I suggest a campaign about ...

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?

1,854 votes
Vote
Sign in
Check!
(thinking…)
Reset
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    I agree to the terms of service
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Ruth JarmanRuth Jarman shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    555 comments

    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      Submitting...
      • jessie wilkinsonjessie wilkinson commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        dear Peter
        The fact that you don't understand the relevance of how many turbines are required to achieve these unobtainable targets in order to cut carbon emissions (all 2% of them in the UK) and the fact that you don't realise that wind energy can NEVER replace conventiional power stations shows your unbelievable lack of knowledge on this whole subject. You are just afloat in telly tubby land where lovely wind turbines will provide all our energy and everything will be just fine. The fact that you don't even realise that Chris Huhne was actually on your side of the argument shows you haven't a clue what is going on in the big world. I suggest you go play with your little models of wind turbines and dream about how you are saving the planet.
        Earlier on you were banging on about foxhunting and berating landowners but you don't mind they are earning vast amounts of money at your expense for a useless technology which won't solve our electricity problems or energy problems.
        Well I wish you well in your quest to cover THE WHOLE OF THE WORLD with wind turbines! What a joke.

      • Peter SimmonsPeter Simmons commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        jessie wilkinsonjessie - you are an obsessive. WTF does it matter how many? We just need as many as possible to avert catastrophe. Yet you keep banging on about a failed politician as if he's relevent. How old are you, fourteen?
        Go and tidy your room.

      • Peter SimmonsPeter Simmons commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        jazzy - nothing is apparent, and you are wrong on everything, so why not on that also. I have never given obscene amounts of money to anyone, never having that much, nor do I support it. Your point about the rich is not, however, an argument against wind power. And if the little communities who are being walked all over apparently were to organiuse and get their act together, get the financing together and make an application for communitiy project, there would not only be a more equitable share of the bounty from wind, but there would be less whining from the likes of you.
        The rich will always try to increase theur wealth, it's in the nature of the disease they all suffer from. But if a landowner puts wind turbines on his or her land, I don't really see what your problem is. Should they not be allowed to do anything on their land? Are you just opposed to them or is there a point? It doesn't surprise me in the least that Cameron has ruch inlaws, he is after all a privileged by birth millionaire, ex-Eton, and thinks he has a divine right to rule. It's the fault of those who elected him who obviously fell for it, or perhaps it was because Labour got so corrupt, arrogant and devious under the Liar Blair that enough people though 'we have to get rid of them and teach them a lesson', and isn't that why there's a coalition because people couldn't decide which bunch of crooks to choose?
        Don't blame me though, I didn't vote, nor would I for the shower of incompetents, idiots and thieves who present themselves for election. The system is corrupt. But that's nothing to do with wind either.
        We are faced with giant foreign utilities companies and rich politicians carving up a growing industry which we have to have. Our home grown wind industry is tiny compared to Germany or Denmark, and they are now geared up for tasking our wind over too, something greens have been warnbing for decades would happen unless renewables got taken seriously and invested in as they were in Europe. We were right, again, and now you see the result of our inaction as a country. And you think that also is the fault of the greens??? Logical you ain't.

      • Peter SimmonsPeter Simmons commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        http://www.desmogblog.com/hide-your-kids-hide-your-wife
        For anyone who thinks big, filthy oil isn't financing the anti case.
        I've also investigated this Spanish trio's 'resport' as have many others. It's been rubbished since it came out, it is yet another attempts to create doubt and division. It might eveb have been funded by the billionaires in the above article, maybe soemone should investigate the bank accounts of the Spanish 'researchers'.

      • jazzyjazzy commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Dear Peter - it is evident from your postings that you absolutely hate anyone in the country you perceive has money ie the landed gentry etc etc, landowners.
        And yet you are happy to give them obscene amounts of money to allow wind turbines on their land, such as the Prime Minister's father-in-law, who earns thousands and thousands in subsidies each year from the turbines he "owns". Plus all the money that goes to the Crown for the same reason even though they profess to dislike wind turbines.
        Is this not perpetuating the perceived divide in the country between those who definitely have and those who do not?

      • jessie wilkinsonjessie wilkinson commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Peter - still no answer to the question?
        Are you saying Chris Huhne's calculation was wrong then? Not 32,000 industrial wind turbines required to produce 20% of UK's electricity by renewables by 2020?
        Perhaps you know then how many are required as Chris Huhne is now dead in the water as you say.
        Still haven't answered the basic question though - how are any number of turbines going to REPLACE coal, gas, nuclear and cut carbon emissions (all 2%) of them? If only you would answer this simple question - please give me the link to this.
        PS you counteract one opinion by Green Economy Post - how is this unbiased? Clearly, everyone has their views and everything can be counteracted depending upon what you want to believe, except Green is the New Red it would seem. Disagree with anything and all you get is verbal abuse.

      • Peter SimmonsPeter Simmons commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Tony Butler - 'the imminent collapse of the Spanish PV sector' LOL, you couldn't make it up! Well, you could, and clearly these Spanish 'researchers' did as Spain's PV sector is a model to the world, and with the sun Spain gets... no brainer except for no brains.
        If that's where you get your 'information', I suggest you delve a little further afield. Are yo aware of the credentials of these people, and do you care? No of course not.
        But you might like to read this below copied from http://greeneconomypost.com/tag/gabriel-calzada-alvarez

        An Analysis of Three Myths Regarding The Green Jobs Programs of Spain and The US

        Dr. Gabriel Alvarez from King Juan Carlos University authored a May 2009 study entitled “Study of the effects on employment of public aid to renewable energy sources” (KJCU Study). Dr. Alvarez has tried repeatedly to correlate the Spanish investment and experience with Renewable Energy technologies (RETs) with that of the U.S. However, even cursory analyses of the Spanish public policies that have been employed over the past decade reveal significant and dramatic differences from the current and proposed domestic (U.S.) approach to RET deployment, and thereby obviate any implied correlation between the negative conclusions of the KJCU Study and the impact of the domestic RET investment. Additionally, included within the KJCU Study are several assumptions with respect to the economics of the U.S. investment inRETs that are fundamentally incorrect.

        Debunking The Spanish Study on The Dire Result of Green Jobs Creation – Updated January 1, 2011
        May 5, 2009 32

        By now, everybody has heard about the Studyt out of Spain that supposedly proves that Obama’s green jobs program is a loss cause that will hurt our economy. I think there are numerous flaws with that study. In this update, we have Spain’s response to his claims, proof that his data was falsified, an explanation of how the renewable energy investment did not have the major negative impact on business, in Spain, that his analysis was too simplistic to be applied in any real world model, and what most economists believe is the major cause of Spain’s high unemployment rate. I will also bring to light extremely relevant facts, that the study fails to mention or factor in to the study, and review the US’s history and results from past renewable energy investments. That’s right we have been investing in renewable energy for years.

        Read more: http://greeneconomypost.com/tag/gabriel-calzada-alvarez#ixzz1o3ugW032

        So this 'study' you are so keen to post about as proof, has been rubbished already and the authors discredited. This is what we have to contend with, it's like shooting those rabbits at the funfair, that just keep popping up again.

      • Peter SimmonsPeter Simmons commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        jessie wilkinsonjessie - I'm bored trying to get down to your mental level, and no amount of your simplistic repetitions is going to change that. Give it up and find something else to do. I just passed through here to see how the votes were, I have no interest in engaging with someone who is stuffed so full of misinformation. I doubt you even know where you got all this nonsense from now. I'm far more interested in the bigger picture, and engaging with people who can reason. Your constant quoting 32,000 is illustrative of how dim you are, it has no relevance or even reality. Huhne is dead in the water and will probably be imprisoned. That you think that somehow reflects on climate change or renewable energy shows how dim you are.

