View Full Version : Wind Farms
GALTAQUAY
05-Jul-07, 23:22
i might get shot down in flames here but im for wind farms in the fact that there eniromentaly friendly and dont cause any pollutins or health problems that im aware of also when something else eg new technology for producing eco frienly power they can be removed with little no damge to the land better than power stations and with all the power we consume we should have a small turbine or solar panels whats your views
anneoctober
05-Jul-07, 23:30
We used to have "views" in Caithness, unfortunately they're now becoming obscured by turbines :(
"Environmentally friendly"
"don't cause pollution"
"removed with little or no damage to the land"?
Are they?
What about the steel and concrete needed to construct them? Sorry but they don't grow on trees. The production of steel and concrete produces huge amounts of pollution.
No damage? What about the irreversible damage to the areas that have been dug up and turned into sterile patches of land?
http://johnrsweet.com/personal/Wind/windpix1.html
No damage done there then?......
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~hills/cc/gallery/index.htm
or there....
GALTAQUAY
05-Jul-07, 23:52
i will need to research further as i was lead to believe they were friendly but if what u say is fact then i have been wrongly informed
ywindythesecond
06-Jul-07, 00:06
i will need to research further as i was lead to believe they were friendly but if what u say is fact then i have been wrongly informed
GALTAQUAY
Sorry for the ferocious response you got to your post, but a good starting point is at www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk (http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk) If you want to learn more please PM me.
ywindythesecond
I don't think my response was "ferocious" - I just cut to the chase and picked out some of the points made in the OP
i might get shot down in flames....
If I came over all brusque I do apologise...
i am for them too. and i cant wait for the ones near me to go up.
ywindythesecond
07-Jul-07, 22:44
i am for them too. and i cant wait for the ones near me to go up.
Where are the ones near you emszxr?
I can't wait for the ones at Bilbster to go up!
ywindythesecond
If all the windfarms planned get built, then we'll all be near one. Funny thing - one developer said the view from the route north wouldn't be spoilt because people will be looking at the sea (there are windfarms planned all the way along the coast to John o'Groats). One problem with that, very soon you'll see them strung out in the sea as well. That 2nd turbine going up as part of Beatrice is the start of 200 turbines. So, look at the sea - turbines. Look at the land - more turbines. This is part of the most famous route in the UK - Lands End to John o'Groats - but, hey, who cares so long as someone is making money out of them.
Oh and by the way, digging up all that peatland is hardly eco-friendly - this is from an objection form on the caithnesswindfarms website -
Some recent research at Durham University has discovered that peatlands, especially blanket bog, store the equivalent of Britain’s output of CO2 for the last 21 years.
Damage the peat and you release CO2. Also, don't forget those huge concrete bases stay in the ground even when the turbines are removed.
Damage the peat and you release CO2. Also, don't forget those huge concrete bases stay in the ground even when the turbines are removed.
I can't see the point in what you posted there.
I mean, so what? You are releasing CO2 just by reading this message. And as for the concrete bases, what do you suggest, use a JCB to dig the base up? Now wouldn't that release more CO2?[lol]
ywindythesecond
08-Jul-07, 23:31
I can't see the point in what you posted there.
I mean, so what? You are releasing CO2 just by reading this message. And as for the concrete bases, what do you suggest, use a JCB to dig the base up? Now wouldn't that release more CO2?[lol]
Astonishingly Reggy, I agree with you! Having done a lot of damage putting turbine bases into the ground, it does less damage leaving them there than trying to remove them.
They become future archaeology. Imagine tourists 2000 years from now coming to Caithness trying to solve the riddle of the sickle shaped layout of the massive prehistoric concrete structures which once supported Caureymire Windfarm.
They might marvel at the vision and enterprise of a society which could construct such features, and may well try to line them up with the stars or annual celestial events.
They won't know that it was only greed that drove their making.
They may even start a thread on the future Org Forum about how they line up mysteriously to form a pentangle or an image of Tony Blair's face......
