Wind Farms

[Chevvyf1]

Re: Wind Farms

I prefer the "Oyster Wave Power" and Tide is more dependable than wind and even looking out to sea, its not too easy to see these yellow sub like engines

[StephenL]

Re: Wind Farms

Stephen, as we "THE UK" process boat and train loads of Nuc waste from all over the world ... you should not be too worried ... just move for retirement ... abroad

It's not the safety which bothers me. It's the cost, which must eventually be passed to the consumer.

[Graptolite]

Re: Wind Farms

For an idea of how effective wind is at contributing to our national energy needs I recommend to anyone interested that they keep an eye on the National Grid here:

http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

Today is a relatively good day - the 4,400 turbines in the UK are currrently producing around 5% of our electricity needs. In the recent cold still weather total output was for several days in a row, around 200MW - less than 0.5% of demand.

[Chevvyf1]

Re: Wind Farms

For an idea of how effective wind is at contributing to our national energy needs I recommend to anyone interested that they keep an eye on the National Grid here:

http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

Today is a relatively good day - the 4,400 turbines in the UK are currrently producing around 5% of our electricity needs. In the recent cold still weather total output was for several days in a row, around 200MW - less than 0.5% of demand.

David, that is why I prefer the "Wave Power" no one can hold the tides back

Stephen, We shall pay a very high price "It's the cost, which must eventually be passed to the consumer" in poor health and loss of fish stocks - where the "dirty water output" is well recorded for this activity and, childhood Leukeamias

[Ian]

Re: Wind Farms

I've never quite understood the argument that bird kills from wind turbines don't matter because cars and cats kill a lot more. That's like saying that it doesn't matter if I murder someone, because Hitler and Stalin killed far more.
One thing which is indisputable is that wind turbines are very efficient at killing bats (all species of which are highly protected both in UK and European law.)
People are understandably concerned about nuclear power, but if we are to stand any chance at all of hitting climate change targets, there are no realistic alternatives. Wind power is an expensive distraction which just doesn't cut the mustard. I would suggest to anyone who is getting jittery about the problems of nuclear waste that you do a Google search for thorium power. The Chinese and Indians are currently doing the world a massive favour by progressing development of liquid fluorde thorium reactors.

My point is, if you are concerned at wind farms supposedly killing lots of birds (and there is absolutely no evidence to support this claim) then there should be much more focus on the routine and proven killing of wildlife by the presence of human infrastructure.

Ian

[Ian]

Re: Wind Farms

Well, Ian, what I actually said was "I believe there are doubts...." I readily admit I'm not nearly informed enough on this issue to have a firm opinion but I do recall TV programs in which the issue has been debated with "experts" having differing views on the matter. As a landscape photographer (sometimes!) I am concerned about the visual impact but I do realise that the power crisis is potentially so serious that any solution must take priority, so long as it is effective. I really did ought to know more facts about this issue, so thanks for the link which I will read when I have more time - I'm going for a walk now while the weather is fine.

Much of the doubt is through misinformation. I dare say that many doubters feel that way because they fear or dislike wind turbines to start with.

I can understand if people dislike the appearance of wind turbines. It's a personal thing. I and a good number of others think the look OK and probably just as many dislike them and another sizeable number are ambivalent. I expect most of those that dislike them fear that they will appear on their doorstep.

Fair enough, but when I start reading that people 'have heard' that wind farms will never recoup the costs in their construction and suchlike... well, nuff said really.

The problem is with humanity - we will only agree when it is far too late.

Ian

[al_kaholik]

Re: Wind Farms

Nuclear isn't really a problem to me either. The French are cashing in with them at the moment and I see little reason for us not to do the same.

[alfbranch]

Re: Wind Farms

Wind turbines are noisier (thats form experience too) than you think I have seen a documentary where a farmer ended up selling up as the family coundnt stand the noise from the turbines on there land.

On the hottest and coldest days of the year they stand still doing nothing when we use the most energy.

As for the hate of pylons windfarms are meaning we need more pylons.

They make a good photographic subject IMO here are some visible form my house but not taken from my house


Trubines in the evening 2 by alf.branch, on Flickr

[alfbranch]

Re: Wind Farms

Nuclear isn't really a problem to me either. The French are cashing in with them at the moment and I see little reason for us not to do the same.

We buy a lot of power from them most of which is produced by nuclear

Oh and you southerners (London essex etc) are closer to the french reprocessing plant than you are to Sellafield.

[Ian]

Re: Wind Farms

For an idea of how effective wind is at contributing to our national energy needs I recommend to anyone interested that they keep an eye on the National Grid here:

http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

Today is a relatively good day - the 4,400 turbines in the UK are currrently producing around 5% of our electricity needs. In the recent cold still weather total output was for several days in a row, around 200MW - less than 0.5% of demand.

