Wind Turbine & a Friday Poll

Poll Poll Would you oppose a wind turbine being erected close to your home?

  • Yes, I would oppose

    Votes: 46 54.1%

  • No, I wouldn't oppose, they could build one near my house

    Votes: 22 25.9%

  • Not bothered either way

    Votes: 17 20.0%
  • Total voters
    85
C

Carol M

Lifer
We've had a note through the door saying there are plans to build a wind turbine close to our house and there's others also planned in the area.
Now, I know these things generate 'free' power and I've always thought them a good thing, we have to progress and find other means of energy sources but now there's one planned for nearly on our doorstep I don't want it here.

We live in a beautiful, unspoilt part of the uk and in a conservation village.

There's a movement to oppose the building of the turbines and I agree with them. I know I am now being hypocritical.

What do you think? Vote please (we all like a poll)
 
I was in Germany a few weeks ago near some of these.

- Ugly or what, in the middle of a forrest.
- The noise, horrendous, like living near an airport.
- It was giving a shadow on a house nearby every rotation. Must drive you mad to have that flashing going on the whole day.

Besides the ugly thing, the noise is the worst part. They are not suitable for the landscape and without subsidy they never receive payback.
 
Voted YES I WOULD OPPOSE and add VERY STRONGLY, the whole concept is flawed, the subsidies paid for wind power generation are way OTT and is a large reason why the consumer is paying too much. I read earlier this week that that it is to cost several billions to install 'smartmeters' in every household in UK by 2020 (I think), we've had one for three years and the only benefit is to the energy company not having to manually read the meters. No way could I say it has helped to us to save on energy costs. Apologies for going off topic.
 
When I studied Environmental Science we used to work out the environmental cost vs the energy benefit.

People seem to forget there is a huge energy cost to create these before they are beneficial. Digging ore, destroying forrest to get to said ore therefore creating more CO2 but less trees to recycle it, transporting ore half across the world, smelting and producing a high quality metal, transporting metal where its needed, fabrication of millions of components with most of the process above, create generators, keep the generator working with oil. Then transporting these wind turbines across the globe where they are needed then installing them with hundreds of tonnes of concrete again mined (most of our limestone is in our national parks) sent to where it is needed. They also have to have brakes installed because if the wind is too high they will destroy themselves.

So for the huge amount of global energy it takes to produce, transport and install a wind turbine VS the amount of energy they produce over their limited lifespan (25 years) the energy costs to keep them running, lubrication etc. They produce less energy over their lifetime than the energy cost to produce and keep them running.

Also bare in mind that they can only be used in a limited speed, and the amount of time it takes in a good speed of wind to produce anywhere near the amount of energy needed they become fairly pointless. There are better, less energy consuming green solutions than wind turbines. One wind turbine working for full day at maximum efficiency will produce enough energy to light 350 homes if the wind is at exactly 28 mph all day If the wind reduces to 14 mph that number drops to 35 homes If the wind drops to 13 mph that number is 20 homes. The likelihood of having a day like that is near enough impossible.

Obviously the above info depends where they are. But generally they aren't brilliant, until technology improves.

There a hundreds dotted around the valleys in Cumbria, am I against them in a visually/noise polluting way… No I think they are pretty cool but they need to get a lot better before they are a viable energy alternative.
 
in two minds about it

on the one hand, investing in the development may one day make it cost effective, it isnt currently without subsidy - but on the other hand i don't think development should be done to spoil naturally beautiful areas.

I suspect in 30 years, we will have orange rusty eyesores and no one will be able to mandate their dismantling.

So, I wouldn't care if i lived in a dump - but if i lived in a pretty area, i would be a bit nimby about it too.

ps - i live in blackpool, they can frack and wind turbine it to their heart's content, it wont spoil its basic nature....
 
Personally, they don't bother me. However, I'd be worried what they look like in 10 or 20 years time when the paint starts flaking off them etc.... Also, what happens once they're deemed uneconomical to repair at somepoint... will they pull them down? I doubt it!
 
How near is near? The one I was listening to was about 500 meters from where I was and it was deafening there.
 
I'm involved with a local group fighting off multiple applications in our area. We won the first planning hearing but the developers are launching an appeal. Make no mistake you will need some smart people with lots of time and energy to fight it. As a layperson you have to get over the fact that they look 5hit near homes and will damage property prices and focus on the minutiae of planning regs. Noise, traffic access, drainage, impact on businesses, blade shadow on roads, bird flight paths, protected vistas, orchids, insects, good old bats we have used them all!

My main objection is the fact that the developer gets a subsidy and relief based on the potential generating capacity, not on what they actually produce. They make a huge profit even if they produce NOTHING. Most UK turbines have actually produced a fraction of capacity, as low as 17%. Because cold weather is usually accompanied by high pressure low wind speed in the UK they don’t make much when we need the power, and every KW of wind energy has to be backed up by another in spare unused capacity from conventional sources as wind simply stops! Nuclear power and other plant takes hours or even days to crank up so the system overproduces to back up wind – madness. Even worse when it’s too windy they have to brake turbines down to prevent over-speed, and when the grid capacity is exceeded the turbine operator gets paid even more NOT to produce, and stop the turbine!

There have been attempts to introduce a private members bill to ban large turbines from within a mile of housing, which seems reasonable. This would bring the UK in to line with many European countries but the coalition 5hit bags would not support it and despite many back benchers promising their locals they would back it they didn't! There is lot's on the web to research it's a big green joke which is a shame as I support renewables in principle.

The ones they want to build within a few hundred yards of our village will be on the Somerset moors, a wetland area with nature reserves etc. They will be the tallest man made buildings/structures between the Mendip Hills in North Somerset and Devon 50 miles away. I’ll stop now… :x

http://www.huntspillwindfarms.org.uk/
 
One has just (this week) gone up near me. It's huge, but it's on the horizon so its not bothering me. Glad it's not any nearer though.
 
apparently they dont give out much power anyway,and the ones off shaw need diesel to run them when there is no wind, otherwise they get damaged if left not moving .
some crap like that anyway. so Yes I would oppose
daz
 
I would be a real NIMBY on this I'm afraid.
Bloody ugly and not efficient poor value for money as far as I know. :thumbsdown:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom