View Full Version : Wind farm news
Councillors scale back wind farms
The number of potential sites for major wind farms in the Highlands have been cut from 11 to three in a blueprint for renewable energy schemes.
Councillors at a special planning meeting on Wednesday voted to restrict the scale of sites.
But the decision has left one councillor fearing Highland's energy strategy has become "confused".
The sites earmarked are in East Sutherland, Easter Ross and the Monadhliath mountains, near Inverness.
The decision to abandon several sites for large wind farm developments from the council's renewable energy blueprint was taken at a special meeting of the planning, development, Europe and tourism committee.
BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/highlands_and_islands/4919766.stm)
And in England....
Fight against wind farm continues
Protesters have pledged to continue their fight against a Lincolnshire wind farm - even though a renewable energy firm has scaled down the proposals.
At a public inquiry a planning inspector rejected a scheme for ten turbines at Laughton near Gainsborough.
London-based Your Energy now wants to erect eight turbines on the same site and says it is confident the wind farm will be operational in two years.
BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/lincolnshire/4921646.stm)
Why do we call these Wind Factories ,Farms .They are industrial Buildings and should be zoned as such . All the power that is generated by turbines is lost to the grid due to the tranfer to so called users being in the South ,well the South should put the turbines up where the electricity is going to be used .If they started to cover their local parks and green spaces with turbines there would be No Turbines anywere. Lets put some up on top of Edinburgh Castle or along the Firth of Forth and there are plenty of golf courses that could take a turbine or two .If the Central Belt needs power let them produce what they consume . I would be happy to see turbines in Caithness if 2 things were in place .1 .The power produced is for local use only and 2. the turbines are the property of a local trust No one must profit from the scheme . If we need more power later WE the local people decide .Not the Developers . THE FIGHT MUST GO ON .
Buttercup
21-Apr-06, 14:57
Why do we call these Wind Factories ,Farms .They are industrial Buildings and should be zoned as such . All the power that is generated by turbines is lost to the grid due to the tranfer to so called users being in the South ,well the South should put the turbines up where the electricity is going to be used .If they started to cover their local parks and green spaces with turbines there would be No Turbines anywere. Lets put some up on top of Edinburgh Castle or along the Firth of Forth and there are plenty of golf courses that could take a turbine or two .If the Central Belt needs power let them produce what they consume . I would be happy to see turbines in Caithness if 2 things were in place .1 .The power produced is for local use only and 2. the turbines are the property of a local trust No one must profit from the scheme . If we need more power later WE the local people decide .Not the Developers . THE FIGHT MUST GO ON .
Well said Dozy, I agree 100%.
Valerie Campbell
21-Apr-06, 15:05
Agree with you Dozy but for one point. It's not central Scotland that gets the power from the turbines. It's all transported over the border to the big English cities. Maybe if these companies supplied a few turbines for Cathiness folk and reduced costs, people would be a bit happier here.
All the power that is generated by turbines is lost to the grid due to the tranfer to so called users being in the South ,well the South should put the turbines up where the electricity is going to be used.
Wick was built upon the prosperity of selling herring to the markets in the South. Same difference?
Wick was built upon the prosperity of selling herring to the markets in the South. Same difference?
Hangfire there Rheghead!
Herring will last forever....wind won't.....er...:o
Not really, Rheghead.....the herrings didn't blight the local landscape.
If a case can be made for large windfarms in Caithness to supply the Scottish market, then I could just about live with them........they are actually rather elegant .................but I have to admit that if the only reason for windfarms is to produce enough additional energy to provide the English market with cheap 'leccy, then I am very firmly in the NIMBY camp!
I've just moved from an area covered by Scottish Hydro, and I could see, from the end of my road in Elgin, the windfarms on the hills above Rothes and was aware that that was simply the tip of the iceberg...............if allowed, there could be a couple of hundred windmills as opposed to the twenty or so which presently dominate the skyline.
There is a fine line to be drawn between accommodating the English need for energy and the Scottish reliance on tourism now and in the future.............why not have the large scale farms on the Yorkshire moors..............been there.............wind more than ample..........and a lot handier for the markets for the 'leccy!
NIMBY-ism, mebbe?
Not really, Rheghead.....the herrings didn't blight the local landscape.
If a case can be made for large windfarms in Caithness to supply the Scottish market, then I could just about live with them........they are actually rather elegant .................but I have to admit that if the only reason for windfarms is to produce enough additional energy to provide the English market with cheap 'leccy, then I am very firmly in the NIMBY camp!