I agree with Badger. Wind farms wreck the beautiful natural scenery of Scotland . They can also be very harmful in other ways. Blade flicker through sun shining on the blades drives people mad. So does the Thump ! Thump! Thump! of the blades as they pass the tower. There is no escape from this; it is worse in the middle of the night when other noise abates. It will carry 1.5 miles on the wind ,especially from big turbines. The latest turbines are 600 feet tall or half the height of the Empire State Building[ or the Twin Towers of NY]. They want to put that size turbine on LAND in some areas of the UK. The usual trick is to get the Planning Permission for smaller turbines, then to exchange them for bigger ones a few years later. I know of 3x250 ft turbines that affected a woman's health so badly, she had to sell up and move. The imperceptible infra-sound was giving her head-aches, proven by a doctor. Anyone who is "looking forward" to wind turbines coming nearby must be without common-sense. Their properties are about to be devalued by at least £50000 per house. No-one in their right minds in the UK wants to live anywhere near them. They also disrupt TV reception.
How can they save CO2 ? The back-up fossil fuel power stations are NEVER cut back, let alone switched off ! It is a myth that they save as much CO2 as claimed, because the wind is like a yo-yo , dropping at short notice, especially in the evening. How can you alter the production of a huge power station at short notice? Besides, any decent fossil fuel station generates 1000MW. Even a 400 ft turbine only produces 0.5MW on average. Yet you cannot predict even that!! Wind energy is the ultimate spin!! If I lived in Scotland , I would be writing to the politicians and the Press all over the UK. Your voices are unheard in London. The desecration of Scotland is unknown in the London Press. You need to be far more vociferous, or the beauty of Scotland will be gone forever. You won't find a SINGLE wind turbine in most English counties. Where are they on the Cotswolds , Chilterns , Malverns or South Downs? Not ONE turbine on any of them, amongst the "chattering-classes"! Yet that is where the bulk of the UK population resides!! In the southern half of England! Wake up Scotland!! You need to start shouting off the roof-tops! You are being USED!!!
Whitewater
09-Jul-07, 11:39
There have been many great and interesting debates on here both for and against wind farms. Personally I'm against, but I'm not going into all the points for and against. They are a result of a desparate policy by the government in an attempt to show they are doing something to reduce carbon emmissions. A few years ago nobody in in their right mind would have ever considered erecting a power plant that was only 20% efficient.
I can't see the point in what you posted there.
I mean, so what? You are releasing CO2 just by reading this message. And as for the concrete bases, what do you suggest, use a JCB to dig the base up? Now wouldn't that release more CO2?[lol]
Err. actually no, I suggest not putting them there in the first place. Point of my post is that we shouldn't be digging up peat. I suspect in a few years' time people will look at windfarms the way they now look at all those horrid artificial forests planted up here, which were once thought to be such a good idea, and wonder how anyone could have been so silly.
A few years ago nobody in in their right mind would have ever considered erecting a power plant that was only 20% efficient.
Then why did they do it with the coal, gas and nuke then? Efficiency is only relevent when the fuel needs to be paid for.
Err. actually no, I suggest not putting them there in the first place. Point of my post is that we shouldn't be digging up peat. I suspect in a few years' time people will look at windfarms the way they now look at all those horrid artificial forests planted up here, which were once thought to be such a good idea, and wonder how anyone could have been so silly.
OK then, to put any relevence to your arguement, can you say how much CO2 is released by the peat when the foundations are put in??? And how does that compare with the amount of CO2 which is mitigated when the turbine is in operation?
And if you are suggesting not putting them up then where on Earth are we to get renewable energy? Tidal, wave, solar, biofuels etc won't be enough.
Wind is the only major player that has proven itself environmentally and economically.
OK then, to put any relevence to your arguement, can you say how much CO2 is released by the peat when the foundations are put in??? And how does that compare with the amount of CO2 which is mitigated when the turbine is in operation?
And if you are suggesting not putting them up then where on Earth are we to get renewable energy? Tidal, wave, solar, biofuels etc won't be enough.
