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?
Ruth Jarman
shared this idea
551 comments
-
ajax
commented
Disappointed in you, 38 degrees. The Government are finally reconsidering a U turn as so many people are finally seeing through the PR-speak of the wind farm industry. A vote for this is a vote to increase the profits of the PR companies, the barristers, the energy companies and the wealthy land-owners. It is NOT a vote for the preservation of the planet, it is a vote for fuel poverty, failing industry and landscape destruction.
-
lesley
commented
Alan - this is pie in the sky land. DECC would like to cover the whole of the UK with 32,000 useless turbines. I think people see the existing wind farms dotted around the country and think this isn't too bad without realising what is planned. People in Co Durham, Northumberland and Scotland may disagree with me there as they are already inundated. Even with all those turbines, we would still need coal, gas and nuclear, so what is the point? Furthermore, the cranking up and cranking down required of the National Grid makes it very unlikely that any carbon emissions are essentially saved.
Windmills and small wind pumps dotted about from the early 1900s is an age away from industrial wind turbines, over 120m high placed less than 500m away from people. Wind farms just aren't suitable for rural England. We should value what we have - lovely countryside. That is why people visit us. -
Mick
commented
Wind turbines are an absolute disgrace. They are funded, without their knowledge, by the poorest in society to fund the richest. Stop the hidden subsidies now and tell the truth. Wind turbines only provide money for the developers and land owners. They do not provide energy when it is needed and they contribute to CO2 emissions. The whole situation has been constructed by the wind industry to benefit only them even the regulations concerning noise were formulated by them; if the normal planning considerations were used wind turbines would not be built.
Thousands of people died from hypothermia last year because they could not afford to pay for their electricity; they had a choice EAT or HEAT. They could not do both.
Those who continue to support these hideous contraptions are morally bankrupt. Is that the kind of country we want for ourselves and future generations? Of course it is not so have some decency and think of the poor people( of which there are millions) and stop wind power now.From Healthconcerns
-
wookey
commented
Renewable energy investment is a very good thing. Onshore wind is currently the cheapest form, and compares well with fossil generation. If that paid its full carbon impact Wind would be the cheapest electricity generation source available. Tidal and CSP (further south than the UK) should indeed also get investment, but they are less mature technologies right now.
People who think that Wind-power subsidies will cost them significant money are not working out how much money thay'd spend on gas and coal instead if it didn't exist. And ideas like 'lets support heat pumps instead' are technologically illiterate - heat-pumps don't generate electrical energy, so are not an alternative. They are of course a useful way of making heat, but only if you have already made electricity.
-
Alan Giles
commented
Wind farms are part of the solution - encouraging the development of wind technology by providing small subsidies now will keep the price of energy down in future as the oil runs out and the price of all types of energy sky-rockets as demand outstrips supply
In the early 1900s there were thousands of wind pumps around the countryside keeping farmland dry and productive using sustainable energy - the advent of "cheap" petrol and electric pumps robbed us of this view of the countryside at work - let's return to the view of an elegant solution to our energy needs
-
Anonymous
commented
May isuggest you use the information from people who know what they are talking about regarding the most uneffictive energy generating system in he world which has INCREASED the UK's CO2 emissions in 2009-2010 by 3.8 %. with an average efficientcy of less than 20 % and falling requiring that for every theoretical MW a so called Windfarm is producing a back up power of the same size has to be installed using traditional energy producers. Billions of govern money = OUR money is wasted to go to overseas investors who are laughing all the way to the bank whilst it is estimated that by 2015 another 20% of the UK population is suffering from fuel poverty. Up till now i have supported yr actions but if you are going ahead with the pro windpower you will find with me hundreds of people against you. I have a windfarm of 8 turbines in front of my garden and potential serious medical consequences to my spouse as a result. i wil unsuscribe if you continue with your unthought out action . Robert Klaasen Chairman CSWWAG
-
lesley
commented
You have to be joking! No way would I vote against the government right now! They are finally seeing sense and looking at the ineffectiveness and expense of industrial wind farms put so close to rural communities that they make people sick + ruin our British countryside and heritage assets.
All paid for by us - the electricity consumer. Do you really wish to run a campaign for fuel poverty?
I have supported you before with the NHS and other campaigns. I will be getting out firmly if you run this one! Read THE WIND FARM SCAM by John Etherington or do some proper research before you commit to this lobbying by the wind industry. -
V Wood
commented
Well funded!!? From the pockets of hard working people who have to fund raise to prevent the destruction of the countryside from industrial wind turbines. The well funded are the pro wind who have numerous agencies lobbying on their behalf payed for by the rich energy companies. The only reason the energy companies promote this type of energy is because it is so profitable and payed for by our energy bills. Why not put money into tidal, solar, biomass etc which at least are fairly consistant and don't require a complete back up system. Please consider more of the facts before voting for this campaign which demands components are imported from across the world and brings very little investment into the UK and feathers the pockets of mainly large foreign companies.