I've just moved from an area covered by Scottish Hydro, and I could see, from the end of my road in Elgin, the windfarms on the hills above Rothes and was aware that that was simply the tip of the iceberg...............if allowed, there could be a couple of hundred windmills as opposed to the twenty or so which presently dominate the skyline.
There is a fine line to be drawn between accommodating the English need for energy and the Scottish reliance on tourism now and in the future.............why not have the large scale farms on the Yorkshire moors..............been there.............wind more than ample..........and a lot handier for the markets for the 'leccy!
NIMBY-ism, mebbe?
Just read your reply and there are a number of things I disagree with.
1, The buildings that are associated withthe herring industry, eg big Industrial buildings are not exactly pleasing to the eye, so yes, I would say Herring does blight the landscape.
2, There is nothing cheap about Wind energy, the ROC system puts paid to that, so even if the Scottish windindustry could supply enough to export to England it wouldn't be cheap.
3, I find your notion that those windfarms that only supply a domestic Scottish market to be elegant somewhat puzzling. A turbine is a turbine.
4, The Yorkshire moors have been earmarked for enough windfarms thank you very much, your attempt to paint a picture that Scotland is going to be the dumping ground of England's wind operators is ultimately fallacious.
5, Tourism in Caithness being damaged by windturbines? Get real! The reliance on nuclear industry and the apathy of the Highland council makes that arguement a non-starter straight away.
I am not a big fan of wanton turbine proliferation but I can't condone the spreading of mistruths.
Hey, you can stick a wind farm anywhere these days. We've got one down here at Reading. This is a genuine photo - not a mock-up.
http://www.driversjonas.com/img.aspx?CID=782883&LangID=1
If a case can be made for large windfarms in Caithness to supply the Scottish market, then I could just about live with them........they are actually rather elegant .................but I have to admit that if the only reason for windfarms is to produce enough additional energy to provide the English market with cheap 'leccy, then I am very firmly in the NIMBY camp!
It's not cheap leccy though, it's expensive. If you opt to have your electricity supplied form green sources you pay a premium. Also I thought it was just sold back to the national grid meaning anyone who wants can pay extra to have it supplied to them? Don't know how it works though so I could be getting the wrong end of the stick! :)
Just read your reply and there are a number of things I disagree with.
1, The buildings that are associated withthe herring industry, eg big Industrial buildings are not exactly pleasing to the eye, so yes, I would say Herring does blight the landscape.
Not so's I've noticed..........but as a newcomer to this area in particular, maybe I haven't seen the eyesores yet!
2, There is nothing cheap about Wind energy, the ROC system puts paid to that, so even if the Scottish windindustry could supply enough to export to England it wouldn't be cheap.
As someone who deliberately moved her electricity supply company in Elgin specifically BECAUSE English prices were less from her current supplier than in Scotland.............and as that company IS Scottish...it does rather irritate one! (Heck I don't like the org anti- expletive restrictions one bit!)
It has nothing to do with the cost of Wind-farm energy...it has more to do with the fact that it appears that English users get charged less for Scottish generated electricity than those in Scotland. Could let you do a comparison between a Yorkshire Bill and a Moray one, if you like! :grin:
3, I find your notion that those windfarms that only supply a domestic Scottish market to be elegant somewhat puzzling. A turbine is a turbine.
I have no objections at all to Wind Turbines in the Scottish tourist areas if those turbines are essential to provide electricity to the Scottish market..........................I have a problem where they are situated in Scottish tourist areas to provide electricity to England, while English tourist areas are left untouched.
4, The Yorkshire moors have been earmarked for enough windfarms thank you very much, your attempt to paint a picture that Scotland is going to be the dumping ground of England's wind operators is ultimately fallacious.
Was in West Yorks at the tail end of the year..................saw very few Wind turbines from the A65.......compared to those which can be seen from main roads in Northern Scotland. Earmarked does not mean construction.........at least we are praying not in Morayshire!
5, Tourism in Caithness being damaged by windturbines? Get real! The reliance on nuclear industry and the apathy of the Highland council makes that arguement a non-starter straight away.
I am not a big fan of wanton turbine proliferation but I can't condone the spreading of mistruths.
Am I spreading mistruths?
I am talking about what I see....I have lived in Morayshire, where I could SEE the wind-turbines at Rothes..............presently only a small proportion of those proposed.............And while those already there are supportable.......just.....a ring of upwards of a couple of hundred on the high ground will kill off the tourist industry which is the life-blood of rural areas. Scotland IS its wildernesses, Rheghead!