Wind is the only major player that has proven itself environmentally and economically.
woohoo, someone talking sense.
i am totally for windfarms.
what about the money they make for communities and employment?
Efficiency is only relevent when the fuel needs to be paid for.
OK Rheghead we all would agree that the wind blowing across bonny Scotland is free but what about those ROCs that are being paid to all these windfarm owners, they are hardly free - they are paid for by you and me. No ROCs (or subsidies) = no windfarms. When the ROCs for onshore wind are revised down drastically in the next couple of years lets see how many wind farms are applied for. Thats why there is this mad scramble at the moment to get their applications in so they can get connected up before that happens.
Bobinovich
09-Jul-07, 19:03
woohoo, someone talking sense.
i am totally for windfarms.
what about the money they make for communities and employment?
From what I understand the community benefit is miniscule compared with the money the developers (and probably landowners?) are making. Regardless of that though does it pay individuals for the devaluation of their homes, livelihoods, or their lifestyles?
As for employment there may be a few engineering/transport/craneage jobs during the development phase but then what? One or two mainenance technicians to keep them going? Not exactly a replacement for Dounreay, eh!
I have less of a problem with those being put out in the sea, but why ruin beautiful landscapes in caithness.
As for what other renewables to rely on? I have to agree with other posts on the Org which suggest the reduction of energy use all round would be the best start - at least until an efficient, cost-effective (even when unsubsidised), and asthetically pleasing (or even better, hidden!) renewable is developed.
The whole ROCs system is one of the worst ideas the Government has ever conjured up and they've simply not thought it through at all.
I'll have a pair of the rose coloured specs emszxr is looking through....
ywindythesecond
09-Jul-07, 20:27
Wind is the only major player that has proven itself environmentally and economically.
Can I have some of your tablets please?
ywindythesecond
I'll have a pair of the rose coloured specs emszxr is looking through....
how dare you imply i am thick, ill keep being in the for for windfarms seen as one going up will give my family finacial security.
Can I have some of your tablets please?
ywindythesecond
You don't need any. You just have to see their success at springing up everywhere;)
From what I understand the community benefit is miniscule compared with the money the developers (and probably landowners?) are making.
The community benefit from proxy developers I agree is pitiful, however, the rate is only a recommendation and it is up to the community to agree upon.
However, community-owned websites surely must be the way to go as the community would directly benefit from electricity sales but sadly, Caithness powers-that-be doesn't want any of its citizens to invest in the industry on a macro scale.
The trouble with wind energy is that no-one knows when the wind is going to drop below an unproductive 9 knots or gust above 48knots, when wind turbines cut out. Therefore, it follows that fossil fuel power stations must be kept running , wind or no wind!!
Besides, since a gigantic 400 ft wind turbine only generates a paltry 0.5MW on average, what do you think wind turbines will achieve, apart from desecrating beautiful countryside; ruining TV reception ; creating a horrendous racket in the middle of the night ; upsetting people with light flicker ; damaging health with infrasound ; devaluing property etc etc
Anyone who WANTS wind turbines near his/her house is not au fait with the multitude of wind turbine problems.
RESIST wind turbines by writing to local and national papers about them!!
OBJECT to every wind farm in the UK !! Apathy is no good!!
the second coming
10-Jul-07, 18:25
The trouble with wind energy is that no-one knows when the wind is going to drop below an unproductive 9 knots or gust above 48knots, when wind turbines cut out. Therefore, it follows that fossil fuel power stations must be kept running , wind or no wind!!
Detailed wind projections can be forecast from as much as 48 hours away. Trading in wind energy is based on a 4hour ahead wind projection. This can be firmed up 30 minutes before real time trading. Admittedly projections do have some level of innacuracy, and so trades are made with a factor of confidence. This is typically at or around 80%.
When there is no wind it is found that wind will be in existance in other parts of the country, so therefore trading occurs for the majority of the time. It therefore stands that wind has the same inherrant generating characteristics as all base or secondary load power plant, typically nuclear and coal, in that order. They are supplemented by gas and hydro or the more flexible fossil plants.
