Object To This !!

[demographic]

Although wind farms are not a total solution to the problem of fullfilling our energy needs* I do really believe they play a still significant part in it.
The studies that show they use up more energy during production than they produce being de-bunked now and I have even seen figures of them paying back the energy of manufacture within three to five months which is fairly going some.

Sorry to say that even if I weren't too late to sign that petition I wouldn't.





*People being more responsible about how they actually use the energy playing a major role in helping matters.
As a nation we also seem to use electricity to make up for shockingly bad building design with bad window positioning and insufficiant insulation and so on.
We don't make use of slabs of concrete insulated on the underside to provide a buffer for rapid temperature change anything like often enough either.

There are loads of designs out there to help us use our energy much better but architects are either oblivious to them or ignore them.

 

[Fin]

I'm with rik_uk3 - I think the hysterical, ill informed protests against nuclear power in the 1980's set this country's clean energy needs back decades.

Whether windfarms blight the countryside or not is a matter of personal opinion - I think that they do (my wife likes them!). There is also some doubt as to their effectiveness in terms of output versus cost and carbon footprint of their installation.

As for politicians (local or national), I think that every last one of them is either incompetent, a liar, or a thief and I go along with Billy Connoly when he said:

"The desire to be a politician should bar you, for life, from ever being one"

 

[Northern Giant UK]

I have trouble understanding why anyone could harbour such bile for Windfarms and yet have good things to say about nuclear energy?

I live surrounded by farms/woodland and I would be glad to see these windmills I spose I'm what you'd class a Y.I.M.B.Y (YES in my back yard), I've heard tales about them from bird migration problems to they made my cows milk dry up these all sound (if even tru and not just disinformation) to me like temporary problems that will sort them self out given time.

Ask me (or most Britons) whether they'd be happy with a nuclear power plant near by and you can guess their answer. . "Ooh a possible Chernobyl on my very own doorstep. . .NO TAA", as far as I am concerned if the waste is toxic to all life and will remain so for thousands of years then it isn't a viable alternative it's just another mess for someone else to have to deal with. dumping it in (effectively) holes in the ground is akin to sweeping it under the rug unless you consider the current trick of taking depleted uranium (oh it's ok it's only half as deadly as refined uranium??) and using it as an armour piercing cannon shell, which is currently coating the desert in war zones (to me that's illegal toxic dumping). So tell us again . . .why are windmills so evil?

(must stop taking rant pills)

"Don't let the hair fool you, I'm no a hippy. . ." Billy Connoly.

Kev

 

[Nagual]

An interesting TV was on the other week, some folk down south make it the mission to be as green as possible and go around help others do so too. Program was about a camp site being set up with solar powered / heat showers, a solar dehydrator etc. A house with a decent garden had a single wind farm thingy put in place - it pays for itself over 10 years by selling electricity back to the National Grid ( not sure if they included savings on running costs in that ) Another place - a volunteer coastal thingy, got a wind power thingy as well as solar water heating. Personally I'd love to get one for my garden, but don't think the neighbours would like it too much, plus I can't afford it.

Nuclear power is evil because of the waste it produces, the really nasty stuff has a half life of several hundred thousand years. The really really nasty stuff several million years. Just in case some people think that half life means half it's life, it's not. Half life just refers to when its state is halved, so if the half life is 100 000 years ( just for example ), in 100K years it's radioactivity is halved, in another 100K years the same in another 100K years the same etc. But since we won't be around to see it, it doesn't matter right? Yeah right. pfft.

 

[Smith]

neclear power has already been descided for us, thanks again tony........
i say bring on more wind farms as long as they dont chop down or back any forested areas, and it is on empty fields, id perfer the eye sore, than toxic waste, which we will lazily dump somewhere else in the world, causing even more problems

 

[gorilla]

I have trouble understanding why anyone could harbour such bile for Windfarms and yet have good things to say about nuclear energy?

I live surrounded by farms/woodland and I would be glad to see these windmills I spose I'm what you'd class a Y.I.M.B.Y (YES in my back yard), I've heard tales about them from bird migration problems to they made my cows milk dry up these all sound (if even tru and not just disinformation) to me like temporary problems that will sort them self out given time.

Ask me (or most Britons) whether they'd be happy with a nuclear power plant near by and you can guess their answer. . "Ooh a possible Chernobyl on my very own doorstep. . .NO TAA", as far as I am concerned if the waste is toxic to all life and will remain so for thousands of years then it isn't a viable alternative it's just another mess for someone else to have to deal with. dumping it in (effectively) holes in the ground is akin to sweeping it under the rug unless you consider the current trick of taking depleted uranium (oh it's ok it's only half as deadly as refined uranium??) and using it as an armour piercing cannon shell, which is currently coating the desert in war zones (to me that's illegal toxic dumping). So tell us again . . .why are windmills so evil?