Just as I have seen the wind-farms on the A65.....and, compared to what there is in Scotland, they are, at present, unobtrusive. Whether that is a situation which will continue, I can't comment...............but comparing like for like..............England is doing quite well in the Wind-farm proliferation stakes.
I can live with the Causeymire Wind-farm, but I'd hate to see extensive windfarms all over Caithness......individual turbines appropriately sited for individual use is another matter altogether.
The big problem with damage to tourism is that you can never judge effects for sure until there is a fait accompli by which to judge...and then it is too late.
I'm not a fan of Nuclear, by any stretch of the imagination......but, imo, two wrongs don't make a right! And it doesn't appear that the Highland Council is as apathetic now regarding the impact of various installations on the tourist industry as it used to be.
As far as I am aware....and I'm more than happy to have it disproved.............at least 25% of Scotland's electricity is exported to the English market........................so why do we NEED wind-farms at all? :roll:
As far as I am aware....and I'm more than happy to have it disproved.............at least 25% of Scotland's electricity is exported to the English market........................so why do we NEED wind-farms at all? :roll:
I must say that I especially agree with your last statement, Oddquine. If Scotland is exporting electricity why DO they need more wind farms. Surely it is the English who need more wind farms - they have the shortage of electricity. [disgust]
As far as I am aware....and I'm more than happy to have it disproved.............at least 25% of Scotland's electricity is exported to the English market........................so why do we NEED wind-farms at all? :roll:
To outline the fallacious aspect of your arguement, you were talking about the export of cheap RENEWABLE wind energy to the English market, but the reason that Scotland is able to export energy is because of nuclear energy.
Since you have been quoted as being not a fan of nuclear energy, then I think you have answerred your own question about why Scotland needs windfarms.
To outline the fallacious aspect of your arguement, you were talking about the export of cheap RENEWABLE wind energy to the English market, but the reason that Scotland is able to export energy is because of nuclear energy.
Since you have been quoted as being not a fan of nuclear energy, then I think you have answerred your own question about why Scotland needs windfarms.
Maybe you would be justified in calling me insular, Rheghead.................but why on earth SHOULD Scotland provide England with energy at all..........from any source whatsoever? :confused
As far as I am concerned, if Scotland can generate enough electricity to meet the needs of the Scottish population....why on earth should any more be expected.........particularly in these days of calculating environmental impact?
I've been trying to find, on the net, how much of Scotland's energy requirements RELY on nuclear power,and how much could be replaced by alternative energy sources, and frankly, find the info is so hedged about with export levels to England that the ESSENTIAL nuclear input to Scotland's electricity supply is very difficult to ascertain...............but I am more than happy to study any links you care to give........so over to you!
Maybe you would be justified in calling me insular, Rheghead.................but why on earth SHOULD Scotland provide England with energy at all..........from any source whatsoever? :confused
I thought so, I had you down as someone who holds such values from the start.
However, the fact that the entire wind debate has fast become the arena for anti English sentiment is rather bemusing (It is funny how prejudices never fail to find a new platform) especially as with any commodity, whether it be stone, wool, food, coal, etc we need a producer and a customer to drive our economy, so why should energy be treated any differently?
If the Saudis decided to supply oil to their own domestic market then they would be poor and the world would grind to a halt!
Of course oil wells blight their landscape as well. Same difference?
I thought so, I had you down as someone who holds such values from the start.
And that means?
However, the fact that the entire wind debate has fast become the arena for anti English sentiment is rather bemusing (It is funny how prejudices never fail to find a new platform) especially as with any commodity, whether it be stone, wool, food, coal, etc we need a producer and a customer to drive our economy, so why should energy be treated any differently?
So tell me........why?
Maybe I am naive....but the very fact that "the entire wind debate has fast become the arena for anti English sentiment" simply illustrates........to my mind at least......that that appertains because Scotland is the English electricity cow....and it is regardless of however the electricity is generated.
I agree we need the producer and the customer.............but nobody has yet made any effort to justify the price differential between Scotland and England....or tried to justify the Scottish landscape being trashed to perpetuate those differences.
Care to try to justify that, Rheghead?
If the Saudis decided to supply oil to their own domestic market then they would be poor and the world would grind to a halt!
Of course oil wells blight their landscape as well. Same difference?
Not really, Rheghead..............do Saudis pay BIG BUCKS for their oil compared to their next door neighbours? :confused
So tell me........why?