Besides, since a gigantic 400 ft wind turbine only generates a paltry 0.5MW on average, what do you think wind turbines will achieve, apart from desecrating beautiful countryside; ruining TV reception ; creating a horrendous racket in the middle of the night ; upsetting people with light flicker ; damaging health with infrasound ; devaluing property etc etc
Turbine output per size of mast& nacelle & blade diameter has increased dramatically over recent years. Take Beatrice or Black Law as examples of 5MW and 2.3MW turbines.
Visual interpretation is a personal thing. Some people will hate turbines, others will approve while others won't have an opinion.
TV reception are always remedied so this is not a valid point.
Noise emissions are quanitified. At no point is " a horrendous racket " particularly " in the middle of the night " ever been a concern.
Upsetting people with light flicker is your only valid point here. I have to agree you have a point.
Damaging health with ultrasound...magic...beware the triffids. Not a valid arguement or point, no recored issues or evidence.
Devaluing property. Dont believe there is any evidence of this.
Scaremongering at its best.
Anyone who WANTS wind turbines near his/her house is not au fait with the multitude of wind turbine problems.
A very stupid comment. I have worked on and lived by the majority of generation types and I would be happy to have a site nearby. Especially considering the alternatives. In consideration of what and how I would like to leave this planet for my offspring, wind is the lesser of a number of evils. By no means perfect but certainly better than an number of failing and aging existing alternatives
RESIST wind turbines by writing to local and national papers about them!!
OBJECT to every wind farm in the UK !! Apathy is no good!!
Why not let people find out the REAL facts for themselves! If people dont like the look of turbines, thats their perogative, just dont try to justify it with scaremongering and blatent untruths.
The wind may be "free" , but it does not blow all the time as evidenced on www.metoffice.com/education/archive/uk (http://www.metoffice.com/education/archive/uk) . Wind turbines produce zilch below 9 knots and above 48 knots, and because the wind drops so regularly, especially in the evening, it follows that fossil fuel power stations are rarely cut back....let alone switched off!!
Wind energy is the biggest CON since the South Sea Bubble !! It will not close a SINGLE fossil fuel power station!! If you build 500 monstrous 400 ft wind turbines in Caithness, what will you gain in energy? They will generate 500 x0.5MW = 250MW , but that will be SPORADIC, therefore backed by fossils.
However 500 turbines 400 ft high would appear like a huge DENSE FOREST of turbines. TV reception would be ruined ; property values DECIMATED , much of it unsaleable ; the RACKET at night will be horrendous ; flicker will drive you all mad and infra-sound will also make you ill!!
Can you IMAGINE 500 x 400 ft turbines? Do you KNOW what I am really talking about? Most of the new turbines are 327ft, but they get bigger all the time. 600 ft high are the latest monsters !!
The UK uses 60000MW at winter peak, mostly in England, which has 83 pc of UK population . Scotland is being SACRIFICED to serve England. Are you mugs up there? English rulers would NOT give you sole ownership of REALLY valuable North Sea oil, would they ..........but they are prepared to GIVE YOU the rubbish wind turbines which they DON'T want..........whilst they have the electricity!! Marvellous!!!
FIGHT wind energy!! Write to the BRITISH Press in droves!! Speak up before Scotland is WRECKED!!
To "the second coming". You obviously have a vested interest in wind energy, so you are MAKING MONEY out of it!! To paraphrase and adapt the immortal words of Mandy Rice Davies in the Profumo Affair........."You would say that, wouldn't you ?!!"
I do not scaremonger, I deal in FACTS!! I know a woman who was affected by infra-sound from 3 x250ft turbines a mile from her home. She had to leave her home! Her illness was diagnosed by a SPECIALIST in the medical profession.
Of course there is noise from wind turbines! I know people who have lived for 12 YEARS 0.75 miles from 11 turbines a MERE 150 ft high !! They can clearly hear the THUMP!! THUMP!! THUMP!! in the middle of the night! They hate it!
