Windfarms – yes or no?

Home Forum Chat Forum Windfarms – yes or no?

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 122 total)
  • Windfarms – yes or no?
  • druidh
    Member

    Sometimes

    TandemJeremy
    Member

    As a part of a mix of solutions yes. Its not the only answer but they are part of the answer

    Premier Icon Sandwich
    Subscriber

    Install closer to the end user would be a better idea. The Cambridge NIMBYS didn’t like that idea though.

    fatsimon mk2
    Member

    yes but then they are building a great big one off the coast at gunfleet sand and are using the port where i live and are bring a shed load of cash in to the local area so not going to say no

    coffeeking
    Member

    Offshore is the sensible option, onshores generally only produce around only ~15% of their rated output, and although one looks nice, a hillside smattered with them looks bloody aweful. I think the location needs careful consideration – IMO farmers fields on flat ground are a fine location from a looks point of view but useless from a generation point of view, so they have to stand on picturesque hillsides where people previously ventured to get away from the hustle and bustle of man-made life.

    will
    Member

    Off shore yes, in the mountains, well i’m not sure…

    thepodge
    Member

    they are more than welcome to put one in my back yard as long as they fill in all the planning forms.

    I like wind farms from an eco side and from an industrial design side

    Premier Icon jj55
    Subscriber

    ……. not very effective on a day without wind

    gusamc
    Member

    As a minor part of an overall plan yes.

    Currently I prefer tidal (more reliable – possibly), however have seen so many (contradictory) statistics that I now no longer believe anything.

    Keep Nuclear as it actually works.

    Also interested in building regs type aproach – ie better insusualtion, compulsary solar roofs etc etc

    coffeeking
    Member

    Solar panels are questionable – the amount of energy and chemicals used to make them isnt great, certainly not with normal incident light as the energy production takes 10+ years just to pay back the carbon used in manufacture IIRC, concentrated to a few hundred suns makes them far more viable, butimpossible to put on your house roof.
    And in the UK? The efficacy of them goes lower and lower. We had some 80w panels on our roof here in scotland and their output throughout the year was negligible – talking <5w unless it was a clear-sky day.

    Premier Icon geoffj
    Subscriber

    I’ve just returned from a promotional event by Vattenfall who want to put in 15 turbines up at the back of Dunkeld.
    I’m supportive and don’t agree with the landscape arguments. What say you lot?

    TandemJeremy
    Member

    solar panels of the type that heat water are fine – even in Scotland they work. Photovoltaics are not – the embedded energy and polution from making them is too great for the return

    Context dependant. But I’m not anti-turbine. I’m glad they built one on the Mendip because people need to get used to the look of them and we needs some realistic idea of the cost/benefits.

    Cooling towers seem ridiculous- Combine heat and power

    Flaring also looks stupid

    Transmission losses of electricity are surprisingly high so localising generation near users is good (e.g. a nuclear pile near London makes sense to me).

    An infrstructure supporting fixing the energy at source and transporting it efficiently to the end user (hydrogen cells?), using the cells to fuel the transport.

    Tidal – yes but some mitigation for the landscape and ecology changes must go with it IMO

    Finding was of sponsoring reduced consuption – a Joule saved is a Joule earned.

    Basically, we have to do the lot.

    Premier Icon matt_outandabout
    Subscriber

    Efficiency is king. Insulate, insulate and err airtight etc etc.
    If you are in Scotland, micro hydro is a massively undeveloped and huuuuge potential – capital payback is 3-5 years, maintenance minimal, more reliable energy production etc etc.

    Onshore wind – sometimes…

    uplink
    Member

    No – too ugly for anywhere but at sea

    Nuclear & coal with some off-shore turbines [as a gesture] is the way we’ll be going, which is fine by me

    coffeeking
    Member

    If you are in Scotland, micro hydro is a massively undeveloped and huuuuge potential – capital payback is 3-5 years, maintenance minimal, more reliable energy production etc etc.

    Boy would I love a house with micro hydro capabilities, unfortunately I cant find a house thats affordable let alone has a water supply 🙂

    TJ – you mention water heating panels work in scotland, I’d like to see some tests done on that – I dont doubt it but I’d assume you needed a fairly large array to give any form of payback?

    Premier Icon coolhandluke
    Subscriber

    Apparently, they take 10 years to produce the amount of energy it took to make them in the first place so I’d have to say NO.

    sonic
    Member

    I can’t understand people who think wind turbines look ugly. i think they look beautiful both physically and for what they represent. To see these tall, slender, graceful structures with their slowly-turning pure-white wings is only made better by the thought that they represent responsable and clean energy production.

    but it remains the fact that nuclear energy is the way to go. for the energy produced versus the amount of energy to build and the amount of waste produced, nuclear is leaps and bounds ahead of any other method. all we need now is controllable nuclear fusion….

    Premier Icon igm
    Subscriber

    Done the connections for a few in my time (puffs chest, draws breath , prepares to spout nonsense).