You are the one that seems to be treating the sale of energy any differently to other commodities.
So tell me why?
Not really, Rheghead..............do Saudis pay BIG BUCKS for their oil compared to their next door neighbours? ....but nobody has yet made any effort to justify the price differential between Scotland and England....or tried to justify the Scottish landscape being trashed to perpetuate those differences.
Care to try to justify that, Rheghead?
The most expensive pint of guinness you can get is in the Rep of Ireland.
Prices are driven by supply and demand, since there are more suppliers in England then competition is stronger thus energy bills are lower. No anti Scottish sentiment involved.
You are the one that seems to be treating the sale of energy any differently to other commodities.
So tell me why?
Maybe because no other commodity so comprehensively trashes the Scottish landscape for no obvious benefit to Scots? :confused
The most expensive pint of guinness you can get is in the Rep of Ireland.
And that is in which currency? :confused
Prices are driven by supply and demand, since there are more suppliers in England then competition is stronger thus energy bills are lower. No anti Scottish sentiment involved.
Ah, Rheghead..........but where I have my problems is why SCOTTISH suppliers can supply ENGLISH companies at a lower rate than SCOTTISH consumers are charged.
You got an explanation?
My problems have nothing at all to do with the levels of ENGLISH suppliers..rather to do with the need for SCOTTISH companies to be supplying ENGLISH suppliers at all when they appear to be able to do it at a lower rate than they charge us!
Or do you think it is fair that an English supplier can charge less for Scottish generated electricity than a Scottish supplier?
Or do you think it is fair that an English supplier can charge less for Scottish generated electricity than a Scottish supplier?
Could it be that Scottish companies are rip off merchants and Scottish customers are mugs to cough up?
Or it could be just that the cost to maintain a network to supply electricity to a sparsely spread customer base is just higher?
Could it be that Scottish companies are rip off merchants and Scottish customers are mugs to cough up?
Or it could be just that the cost to maintain a network to supply electricity to a sparsely spread customer base is just higher?
That may very well be the case..........so now convince me that we should encourage those rip-off merchants by allowing them to erect unnecessary to Scots wind-farms/nuclear power stations in scenic areas simply so they can continue to rip us off? :confused
That may very well be the case..........so now convince me that we should encourage those rip-off merchants by allowing them to erect unnecessary to Scots wind-farms/nuclear power stations in scenic areas simply so they can contiue to rip us off? :confused
Windfarms are subsidised through the ROC system, indirectly through taxation.
OK let us assume Scotland can generate enough renewable energy to export. Since England contributes ~90% of the tax burden then it makes sense to me (on this specific issue) that the English will not only be paying for expensive electricity but they will be paying again for it through taxation, all for putting up a few wind turbines. The joke is on them.
Put yourself in their shoes, would you be happy to pay twice for something?
Windfarms are subsidised through the ROC system, indirectly through taxation.
OK let us assume Scotland can generate enough renewable energy to export. Since England contributes ~90% of the tax burden then it makes sense to me (on this specific issue) that the English will not only be paying for expensive electricity but they will be paying again for it through taxation, all for putting up a few wind turbines. The joke is on them.
Put yourself in their shoes, would you be happy to pay twice for something?
See..............does it really matter if they are exporting renewables or not.........the fact is that they are exporting approx 25% of production........whatever the source?
As far as I am aware..........and I'm more than happy to be proved wrong............... the Scottish ROC system is a devolved issue...............so England doesn't really have a heckuva lot to do with what Scotland allocates to it..........and, frankly...........how's about justifying the 90% English tax-burden figures................please...................be cause if you can, you'll be the first I've ever come across after years of arguing this on forums!:confused
As far as I am aware..........and I'm more than happy to be proved wrong............... the Scottish ROC system is a devolved issue...............so England doesn't really have a heckuva lot to do with what Scotland allocates to it..........and, frankly...........how's about justifying the 90% English tax-burden figures................please...................be cause if you can, you'll be the first I've ever come across after years of arguing this on forums!:confused
As far as I am aware, the ROC system is not a devolved issue and if it is then it mirrors exactly the English model. Since there is ~90% English to Scots population then there is the justification for my assumption.
As far as I am aware, the ROC system is not a devolved issue and if it is then it mirrors exactly the English model. Since there is ~90% English to Scots population then there is the justification for my assumption.