Do not tell me they are inaudible! The monsters they are building now will really make a racket! A 400 ft turbine has about 8 times the swept area of a 150 ft machine. So don't talk rubbish!!
As for TV reception, the blades cut the signal. If there are turbines all around the area , more and more are affected. If turbines are between a home and the transmitter, reception is ruined.
You are also talking PURE TWADDLE when you say that turbines do not devalue property. Who in his RIGHT MIND would want to buy a house with those whirling bits of scrap in full view?? Every property programme on TV emphasies that "natural views" and "fantastic unspoilt scenery" are the main factors in selling property. I know of a bona fide valuer in Wales, who knocked £250,000 of the value of adjoining farms and £50000 off houses, if a wind farm was built nearby. That was a PROFESSIONAL valuation!!
As I said, you have a vested interest........so why should you be telling the truth??
The trouble is......if I am RIGHT and you are wrong......it is too late for the people of Scotland!! Once the turbines are erected , you can walk away and leave those people with all the problems!! Despicable!!
Put "Crystal Rig broken blade" into Google and view the pic of a blade that snapped off a 300 ft turbine in the Lammermuir Hills. It is on Berwickshiretoday.co.uk . That blade shattered and was thrown at least 300 metres. It had razor-sharp shards of fibre glass. Deadly!!
Check the German sites of Wilfried Heck for turbine disasters. See www.bmpg.co.uk (http://www.bmpg.co.uk) and www.socme.org (http://www.socme.org) . Then look at www.visitwalesnow.org.uk (http://www.visitwalesnow.org.uk) .
Then you might learn more about the problems galore posed by wind turbines.
"Second coming " is slow at becoming "Third coming" ! Where are his answers? He is also waffling with his "wind will be in other parts of the country". The truth is that if you spread 2000 wind turbines 400 ft high over the length of the UK, they would only generate 0.5MW each on average. So if they were all working, that is only 1000MW, or the output of a medium sized power station.
However, if the wind is only blowing in one area of the UK , only 10 per cent of the turbines might be generating. That could be 100MW only from 2000 really MASSIVE turbines!! It is chicken-feed!
Besides, how can you switch the back-up fossil fuel stations off??
The UK uses 60000MW at peak winter usage. Under a High Pressure in January, there would be a HARD FROST and no wind!! So what good are wind turbines then? What is 100MW from wind if the country needs 58000MW, say ?
how dare you imply i am thick, ill keep being in the for for windfarms seen as one going up will give my family finacial security.
Oh yes, here we have it. So far on this thread we have only 2 windfarm supporters (apart from Rheghead who will happily skip around all threads with his special brand of Devil's Advocacy - I'm not getting at you honest Rheghead - I always enjoy your posts). Anyway, one of the 2 supporters will gain financial security for his/her family from a windfarm and it sounds as if Second Coming works in the wind industry.
Sounds to me like Galtaquay started this thread in good faith and is keeping an open mind. Apart from reading up on both sides of the argument, the best thing to do is speak to people who live near a windfarm, or a proposed windfarm - and I mean within 2 or 3 kilometres - and see what they are saying. Best not to ask people in Edinburgh or the Home Counties as they think wind energy's fantastic.
Also talk to the people of Halkirk and see if they've seen any community benefit yet - after all, Causewaymire's blades have been twirling for 3 years now. In fact, ask anyone in Scotland whether they've seen any community benefit yet from any windfarm. If you find a community that's had pay outs, see what they've been able to spend the money on. See if it was, for example, for triple glazing to keep out turbine noise, for sending deprived youngsters to uni, for free electricity, for solar panels etc etc.
emszxr I apologise if that is how you perceived my post.....
the charlatans
13-Jul-07, 22:22
Titler i don't think you can asume that because only 2 people have replied on here that they support windfarms it doesn't mean that the entire forum is against them.
I agree with windfarms and windpower in the right location but because of all the sniping and black and white viewpoints on here i tend not to put my viewpoint down.