-
Martha
commented
We have to do something about the looming energy gap and it just makes sound sense to use our own abundant and natural resources than to increase our dependency on imported fossil fuels.
-
ann
commented
Well I do worry about what my children will see if all these windfarms & windturbines go up-they won't know what beautiful countryside views are any more-Just Rusting Industrial structures that were follies to pretending a technology was efficient and that they were the answer-but by then we will have driven fuel costs up by so much subsidies to the rich that we won't be able to afford to go for our runs out in the countryside or that stay away in that quiet unspoilt area of our beautiful countryside.Quite honestly a Country swathed in turbines is a vision from hell.
I am sorry I don't believe the climate scam either- we are being ripped off and both we and our children will lose the some of the best reasons for living and for what to make the rich richer and the rest of us much poorer.Let's support Heat Pumps instead ! -
Jonathan
commented
Adrian - this was a great suggestion from an ordinary member of the public. Investment in renewable energy costs the public the equivalent of a packet of crisps each week. Are you seriously suggesting that's really pushing people into fuel poverty as opposed to soaring imported gas prices? Are you suggesting that's what we should continue to rely on? Or perhaps all those nuclear reactors that still haven't been built?
-
Andrew Moore
commented
Surely makes a lot of sense to support an energy supply where the input cost is "ZERO". Wind is free.
I'd rather support wind turbines than see my hard earnt money disappearing off to some middle Eastern country. I'd rather have money to buy assets in their country than see them buy up assets in ours.
oh and lets put the wind turbines on-shore, reducing transmission costs and saving the beauty of our coastline. -
Dave
commented
Great idea - a positive campaign FOR something important. Also ties in perfectly with the current campaign against the rip-off pricing of the big six energy companies, by supporting a type of energy that is proven, cheap, generates jobs and local income and helps wean us off our dependence on fossil fuel that in turn leads to our dependence on the big six...
-
Mark
commented
http://www.cse.org.uk/downloads/file/common_concerns_about_wind_power.pdf Worth a read. Evidence-based analysis that draws on peer-reviewed
academic research and publicly funded studies to address
issues such as bird-strike, shadow flicker, noise, impact on
property prices and ‘wind turbine syndrome’.
Centre for Sustainable Energy, May 2011 -
Pam Gill
commented
This is so vital right now as the wind energy companies will give up without some government clarity. And the government needs to know that most people are pro renewables, even if they don't go around shouting about it, like the anti wind folk.
-
Charles Butcher
commented
A planning appeal for a couple of wind turbine clusters near me has just finished, and I've been gobsmacked at the lack of support for wind. The NIMBYs are vocal and well funded, yet the people who aren't opposed -- and I'm sure there are plenty -- won't stand up and say so.
The antis view the north Norfolk countryside as some kind of pristine wilderness. I feel lucky to live here and I love the wildlife, but in the end it's just fields of barley and sugar beet. A few turbines would add to the interest.
The barrister for one of the developers said: “If a wind farm is not acceptable at Chiplow, then no wind farm can be considered acceptable anywhere in lowland England. It really is, with respect, as simple as that.”
That cuts both ways. Unless we can get it together fast, I'm afraid that wind farms soon "will not be acceptable anywhere in lowland England".
-
Dave Elliott
commented
On land wind power is one of the cheapest renewable energy options at present and the UK offshore wind resource is huge, enough to supply all our needs and more. We have to make sure it's done right, with careful attention to location and local impacts, but we also have to resists ignorant opposition. While we can and must reduce energy waste, whatever we do by way of energy saving we will still need non fossil sources of energy if we are to avoid climate change. Wind, along with solar, wave, and tidal power, are far better options than nuclear, as has been recognised by Germany , Denmark, Italy, Austria and many other EU countries. The UK has the best wind resource in the EU. Are we really going to ignore it because of a few NIMBYs? So far even France is beating us on wind!
-
Peter Simmons
commented
I love to see wind turbines turning gracefully on the horizon supplying clean energy, close up they are even more impressive. It's a no-brainer really; which is why the no brains are against wind.
-
jonathanmelhuish
commented
I agree with Mrsatj, wind turbines don't spoil the view and I certainly find electricity pylons and roads much more ugly. It's also worth making the point that as fossil fuels become more scarce, countries with pitiful levels of renewable energy (like the UK) might soon find themselves struggling to keep the lights on at an affordable price.
-
Pete
commented
There is a real danger of the mis-information circulated by the incredibly well funded anti-wind campaigners being believed. We have to fight this with the truth.
Every kw generated by a wind turbine is a kw that a fossil-fueled power station does not have to produce.
We have to stand up to those who think that the biggest threat to the countryside is the view.