As we are presently in the process of looking at the wind turbine option on the Scottish SCHRI site, and the Engish Clear Skies site gives different...and reduced............. grant availability.............perhaps you will elucidate that assumption? :confused:
elucidate
I only wish I knew what that means :p
Countryman
22-Apr-06, 14:00
It is not just the English that want to spoil our landscape there are people and organisation that want to the the same at Shebster.
John Rosie told the Shebster community that he will build windmills at Shebster wether they surpported his proposal or not.
He was told at a Community Council meeting by the residents of Shebster that they did not want them the Community Council fully surpport the residents in their opposition to these wind farms.
Now the residents of Shebster have been written to by Ormlie Community Association saying that they want to discuss the wind farm proposals with them.
Come off it Ormlie if you want a wind farm put it at Ormlie not at Shebster.
Councillors scale back wind farms
BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/highlands_and_islands/4919766.stm)
And in England....
Fight against wind farm continues
BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/lincolnshire/4921646.stm)
There is considerable misunderstanding regarding windfarm scaleback as raised by MadPict in this thread. The draft Highland Renewable Energy Strategy (HRES) identified 11 areas as "preferred" for major and national scale windfarm development. A few days before the Planning, Development, Europe and Tourism Committee (PDET) voted on 19th April whether or not to recommend HRES, it was widely reported that the 11 preferred areas had been reduced to 3, and this information came from Highland Council. Everyone now believes that a huge reduction in windfarm potential was removed from the system. Not so.
The "preferred" areas have NOT been reduced from eleven to three in number, as announced prior to the PDET meeting on 22nd March 2006. Eight of the original preferred areas remain largely unaltered.
· Strathy Forest, East Caithness, and Balmacaan Forest have been removed. (Areas 1, 2, and 9 originally)
· Kinbrace, Helmsdale and Strath Brora (Areas 3,4 and 5 originally) are now collectively renamed as "Helmsdale and Strath Brora"( Now area 1)
Strath Rory, Beinn Tharsuinn and Glen Glass (Areas 6,7 and 8 originally) are now collectively renamed as "Beinn Tharsuinn" (Now area 2)
Monadhliath North West, and Monadhliath North East(Areas 10 and 11 originally) are now collectively renamed as "Monadhliath Mountains" (Now area 3)
So Areas 3,4,5, 6,7,8, 10 and 11 are still in the picture.
Eleven down to three suggests about a 70% reduction. Eleven down to eight is about an 18% reduction.
Ask your councillor to explain this to you.
ywindy
.
Windfarms are subsidised through the ROC system, indirectly through taxation.
OK let us assume Scotland can generate enough renewable energy to export. Since England contributes ~90% of the tax burden then it makes sense to me (on this specific issue) that the English will not only be paying for expensive electricity but they will be paying again for it through taxation, all for putting up a few wind turbines. The joke is on them.
Put yourself in their shoes, would you be happy to pay twice for something?
Wrong Rheghead, windfarms are not subsidised through taxation. The cost of the ROCS system which make them commercially viable is DIRECTLY added to your electricity bill.
Now the residents of Shebster have been written to by Ormlie Community Association saying that they want to discuss the wind farm proposals with them.
Come off it Ormlie if you want a wind farm put it at Ormlie not at Shebster.
... and were you aware that Ormlie Community Association kindly suggested that they visited the Shebster residents in their own home BEFORE meeting them all together? I believe that was not received too well in some homes!
Community Wind farms should be sited in or near the community proposing it, then they can experience all the benefits/effects of their wind farm!!!!!
Whitewater
11-May-06, 10:50
I have read through this thread with great interest. Many good points and arguments made. I am being educated.
I am not in favour of wind farms. I'm not against them from the scenic point of view, though they do not help the landscapes of Scotland or England. My reason for being against them is that they are an ill thought out, quick, and cheap answer by our government, so that they can meet a self imposed target for producing green energy, and so do their bit for global warming. They are also inefficient, at 25% efficiency, this type of source would have been scoffed at a few years ago.
Had they given the 'power' developers/design engineers some more time, much more efficient methods would have been developed e.g. tidal/current flows could have been utilised, and perhaps, could be the answer, they are constant, and would be much more dependable and efficient. Solar power is another obvious source which requires further developement.
As our Nuclear Power Stations are coming to the end of their lives, they have to be replaced by a power source of equal or similar capacity, how can we do it? It will not be via windmills, and perhaps not even tidal or solar power, fossil fuel is probably the current method of thinking, but then we would be doing nothing to reduce global warming. I think we will probably go full circle and return to Nuclear Power.