I know several people who live near windfarms, all over the country and they don't seem to have a negative viewpoint about them. I also know people who live near fossil fuel powerstations or work at them and they would all prefer to live or work near something that didn't so visably pollute the environment. I hear you with them not being as efficient, or spoiling the view etc. but i think its necessary that the energy makers do something rather than nothing at all. After all wouldn't it be terrible if you didn't have electricity to turn on your computer and chat to all your org pals?
the second coming
13-Jul-07, 22:47
"Second coming " is slow at becoming "Third coming" ! Where are his answers? He is also waffling with his "wind will be in other parts of the country". The truth is that if you spread 2000 wind turbines 400 ft high over the length of the UK, they would only generate 0.5MW each on average. So if they were all working, that is only 1000MW, or the output of a medium sized power station.
However, if the wind is only blowing in one area of the UK , only 10 per cent of the turbines might be generating. That could be 100MW only from 2000 really MASSIVE turbines!! It is chicken-feed!
Besides, how can you switch the back-up fossil fuel stations off??
The UK uses 60000MW at peak winter usage. Under a High Pressure in January, there would be a HARD FROST and no wind!! So what good are wind turbines then? What is 100MW from wind if the country needs 58000MW, say ?
Your responses give me little to ponder on the intellectual possibilities of debate as is what I thought this forum is about.
You are of course entitled to your view, no matter how misguided or incorrect your beliefs. I DO NOT gain any benefit, financial or otherwise from wind power. I DO however have a long service in the power generation industry and as such do know a little of such things. I am not going to tit for tat your answers as I feel I am speaking to a preverbial brick wall (you can add your own words here to suit), however if you provided clear and independent evidence of the many points you raise will be happy to change my beliefs as appropriate.
Until that happens, I will leave you with the thought of steam turbines throwing blades at twice the sound of speed, safety valves lifting off their seats and being found in fields three miles away, polluted beaches, neighbourhoods, noise entering the pain threshhold, waste both pulversed fuel ash, nuclear and unseen pollutants that cannot be disposed off in any practical fashion. Workers killed from steam, coal and gas related incidents and the long term health implications of working in these industries
Yes there are issues with wind as with all forms of generation, and yes there are technical shortcomings, and of course there have been accidents, injuries and deaths but i'll let you search your little biased internet sites to find them.
Finally, wind is not the single answer, but a balanced and suitable mix of power generation that suits both share holder, safety and environmental legislative requirments, flexibility and reliability to trade in the current BETTA markets and finally a portfolio that does not leave my children and their children asking why their ancesters did what they are currently doing to the planet. Furthermore, educating peoples use of this very accessible form of energy would perhaps alleviate the demand on producing electricity. I have a clear conscience on efficiency. Do you?
As I once read, " we have not inherited the planet from our ancestors, we have borrowed it from our children ".
ps, As to your question querying my delay in answering, I was out earning a wage, funnily enough, not from wind power.
The wind may be "free" , but it does not blow all the time as evidenced on www.metoffice.com/education/archive/uk (http://www.metoffice.com/education/archive/uk) . Wind turbines produce zilch below 9 knots and above 48 knots, and because the wind drops so regularly, especially in the evening, it follows that fossil fuel power stations are rarely cut back....let alone switched off!!
Wind energy is the biggest CON since the South Sea Bubble !! It will not close a SINGLE fossil fuel power station!! If you build 500 monstrous 400 ft wind turbines in Caithness, what will you gain in energy? They will generate 500 x0.5MW = 250MW , but that will be SPORADIC, therefore backed by fossils.
However 500 turbines 400 ft high would appear like a huge DENSE FOREST of turbines. TV reception would be ruined ; property values DECIMATED , much of it unsaleable ; the RACKET at night will be horrendous ; flicker will drive you all mad and infra-sound will also make you ill!!
Can you IMAGINE 500 x 400 ft turbines? Do you KNOW what I am really talking about? Most of the new turbines are 327ft, but they get bigger all the time. 600 ft high are the latest monsters !!