This is an interesting resource but in the end it's not what happens on one day or even in a week or a month but as a long term and ongoing statistic. Published data already shows that wind energy has significantly decreased CO2 emissions for the country - despite some claiming wind energy actually causes more CO2 to be emitted. Who would you believe?

On top of that and often left out of debates - besides CO2, wind and other renewable energy here in the UK will reduce pollution (not just in the UK but in our neighbouring countries (acid rain, etc.) and will help us to be less reliant on imported gas, oil and coal in the future.

Hey - I'm no Green (I consider them to be extremists, and I don't like extremists of any sort) - renewables just make sense to me. I am in favour of nuclear too! And the Japanese experience of two years ago made no difference to my support for nuclear - what was done in Fukushima was asking for trouble and completely avoidable and the nuclear industry will have learned from that, hopefully!

Ian

[alfbranch]

Re: Wind Farms

. I am in favour of nuclear too! And the Japanese experience of two years ago made no difference to my support for nuclear - what was done in Fukushima was asking for trouble and completely avoidable and the nuclear industry will have learned from that, hopefully!

Ian

It has Ian

[DanH56]

Re: Wind Farms

Ugly, expensive, inefficient, and a complete waste of time.

[Graptolite]

Re: Wind Farms

This is an interesting resource but in the end it's not what happens on one day or even in a week or a month but as a long term and ongoing statistic. Published data already shows that wind energy has significantly decreased CO2 emissions for the country - despite some claiming wind energy actually causes more CO2 to be emitted. Who would you believe?

Actually there is no firm evidence that any recent reduction in CO2 level is due to wind energy, rather than the economic downturn. The estimates of CO2 savings produced by the wind industry conveniently "forget" to include the CO2 produced by the back-up power sources required to be ticking over (so called spinning reserve) to take over from the turbines at those times when the wind drops.
The net result according to several authorities e.g. Prof G Hughes of Edinburgh, Udo & le Pair in Europe and BENTEK in Texas and Colorado is that wind + its essential ‘back-up’ save little or no CO2.

There is however, good evidence that wind farms and ancillary groundworks situated on peatlands will release more CO2 due to peat disturbance and changes in drainage than can ever be recouped during the projected lifetime of the windfarm. Even the Scottish Government recognises this and has now produced a "carbon calculator" to determine what the balance is likely to be in peat areas. And where are most windfarms being built at the moment? On upland peat moors of course.

I'm sorry Ian - I don't wish to get embroiled in a heated online discussion about this - it can be a very divisive, polarising issue, but it is something I feel strongly about as I witness countryside that I have known and loved all my life disappearing under a tide of windfarms. I know a great deal about the pros and cons of windpower, and the more I've learnt about it, the more convinced I am that a bunch of snake-oil salesmen have very successfully sold us a very expensive pup.

[Zuiko]

Re: Wind Farms

Ugly, expensive, inefficient, and a complete waste of time.

Well, that's me (according to my wife, anyway) but what about the wind turbines?

[Ian]

Re: Wind Farms

Actually there is no firm evidence that any recent reduction in CO2 level is due to wind energy, rather than the economic downturn. The estimates of CO2 savings produced by the wind industry conveniently "forget" to include the CO2 produced by the back-up power sources required to be ticking over (so called spinning reserve) to take over from the turbines at those times when the wind drops.
The net result according to several authorities e.g. Prof G Hughes of Edinburgh, Udo & le Pair in Europe and BENTEK in Texas and Colorado is that wind + its essential ‘back-up’ save little or no CO2.

There is however, good evidence that wind farms and ancillary groundworks situated on peatlands will release more CO2 due to peat disturbance and changes in drainage than can ever be recouped during the projected lifetime of the windfarm. Even the Scottish Government recognises this and has now produced a "carbon calculator" to determine what the balance is likely to be in peat areas. And where are most windfarms being built at the moment? On upland peat moors of course.

I'm sorry Ian - I don't wish to get embroiled in a heated online discussion about this - it can be a very divisive, polarising issue, but it is something I feel strongly about as I witness countryside that I have known and loved all my life disappearing under a tide of windfarms. I know a great deal about the pros and cons of windpower, and the more I've learnt about it, the more convinced I am that a bunch of snake-oil salesmen have very successfully sold us a very expensive pup.

Well, there is plenty of published data from authoritative sources that contradicts naysayers; data indeed direct from Texas and Colorado where energy consumption has risen and where there has been a significant increase in wind energy and CO2 emissions have gone down.

Would you rather see the whole of the world's beautiful land become choked by pollution and global warming because we don't do anything?

I am sorry and the last thing I want to do is personalise this but unless we do something - we are doomed, and we means you too.

Ian