I can hear all the protests now, and I guess a lot of the arguments are well founded. What everybody seems to have forgot regarding Nuclear Power, is the fact that in the late 1940s and 50s when it was developed, it complied with all the legislations which were in place at that time. Through the developement down through the years, an aweful lot has been learned, new legislation, limits and practices have been put in place, and lots of the past practices have proved to be not as environmental friendly as first thought. A modren Nuclear Plant would be different baby altogether.
However, having said that, they can always be dangerous if the wrong people are in control of them. Chernoble (spelling) should never have happened, had some illegal experiments not been attempted. It was also a poor design of reactor, being watercooled, with very high pressure pipes going through the core. (several thousand psi, forgot the figures, in the region of 2 to 3000 psi). I'm also a bit concerned about Iran at the moment.
I'm sorry, I have digressed, but these are just my feeling about the Power Supply game as it stands at the moment.
I like them.
I'm not a resident of Caithness now, but on the occasions I visit, I am struck by their presence.
So - to some people they blight the landscape for 30 years? After that, you won't even know they were there. Not many other energy sources can claim that.
I can barely keep my eyes on the road on the casweymire for them, but not out of horror - they are majestic.
Im afraid people will always know where they were. Do you realise the vast amount of concrete that is poured for these things to be sited on?
Im afraid people will always know where they were. Do you realise the vast amount of concrete that is poured for these things to be sited on?
I don't think even that would be much of a challenge for Alan Tichmarsh.
On the scale of things, I don't think a few small areas of concrete that would soon grow over - is much to complain about.
There are no miracles in energy production, only compromises. Wind turbines seem a sensible compromise to me.
I like them.
I'm not a resident of Caithness now, but on the occasions I visit, I am struck by their presence.
So - to some people they blight the landscape for 30 years? After that, you won't even know they were there. Not many other energy sources can claim that.
I can barely keep my eyes on the road on the casweymire for them, but not out of horror - they are majestic.
Mareng
"I can barely keep my eyes on the road on the casweymire for them,"
This is just one of the problems!
ywindy
I don't think even that would be much of a challenge for Alan Tichmarsh.
On the scale of things, I don't think a few small areas of concrete that would soon grow over - is much to complain about.
There are no miracles in energy production, only compromises. Wind turbines seem a sensible compromise to me.
Mareng
Please explain the sensible energy production compromise you believe wind turbines provides.
ywindy
Mareng
Please explain the sensible energy production compromise you believe wind turbines provides.
ywindy
Because the only downside is a questionable impact on the landscape, and that doesn't seem too high a price to pay for "clean" energy.
I don't think even that would be much of a challenge for Alan Tichmarsh.
On the scale of things, I don't think a few small areas of concrete that would soon grow over - is much to complain about.
There are no miracles in energy production, only compromises. Wind turbines seem a sensible compromise to me.
Oh they look pretty so they must be good for the environment -
Energy consumption is the biggest environmental concern with cement and concrete production. Cement production is one of the most energy intensive of all industrial manufacturing processes. Including direct fuel use for mining and transporting raw materials, cement production takes about six million Btus for every ton of cement...
Thats just for the bases - what about the energy used to actually produce the steel to make them?............[disgust]
Wrong Rheghead, windfarms are not subsidised through taxation. The cost of the ROCS system which make them commercially viable is DIRECTLY added to your electricity bill.
Ermm? Where do you think the money comes from? Taxation of course!
Community Wind farms should be sited in or near the community proposing it, then they can experience all the benefits/effects of their wind farm!!!!!
Please define the geographical boundaries of your community.
Is it the scottish community? Caithnessian community or the Shebster community?
If we are talking about the concerns of the Scottish community then all Scots and residents can speak, we wouldn't want the English dictating to us what can and can't be done in Scotland. If we are talking about Caithness then only Caithnessians can speak, we wouldn't want Glaswegians dictating to us about what goes on in the county. Similiarly, if we are talking about the Shebster community then I think only Shebsterites can speak out about their community and other Caithnessians should poke their neb elsewhere.
Please define the geographical boundaries of your community.
Is it the scottish community? Caithnessian community or the Shebster community?
If we are talking about the concerns of the Scottish community then all Scots and residents can speak, we wouldn't want the English dictating to us what can and can't be done in Scotland. If we are talking about Caithness then only Caithnessians can speak, we wouldn't want Glaswegians dictating to us about what goes on in the county. Similiarly, if we are talking about the Shebster community then I think only Shebsterites can speak out about their community and other Caithnessians should poke their neb elsewhere.
Yes, but when somebody has got away with forcing Shebster to accept what somebody doesn't want on their own doorstep others will try to dump what they they dont want spoiling their own area on others as well.
Shebster today, where else the next day and the day after that and the day after that?
"It's nothing to do with you so keep your nose out!" is fine until it is something to do with you and nobody cares that it is you who is being trampled under foot by a different bully forcing his wishes on you.
Yes Jaws, but the same could be said when the pen pushers and accountants want a nuclear repositary to make a nice little backdrop to the Shebster windfarm. Only this time, the Shebsterites (or some of them) will welcome it with open arms with the sanction of every current and former Dounreay worker who is still blinded by the Dounreay 'goodtimes' of the 1960s and 1970s.
My point being, if folk want to object to the issue of windfarms then speak/object to them in real terms, not in terms of splitting or setting communities against eachother, divide and conquer has always been Scotland's downfall in the face of issues on a grander scale, hasn't it?
I think the nagging doubt many of have about the direction of the Governments push for green energy is their breathtaking incompetence on so many other fronts, I mean how can you trust an outfit that can't even organise a dental service?
Caithness and the Highlands have been the recipient of too many bad ideas which seemed the right thing at the time. The failed Alltnabreac peat powered station in the 50's, the failed tax break forestry plantations, poll tax, and I suppose you have to mention Dounereay and why ever we're in Iraq.
Global warming hasn't arrived overnight, its been cooking for 200 years or more. We can probably wait a few more years to improve the alternative technologies of wave and sun, but of course wind offers a quick solution now and when it fails to make sufficient difference the Government can turn round and say, well, we gave it a good shot let's get on with the nuclear alternative.
I also don't like the way that we are mining and shipping out our raw resource (wind) yet again when we should be adding value and jobs by turning it into some other product such as hydrogen fuel or another manufacturing process.
Oh they look pretty so they must be good for the environment -
Thats just for the bases - what about the energy used to actually produce the steel to make them?............[disgust]
Err - do you think you are going to make much energy from rubbing two organic sticks together? Every power station, hydro-dam, wave-energy turbine requires a bit of construction (meaning use of steel, concrete, ....... resources!)
Tell you what .......... Get rid of your car/TV/computer (the list goes on) and then take that line. Until such time ------ Get real!
As for the "looking pretty" - read my comment in the context it was obviously meant - I do not think they are an eyesore, I also think that they do not harm the environment. They are two entirely separate sentiments.
Have a nice day now.
Yes Jaws, but the same could be said when the pen pushers and accountants want a nuclear repositary to make a nice little backdrop to the Shebster windfarm. Only this time, the Shebsterites (or some of them) will welcome it with open arms with the sanction of every current and former Dounreay worker who is still blinded by the Dounreay 'goodtimes' of the 1960s and 1970s.
My point being, if folk want to object to the issue of Windfarms then speak/object to them in real terms, not in terms of splitting or setting communities against each other, divide and conquer has always been Scotland's downfall in the face of issues on a grander scale, hasn't it?
Well the nearest I have been to Dounreay is by having driven past the gates a few times so there is no financial interest or rose-tinted memories of any "good times" from it any more than I have of any other method of producing Electricity.
But for one small community to say to another, "We are not having our area spoiled but we are going to spoil yours for our benefit whether you like it or not!" is not the work of some devious sneaky pen-pusher or accountant, it is one community riding roughshod over another by saying, "We're going to do it whether you like it or not!" That is simply the tactics used by the bully and the Dictator.
The same goes for an individual doing the same thing.
How many people would be a little unhappy if I got some Company to give me a lot of money so they could build an old fashioned Coal Fired Power Station belching out black smoke all over Caithness? Would the people who objected to that be the same as those objecting to Shebster?
I could have a couple of chimney stacks a hundred meters high or so to prevent the smoke actually getting low enough to affect anybody.
My point is that there seems to be some problem here, not about wind-farms and Shebster but simply an anti-nuclear, anti-Dounreay impression being promoted. The problem is not that the people of Shebster, or Shebsterites, don't want a Wind Power Station but that they might just accept, horror of horrors, a nuclear repository and that if they do they will become the Devil Incarnate set on the destruction of everybody in Caithness.
Your objections to that are no less emotive than those of the Shebsterites towards a Wind Industry site.
It just seems that people don't like the change until it arrives, it gets built, time goes by, they get used to the change, it grows on them, they accept it, then they eventually get to like the change. Dounreay and bright red phone boxes are a good example of this. Same will happen to windfarms or the repository when it arrives.
In 50 years time, when nuclear fusion may make windfarms redundant, I can see Causeymire being preserved as a national monument.
I just hope the founding fathers of CWIF were able to see it happen![lol]
It just seems that people don't like the change until it arrives, it gets built, time goes by, they get used to the change, it grows on them, they accept it, then they eventually get to like the change. Dounreay and bright red phone boxes are a good example of this. Same will happen to windfarms or the repository when it arrives.
In 50 years time, when nuclear fusion may make windfarms redundant, I can see Causeymire being preserved as a national monument.
I just hope the founding fathers of CWIF were able to see it happen![lol]
Providing the Wind Farm is kept because it is the only one in the country then that would be fair enough. Seeing it is intended to cover the Country from end to end with them it would be like preserving fence posts for posterity.
it would be like preserving fence posts for posterity.
I believe there is a museum in Texas dedicated to barbed wire, so I don't rule anything out.
"Community Wind farms should be sited in or near the community proposing it, then they can experience all the benefits/effects of their wind farm!!!!!"
Caithness Windfarm Information Forum urged Highland Councillors to amend their Renewable Energy Strategy to include the following:
"No windfarm development for the benefit of one community will be permitted if it has a detrimental effect on another community."
Too sensible I'm afraid. Not a flicker.
ywindy
It just seems that people don't like the change until it arrives, it gets built, time goes by, they get used to the change, it grows on them, they accept it, then they eventually get to like the change. Dounreay and bright red phone boxes are a good example of this. Same will happen to windfarms or the repository when it arrives.
In 50 years time, when nuclear fusion may make windfarms redundant, I can see Causeymire being preserved as a national monument.
I just hope the founding fathers of CWIF were able to see it happen![lol]
At least one founding father of the Causewaymire Wind farm now lives well out of sight just north of Edinburgh.
ywindy
I've always felt that there is a deepseated resentment by some members of communities (and no - no-one on this thread appears to have displayed it - but I offer it for consideration) to projects like wind turbines on the subconcious basis that someone is making money out of "nothing".
By this I mean that the wind is freely available, and for someone to come along and erect a turbine, thereby appearing to get something for nothing - can irk some people. What they don't see is the development, construction and maintenance costs of the project.
I feel that some objections are based on that reason alone, but depicted as a complaint against a "visual eyesore"
Mmmmm.....
Which would you prefer to see, and which will have the lesser long term environmental effect?
http://www.natwindpower.co.uk/causeymire/images/aerialview.jpg
or
http://www.cpluhna.nau.edu/images/navajopwrplant_sm.jpg (http://www.cpluhna.nau.edu/images/navajopwrplant.jpg)
If you're going to quote me at least get it in context.
I don't think even that would be much of a challenge for Alan Tichmarsh.
On the scale of things, I don't think a few small areas of concrete that would soon grow over - is much to complain about.
There are no miracles in energy production, only compromises. Wind turbines seem a sensible compromise to me.
Oh they look pretty so they must be good for the environment -
Quote:
Energy consumption is the biggest environmental concern with cement and concrete production. Cement production is one of the most energy intensive of all industrial manufacturing processes. Including direct fuel use for mining and transporting raw materials, cement production takes about six million Btus for every ton of cement...
Thats just for the bases - what about the energy used to actually produce the steel to make them?...........
The point I was making was that creating your "few small areas of concrete" has probably wiped out any reductions in carbon emissions for each wind turbine for a good part of its first months/years of use.
The wind turbine companies will have you believe that they are the answer to the energy problems in the UK. They are not. They might make a very small dent in the problem but the only people benefitting from their erection are the companies/landowners involved.
Tell you what .......... Get rid of your car/TV/computer (the list goes on) and then take that line. Until such time ------ Get real!
Have a nice day now.
How do you know I do not generate my own electricity, cycle or use public transport, recycle everything, use water saving devices. Until you do, don't harangue me...
Now, I have to go and clean the solar panels, so a nice day I will be having....
P.S. If you had followed any of my arguments in threads about windfarms you'll see I am an advocate of Offshore windfarms - I just think that the little wilderness we have left in this country should not be an excuse for companies to stick up 100's of 300 foot tall whirling devices...
http://app100828.applicabroadband.net/BumperStickers/Offshore.jpg
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.