renewable from 2020 onwards. Besides, have you never heard of smart-grids, or the European super-grid? No, probably not. I'm afraid that you're too easily taken in by NIMBY propaganda of the sort which invariably does the rounds every time one of your "290" anti-windfarm groups gets up and running (and then gets criticised by the independent Advertising Standards Authority for publishing false information and misleading, unsubstantiated scare stories). They are still, however, a minority - albeit an extremely noisy and unscrupulous one.
Lord Lawson's "Global Warming Policy Foundation" has refused to reveal its sources of funding, but has been criticised for breaking the rules governing registered charities by openly campaigning on political issues. It is a climate change denial propaganda machine. None of its statements should be taken seriously, as it is really nothing much more than a front for the interests of Big Oil.
Hey you guys! Please comment on this up-to-date report from The Global Warming Policy Foundation report: Economic Analysis Reveals Wind Power 'Worse than a Mistake'
Guess these people are NIMBYS too or biased... though they receive no donations from ANY
Lynn - last I saw of people in Denmark not being happy with their lot was a demonstration against chopping down a forest to make it more windy for their turbines. You are right, there must be a lot of misinformation about Denmark because all the stuff you have written I have seen the exact opposite to. As for your NIMBY brigade, if that is all you can fling at the people who belong to the over 290 action groups round the country opposing industrial wind farms then your lot are getting desperate! As said previously somewhere, the Danes are only surviving with their wind power because they can send it off to their neighbours, we can't do that and to do it will cost huge amounts of money.
Finally, why are Vestas (Danish wind turbine company) laying off people?
And finally, if you have ever been so lucky to see a sea eagle, the reports of their destruction in Denmark makes it very sad. Still, guess "you lot" see them as expendable in the name of
"saving the world".
Jessie - there is a huge amount of nonsense talked about Denmark's wind energy successes by the minority anti-wind power faction here in the UK. First of all, the high cost to the consumer of electricity in Denmark has absolutely nothing whatever to do with wind power and everything to do with the high duties imposed by the Danish government (the generation costs of electricity in Denmark are considerably lower than they are here, thanks largely to their investment in wind energy). Secondly, the NIMBY brigade are forever trying to pretend that Denmark, the European standard-bearer for wind energy, has "given up" on wind power. That is a lie. Denmark's prime minister has recently undertaken to increase the amount of installed wind capacity in Denmark to cover 50% of the country's needs. Yes, Denmark does export some of this energy to Norway, as a quid pro quo - Norway exports hydroelectric power to Denmark, so that the system achieves equilibrium. It is simply a measure of how desperate and dishonest the anti-wind campaigners in Britain are that they go out of their way to mislead themselves and others about the success of wind power in Denmark (as well as telling the usual lies about "subsidies", etc.)
Elizabeth Mckay commented
Yes really in favour of this !
Carl Holmes commented
sorry jazzy a load of rubbish wind will play a vital part in our future energy needs together with wave, tidal, solar,hydro, waste to energy dominating coal and gas
yes we still will have coal and gas but a lot less of it , and subsidies are not the reason for rising energy bills if you looked up the facts subsidies for clean renewable enrgy is far far lower than those subsidies given to fossil fuels (theres a campaign for 38 degrees later)
community wind is vital as it will bring the locals closer, and they will get a fair slice of money made supplying the grid money that will be invested back into the community