(must stop taking rant pills)

"Don't let the hair fool you, I'm no a hippy. . ." Billy Connoly.

Kev

i have to agree - there are currently plans going through consultation for a windfarm on the Mersey, and the uproar and vitriol being generated (forgive the pun) is something that i find bizarre.
i fall into the camp that find windmills strangely pleasing to the eye, and while they obviously have certain aesthetic drawbacks, the future demands a solution, and no doubt worse proposals will come to light in days to come

 

[big_daddy_merc]

There is one way to have less power/environmental issues, use less power in your homes and work, lets face it that live earth thing yesterday was going on about using less power and being more careful in what we use, yet they had more lights on stage than Blackpool could ever have, massive tv screens.
Wind farm will only output a very small part of what the U.K needs, coal and gas are no longer "clean" enough, no-one wants a nuclear power station, we don't get enough sun to run massive solar station and again no-one will offer to have them in there back gardens, so it doesn't leave much to use really.
the only real way to lower the amount of power used is to cap home and work supply's to force everyone to be more efficient in power use, if you go on holiday in a caravan you know you can only have so much of a power output. so you only have on what you really need at any one time.
It's not the power stations that have to change, it's the consumers that do. Even if that means fining the customers that abuse the system.

 

[Proudfoot]

not my neck of the woods but lets face it, if we want wild areas we are going to have to do something, wind is renewable, non poluting, and while not "the" answer to climate change it is "an" answer to climate change. as for tourism, i believe many would like to tour and see a real working wind farm that can be shown to provide clean energy. as to subsidities, does anyone really believe that the conventional power companies are not subsidized in some way? through tax credits, transportation subsidies, grants for scrubbers to clean the emmissions from smoke stacks at coal and oil plants? when these eyesores were built most objected to hugh monstresties (sp?) cluttering the skyline for those who could and had to see them. in time people adapted and just got used to them, the same will happen with the wind turbine towers but we would not have to breath the toxic vapors and general junk that we have been for the past how many years? some thing to think about.


dean

Do we really think that humankind can do anything about or even caused "climate change / global warming"?

Let me put it this way.

1; 15,000 years ago most of us here in the UK would be sitting under about a mile thick layer of ice. So that fact tells me the climate has been changing / getting warmer for the past 15,000 years.

2; It is also a fact that the Earth is slowly but surely getting closer to the sun, and the last time I checked, ie saw the sun, I couldn't help but notice that it was rather warm.

3; Last figures I saw, humankind put out a total of 2% of CO2 that goes into the atmosphere, the oceans being the biggest contributor to the CO2 "problem" followed by termites, yes termites.

Yes I agree we have to do something about using more renewable energy. I'd like to see a wind turbine and solar panels on all buildings be they our homes, work places, hospitals but especially on all government - local and central - buildings.

We also have a problem with fossil fuels and the companies that produce them. My theory on this is that these companies will not stop producing these fuels until they run out. So why don't we all purchase the biggest 4x4s with the biggest engines that money can buy and give them a helping hand. Hummers should do the job nicely, me thinks! That should surely wake up these motor manufacturers and get them designing other types of engine, hopefully something that runs on water, because believe it or not water is here to stay.

END OF RANT. FLAMEPROOFS ON.

Vic a.k.a. Falco

 

[Jodie]

These are just photos of moody turbines in dramatic landscapes, which I find very
appealing.
http://www.embracewind.com/photo.html

Having said that this has no bearing on whether or not they are 'a good thing', only
that I could happily sit for long periods and watch them spin.

 

[gregorach]

I'm not saying a freakin' word this time. I've had enough. Non-sequitur arguments, flat-out contrafactual statements, whatever... I'm not biting.

:tapedshut

Anybody got a straightjacket to keep me away from this thread?

 

[Dynamite Dan]

It looks like people are very opinionated on this topic. Nobody is right or wrong as there is no right or wrong answer.
A lot of you have valid points for both sides of the argument.

Dont get mad at it guys n gals.

 

[Jodie]

What you want to do is watch Ecotricity's webpage with the calming, spinning turbines.
I guarantee that it'll relax your brain - well at least the 10% that we use

http://www.ecotricity.co.uk/projects/index.html - you might have to click on the map a
few times to start them spinning, but wonderful when they do.

 

[brancho]

The main fact is that wind turbines do not pay for themselves they are subsidised and thats why everyone wants to build them.
Think of much energy it costs to make one how much effort is involved in getting energy from the highlands to civilisation.

For those who object to nuvlear think of this:

We buy power from France who produce 80% from Nuclear compared to our 20%

If France becomes short of production as is predicted will they still sell power to us?

 

[longshot]

Do we really think that humankind can do anything about or even caused "climate change / global warming"?

Let me put it this way.

1; 15,000 years ago most of us here in the UK would be sitting under about a mile thick layer of ice. So that fact tells me the climate has been changing / getting warmer for the past 15,000 years.