        And please don't think that in your half-witted way you can 'be worried about me' and suggest I sample a 'green option' as good for me, the Germans are coming here and building wind farms, and will then sell OUR wind resources back to us for profit and all as a result of capital being scared off supporting British wind development by you idiots. You seem delusional, the pro wind peple outnumbered even the organised attendance here of you all by at least 10 to one, you shout in order to sound more than you actually are, and you scare local communities into becoming worried with lies, and use them as weaons to further your agenda. They are abused by both you and the giant [and foreign] utilities. When small communities plan and commission their own wind arrays, there's funnily enough no one 'suffering noise' no one having the 'health affected' and precious little wildife damage reported or found.
        Ah, you've just been joined by one of the extremist nutters, Tont Butler and his [borrowed] ice core theory, copied off an oil-funded disinformation site and swallowed wholesale. His utter lack of a science education is presumably the cause of why he can't understand the role of carbon dioxide, and why increases in levels have dangerous effects. He, from his pedestal of great insight, dismisses the greenhouse warming effect discovered and verified in the 1800s and many times since, and he thinks it means more plant growth. Yep, we've all seen that haven't we? Everywhere getting greener, plants growing taller, food crops yielding more? Well no, actually no effect such as that has been detected, except by simpletons like this. He's convinced by The Great Gren [sic] Global Warming Con Trick, apparently, whilst failing to understand any science. I expecxt thelanguage was couched in idiot terms, with lots of shouting and exclamation marks. Morons are more convinced by more exclamation marks, did you know that?
        He's obviousl;y a suitable case for treatment, paranoia can be very damaging to both the individual and their family. The cultist nature of the internet has served to inflame sufferers and make them worse by reinforcing their worst fears, and there are those around who don't have anyone's best interests at heart except their own. It's sad to see. But impossible to counteract and help them see sense, as they probably see people like me sprouting horns, and no truth or logic has ever cut through this level of self-deception and fear.
        No please go away, I'm not mad, bad, deranged, over the top or ranting, I AM a little impatient and intolerant of stupids, a character fault I know, I should be gentle and understanding and tolerant. I'm working on it. But I fear a lifetime's intolerance of idiots is hard to break. But once I've trashed you, I don't give it another thought, I walk away. I suggest you do too. Or don't you have a life?

      • jessie wilkinsonjessie wilkinson commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        PS Peter
        Oh
        and read Tony Butler's link below on Spain and their economy. Is this honestly what you want for the UK too? Guess you will say though that that research too is funded by the nuclear/oil/gas lobby or whatever.

      • jessie wilkinsonjessie wilkinson commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Peter - if throwing the word "NIMBY" about continually is all you have to throw at "antis" then you are defeated and you know it. Added to that, the fact that local rural communities are all funded by oil companies etc, you REALLY are losing the plot. I am a bit worried about you to tell you the truth, your rantings show signs of delusion and expose you as very close to the edge.
        Still need to answer how are 32,000 industrial wind turbines covering the UK going to replace coal and gas fired power stations and reduce carbon emissions (all 2% of them) and therefore "save the world"?
        Going off to live in Germany and sample the true "green way" may be a good option for you.

      • Tony ButlerTony Butler commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I suggest you read the March 2009 report: the Spanish University of Juan Carlos published a report, ‘Study on the effects on employment of public aid to renewable energy sources.’

        You can read it here: https://acrobat.com/#d=TivYUVcKKXg*rECh5GY*Qg

        President Obama cited Spain as a role model for Green energy - it was, it made them bankrupt and gave them the highest number of unemployed in Europe.

        The question is though, why anyone in their right mind would want to reduce the levels of CO2, without which no lifeforms are possible? After Al Gore and the UK Government scientists were forced to concede in the High Court, the 600,000 year ice cores show that fluctuations in global temperatures are followed 800 - 2,000 years later by identical rises in CO2 levels. (it takes hundreds of years for the Sun to warm the oceans, causing them to produce more CO2.
        Rises in global temperatures results hundreds of years later in identical rises in CO2 levels.