The UK uses 60000MW at winter peak, mostly in England, which has 83 pc of UK population . Scotland is being SACRIFICED to serve England. Are you mugs up there? English rulers would NOT give you sole ownership of REALLY valuable North Sea oil, would they ..........but they are prepared to GIVE YOU the rubbish wind turbines which they DON'T want..........whilst they have the electricity!! Marvellous!!!
FIGHT wind energy!! Write to the BRITISH Press in droves!! Speak up before Scotland is WRECKED!!
Utter claptrap.
Rheghead,
Why don't you PROVE and specify what is "claptrap" in my last posting?
Do you DENY the absolute truth that is in www.metoffice.com/education/archive/uk (http://www.metoffice.com/education/archive/uk) ?? Go on!! Tell the Met Office that their recorded wind speed data is "claptrap"!! You seem to me to be a know-nothing dilettante!!
Look at the BWEA site . Look at the hundreds of applications!!Scotland is being WRECKED by wind turbines, visible from about 30 miles radius.
Can you tell me how much wind there is under an Anticyclone?? Wind turbines CANNOT REPLACE any other form of electricity generation, because the wind does no blow all the time!!
Rheghead,
Why don't you PROVE and specify what is "claptrap" in my last posting
I stopped taking any notice when you tried to drive a wedge through Scotland and England. Pathetic.
Do you think CO2 respects international borders?:roll:
peter macdonald
14-Jul-07, 16:34
I have less of a problem with those being put out in the sea, but why ruin beautiful landscapes in caithness.
Im sorry i dont get this at all ...after all the arguements against windfarms they suddenly are OK if you can stick them in the Moray Firth??? The postion off the beatrice platform is visable from near John o Groats at Warth Hill right round the Moray Firth to the east of MacDuff !!! Also for those concerned with bird life ...dont seabirds count??? Its very much what turns people on but a seacape IMHO is far more beautiful than some lump of useless bog at Camster
PM
Peter,
I understand that offshore is more efficient, and less intrusive as when seen from land the turbines blend in more (if 'camoflaged' correctly) - most offshore farms would be 15-20 miles away and while you can see the Beatrice platform bear in mind that it is a large structure and is more visible.
As for seabirds, there doesn't appear to be a problem if you listen to the wind companies with on shore bird strikes so why roll out that argument for off shore? And if it happens to reduce scorrie numbers isn't that a good thing? ;)
As for seabirds, there doesn't appear to be a problem if you listen to the wind companies with on shore bird strikes so why roll out that argument for off shore? And if it happens to reduce scorrie numbers isn't that a good thing? ;)
Wind farm developers will have you believe that wind turbines, whether onshore or offshore, do not pose a hazard to birds. This is clearly untrue - just recently a rare Red Kite was killed at the Braes of Doune windfarm near Stirling. I believe there can be a significant problem with migratory birds and off-shore wind turbines. I saw a programme recently from Norway where there are a large number of wind turbines being built down the west coast of Norway, offshore, and birds such as Sea Eagles are being killed. Wind turbines are bird mincers wherever they are.
Wind farm developers will have you believe that wind turbines, whether onshore or offshore, do not pose a hazard to birds. This is clearly untrue - just recently a rare Red Kite was killed at the Braes of Doune windfarm near Stirling. I believe there can be a significant problem with migratory birds and off-shore wind turbines. I saw a programme recently from Norway where there are a large number of wind turbines being built down the west coast of Norway, offshore, and birds such as Sea Eagles are being killed. Wind turbines are bird mincers wherever they are.
I agree that the Norway sites were inappropriate, they got it wrong, but don't clump all windfarms together (no joke intended). The RSPB approve the siting of appropriately sited windfarms depending on the threat level to birds. I take their view very seriously. Surprisingly, the RSPB guy told me that there are definite patterns and the risks can be quite low even if the publics perception of the threat is high, it was his job to resolve that issue.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.