2; It is also a fact that the Earth is slowly but surely getting closer to the sun, and the last time I checked, ie saw the sun, I couldn't help but notice that it was rather warm.

3; Last figures I saw, humankind put out a total of 2% of CO2 that goes into the atmosphere, the oceans being the biggest contributor to the CO2 "problem" followed by termites, yes termites.

Yes I agree we have to do something about using more renewable energy. I'd like to see a wind turbine and solar panels on all buildings be they our homes, work places, hospitals but especially on all government - local and central - buildings.

We also have a problem with fossil fuels and the companies that produce them. My theory on this is that these companies will not stop producing these fuels until they run out. So why don't we all purchase the biggest 4x4s with the biggest engines that money can buy and give them a helping hand. Hummers should do the job nicely, me thinks! That should surely wake up these motor manufacturers and get them designing other types of engine, hopefully something that runs on water, because believe it or not water is here to stay.

END OF RANT. FLAMEPROOFS ON.

Vic a.k.a. Falco

LOL first time ive been quoted and then driven totally off the rails. shaking my head and chuckling.


dean

 

[Glen]

My own opinion is that there's an awful lot more that can be done with smaller scale wind turbines than currently is.

Ordinary power line pylons are a bit of an eyesore already and sticking a small/medium sized turbine and solar panel ontop of each could considerably add to renewable sources for little extra cost or visual impact, infact to my mind it'd improve the view of them.
Similarly a smaller combo ontop of every lampost.

Both those ideas need little extra in the way of cable infrastructure.

I'd like to see a small solar panel and vertical axis wind turbine become as common as satelite dishes on houses. These could fairly easily be enough to keep those "vampire" devices ( mobile phone chargers and the like that most people don't bother unplugging when not in actual use ) ticking over and take them off the national power drain that a few million unused devices cause. With the right sort of government backing ( No tax and VAT for a start ) the cost of this might be brought into a range where a significant aditional portion of the populaton would start looking at doing such things. Once people have been involved personally, even in a small way they tend to be a little better informed and be better about the other sides of their energy consumption.

 

[Fin]

My own opinion is that there's an awful lot more that can be done with smaller scale wind turbines than currently is.

Ordinary power line pylons are a bit of an eyesore already and sticking a small/medium sized turbine and solar panel ontop of each could considerably add to renewable sources for little extra cost or visual impact, infact to my mind it'd improve the view of them.
Similarly a smaller combo ontop of every lampost.

Both those ideas need little extra in the way of cable infrastructure.

I'd like to see a small solar panel and vertical axis wind turbine become as common as satelite dishes on houses. These could fairly easily be enough to keep those "vampire" devices ( mobile phone chargers and the like that most people don't bother unplugging when not in actual use ) ticking over and take them off the national power drain that a few million unused devices cause. With the right sort of government backing ( No tax and VAT for a start ) the cost of this might be brought into a range where a significant aditional portion of the populaton would start looking at doing such things. Once people have been involved personally, even in a small way they tend to be a little better informed and be better about the other sides of their energy consumption.

Now this, to me is superb thinking. Glen, if you're not the government's chief consultant on sustainable energy - why not?!

With regards to individual properties: As well as offering tax free incentives, you would also have to appeal to the selfish nature of Joe public. Don't sell it as "saving the planet" because, let's face it, the average Joe couldn't give a stuff! Market it as freeing the individual from reliance on the utility companies.

We're having a major extension to our house, starting this autumn - plans include a rainwater harvesting system, geothermic heating, the gas Aga is making way for a wood burning Rayburn and we're also getting another woodburner with backboiler for the new living room. This has nothing at all to do with saving the planet (and I agree wholeheartedly with Proudfoot's post) - what it will do is stop me paying vast sums of money, every quarter, to some faceless, profit making company to keep me and mine warm and clean!

 

[Proudfoot]

LOL first time ive been quoted and then driven totally off the rails. shaking my head and chuckling.


dean

First off let me appologise to you Dean for going so far off the rail earlier.

It's just that I'm getting a bit fed up with hearing about what might or might not be the answer to climate change. There is no answer to climate change, the climate has and always will change.

I'm fed up with all these so called "experts" telling me what sort of weather we're going to be having in 50 years when they can't even tell me what the weather is going to be like next Tuesday with any sort accuracy.

As I said above, we do need to do something about the way we produce our energy. The cleaner the better. Wind; solar; wave; nuclear power or whatever, we must do something about the air that we breath, that is my main concern. It's the main reason why I like getting out of town and into the wilds. Cleaner fresher air.

Again I appolgise to you Dean.


Vic a.k.a. Falco

 

[JonnyP]

I think we should have methane farms.....Strap inflatable bags on the rear end of cows and use fart power......We could all go and get cow gas stoves....