        What the idiots running the anthropogenic global warming tax scam did, was take the current levels of CO2 as a basis of fabricating evidence to convince the world that the planet was in deadly peril, because man creates 1/33rd of the 0.03% CO2 in the atmosphere today.
        What they forgot was, the 32/33rds of atmospheric CO2 they measured is the result of the global temperatures that prevailed during 12 AD - 1212 AD, a fact established in the High Court.

        We are being conned, google, The Great Gren Global Warming Con Trick, and learn.

      • Peter SimmonsPeter Simmons commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Postscript:
        What a shame that the London Array http://www.londonarray.com/ is being constructed by a German energy giant, E.ON, a Danish offshore windfarm developer DONG Energy, and an Abu Dhabi financier. I suppose all our energy companies, wind developers and financiers have been frightened off by the hysterical chorus of ignorance that's unleashed every time anything is planned. I wonder if Germany and Denmark have the same kind of unpatriotic people willing to put self before country and others.

      • Peter SimmonsPeter Simmons commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Adrian. Yes, wasn't up to my usual standard, heat of the moment. So deleted.

        I already moved on. But I'll be keeping a weather eye out for you on the wind front, because you are wrong and one day will acknowledge it. If you really meant that bit you wrote initially about the wind industry ruining a perfectly good idea, my words, then you're not lost to reason. Unlike most antis who are beyond it. You might benefit from reading 6 Degrees by Mark Lynas. A non-scientist [so readable by non-scientists] very thorough gathering of all known data and opinion on the actual results of warming, measured in degrees up to six. By three, it's starting to get scary, most people are terrified before six. The global repercussions are horrendous, and there seem very few taking any of it seriously yet - 'doing our little bit for the environment' really doesn't come close to the problem. Radical rethink is the only way for species survival, but you wouldn't think it as emmissions worldwide continue to increase year on year and politicians spout about reductions while travelling everywhere in giant limos, and pieces of excrement like Trump think golf course for rich men are a worthy substitute for wild Scottish countryside. How many Nimbys protested about that?

      • Peter SimmonsPeter Simmons commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Adrian - 'the violence of the opinions expressed in this thread quite frightening' - sorry, I don't recognise that. But then I'm used to robust debate, and if you want to see how that works go to upsizethis.org where you will only be banned if you make a specific death threat to another member. All else is ok. They are all intellectuals mind, I find it's usually the non-intellectual who gets offended by language. I personally love a good intellectual wrestle, but that's just me.

        As for the rest; well I'm willing to accept that you didn't post that, since it isn't there and you say you haven't deleted anything. But I'm unclear why you should delete posts here as to my knowledge no one has complained about any of them. Why you would want me to delete mine with the links though... if embarrassed by a link to your business, well, if you didn't want that you should have used an alias, as most if not all other antis here have. Anyone else could find your site very easily as you know, so seems superfluous deleting a link. And right now I can't even find it, this being the first time I've got involved beyond signing a petition. I'll try to find it, re-read it and see if I want to delete it.

      • Peter SimmonsPeter Simmons commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I think the excitement's died down, they've spouted their nonsense, had their intellectual drubbing, not changed their minds, but grown bored and gone elsewhere to cause mayhem where it might be more productive for them and their hidden agenda. Once you take these ignorant bullies on with facts, they expose themselves as shallow, unintelligent and ill-educated paranoiacs and accuse you of bullying and wanting to shut them up.

      • Peter SimmonsPeter Simmons commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Martin - Well said! The house prices in North Norfolk where I live have been pushed so far past what locals can afford that homelessness rather than fuel poverty is the bigger danger for the rural working class. Second homes, holiday homes, homes for let, they're all bought up, every cottage and barn is unavailable through price. And these are the very people who object to any developments in the countryside, which they want to remain just as they first saw it when they came here on holiday. Forever preserved. Pity climate change and sea level rise is going to submerge their expensive houses and remove the farmland from production. The rich more than anyone need to educate themselves on what they are likely to lose if renewables aren't made a central plank of energy policy.

      • MartinMartin commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I have lived in a south cheshire village for twenty years and watched the structure of our farming community change beyond all recognition.
        I, like the vast majority of other people living in this village, and countless others like it, have little or no direct involvement in agricultural, horticulture or forestry, apart from being an end customer. Living in the country is a privilege which is increasingly being enjoyed by the folks taking up residence in the barn converstion developments and vacated farm property and swelling the ranks of commuting city workers, all adding their contribution to carbon emissions. Most farmers I have met welcome the opportunity to reduce their energy costs and are keen to install small wind turbines if they can raise the capital. Unfortunately most of them are inhibited by the campaigning of non farming neo-country folk who have managed to buy their way out of the restrictions of city life. It strikes me that the single biggest driver of opposition to wind turbines is a determination to maintain short term personal privilege at whatever price is to be paid by future generations.

      • Peter SimmonsPeter Simmons commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Adrian - 'none of the links in the Account history you have highlighted lead to this thread or indeed to the 38 degrees site' - really? I suggest you re-read them.

        I have never implied that I have any ownership, editorial or otherwise on this site. I have merely pointed out that the site is for positively supporting an idea, and enables people to vote for a range of ideas and to add a comment. It was going along fine like that, until an increasing number of antis suddenly appeared, dominating with ludicrous claims, lies, misinformation, exaggerated fears and paranoia that one usually only sees on the far-right, US creationist global warming denialist sites. How surprising is that?

        Since I can't see a post like the one I mentioned now [of course] I don't repeat it, although I feel sure Twitter keep full records. But you will find 38 degrees is mentioned and I clicked on the link and came to 38 degrees site, only it was for a protect our countryside page, different. So there is a slight possibility I may have conflated that with what I thought was a rallying call on this issue, since they did all arrive very soon after your first post. A coincidence of course, I wouldn't imply otherwise.

        You're right that I don't understand Twitter, that kind of limit on number of characters frankly appals me; it seems like the tower of babel, nothing of any worth can be written in 140 characters, and I look on it as a place 'little people' can follow celebrities empty lives and feel a part of them. Never appealed to me, so I don't have anything to do with it.

        When you've read the same old 'they keep me awake at night', 'they kill birds and bats', they don't replace coal-fired electricity', they cost all of us lots of money' and 'they are leading to fuel poverty' I do tend to get intolerant, there's only so much anyone can take of this nonsense before telling people they should keep their spurious ill-informed opinions to themselves. Expecially since they are repeating something several posts down but haven't bothered to read anything.
        I repeat, this is supposed to be an opportunity to support something. Sad that you and your fellow objectors seize every opportunity to shout misinformation. I really do think you thrive on conflict, despite your occasional apparent voice of calm reason, which I take to be yet another twist of insincerity.
        Anyway, I really am bored with all this, and I have work to do and a life. I may even resign from 38 degrees, since I don't much like the sort of people they're allowing in now. I thought this was one place where intelligent, educated and progressive people could do something positive and usefull. How naive to think that was possible when vested interests will always subvert decent people and make out that black is white, The pity is that some believe them.

      • Calvin MalhamCalvin Malham commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        To the 'antis', what do we do for energy instead of renewables in our future (which hopefully will be a long, long time after the last drop of oil has been sucked up)? Business as usual? You seem a bit lightweight on the 'thinking about stuff' thing, generally. There can be no doubt as to what you don't 'like'- but I bet you have something AMAZING up your collective sleeves, ready to ride into the breach, and are just stringing everyone along with your reactionary ways. I won't hold my breath...

      • Peter SimmonsPeter Simmons commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Lynn Davies - absolutely agree with you Lynn. http://lenchwind.blogspot.com/ spells it out pretty clearly. Perhaps we should have an anti-anti-wind campaign to expose the machinations of these people, who try to pose as merely 'little people standing up for their rural community' but are in fact something else entirely, agent provocateurs? They are using small rural communities disgracefully [and hiding behind them], with campaigns of posters and leaflets with scare stories to get them all worried, and misinformation which keeps them 'onside'. That's why so many claim the local campaigns are all funded by local fund-raising, one step removed from the oil industry funded agents.

      Feedback and Knowledge Base