    Once again I’m agreeing (generally at least) with MattO&A.

    Onshore, properly designed and in the right place windfarms have a load factor of around 20-30%.
    Flat farmland can be an excellent place to put them ‘cos there’s no hills to get in the way of the wind (same as offshore, if one thinks about it).
    A mix of sources is always best.
    And even better is not to use it in the first place; as the man says – insulate. Also turn your central heating down (17C is plenty, I grew up with 14C) and put a vest (baselayer to you) on if you’re cold

    concept2
    Member

    A little O/T but in the ballpark:

    The “book” within this site is free for download and also available via Amazon. It seems to cover a number of angles – i have only dipped into it so far.

    http://www.withouthotair.com/

    antigee
    Member

    think too intrusive in the wrong place and may well be there for a few decades when technology will have moved on or should have moved on

    there is a proposal to build 5 410ft high turbines on the ridge above Stocksbridge, north of Sheffield and across from Langsett facing the moors
    so if you don’t want to see these as you descend Cut Gate towards Langsett Barnsley Council Planning Application 2008/1667 is I think still open for comment

    (to compare Blackpool Tower is just over 500ft high)

    Andy_K
    Member

    That quoted height will be to the tip of the vertical blade, not the hub, so in reality they won’t seem *quite* that tall.

    porterclough
    Member

    Antigee – there’s already a windfarm above langsett, I think it looks fine from cut gate. Don’t forget you can also see the woodhead road, and in the distance, emley
    Moor transmitter and several coal power stations in west and north Yorkshire…

    cbike
    Member

    TJ – you mention water heating panels work in scotland, I’d like to see some tests done on that – I dont doubt it but I’d assume you needed a fairly large array to give any form of payback?

    Not really – 5 panels provide enough hot water for 6 people in the summer and top up to 30 degrees on a grey day in the winter. You can see them here (well you cant actually but they are the 5 conservatory roof panels) It was a new build. Savings may have been nulled a bit by modern build quality of the boiler though!!

    martyntr
    Member

    Windfarms – yes or no?

    Definately, but preferably out at sea.

    I read recently that the amount of CO2 released when upland peat/boggy areas is dug into to erect wind turbines, negates the CO2 saved by using this as a renewable source of power.

    djglover
    Member

    Unless the cost comes down considerably, there won’t be any more wind farms for a while.

    Offshore wind is more effective than onshore 37% efficient and generating 85% of the time IIRC.

    Still all our projects are currently shelved until the cost comes down or the ROC goes up

    Premier Icon beinbhan
    Subscriber

    Where about at Dunkeld geoffj I haven’t seen anything in the local press
    Personally I hate the things if they want to build them they should put them in the cities that need the power not all over hill sides miles from population centres

    Munqe-chick
    Member

    No idea about pros/cons of their use, however I do know a lot of people whinge about them being an eyesor on the landscape however I disagree. I find them very relaxing and cool to look at. Look at the ones at Afan as you ride past … brill! would be happy if I had to look at them from my back/front garden.

    antigee
    Member

    there’s already a windfarm above langsett, I think it looks fine from cut gate. Don’t forget you can also see the woodhead road, and in the distance, emley
    Moor transmitter and several coal power stations in west and north Yorkshire…

    it looks fine because it is small scale
    the woodhead road is visually intrusive and at some points runs less than a metre from people’s front doors – a ban on HGV’s so they have to use the M62 would make sense
    as to Emley Moor and the power stations – my point exactly – once they are there – that is it no turning back

    Premier Icon geoffj
    Subscriber

    beinbhan – logiealmond, 10km west of Dunkeld, west of Little Glenshee

    porterclough
    Member

    They are beautiful, as are many other things humans built – emley moor transmitter, ribblehead viaduct, the millau gorge bridge, and so on.

    Something has gone wrong in our culture when so many people are afraid to build anything.

    CaptJon
    Member

    Yep. Would see lots of jobs created in the North East of England.

    Premier Icon beinbhan
    Subscriber

    Thanks geoffj

    antigee
    Member

    They are beautiful, as are many other things humans built

    think i’d prefer Ribblehead without the viaduct – think might be confusing impressive tool user achievements with beauty

    Premier Icon epicyclo
    Subscriber

    Wind = heavily subsidised and not particularly effective.

    The answer is nuclear sited right in the centre of the cities that want the power.

    Heather Bash
    Member

    utterly unconvinced – government soft option imo.

    >They are beautiful, as are many other things humans built<

    Yeah, in context perhaps but they have intruded far enough into the Scottish Highlands for example

    Premier Icon IdleJon
    Subscriber

    Absolutely no.

    If you think they are beautiful, please campaign for them in your own areas, your own backyards. But don’t forget that you don’t only build ‘graceful’ turbines, you build the infrastructure to get transport to and from the sites, you fence off areas of open moorland, you clear areas of trees, you destroy areas of heathland and mountain landscape, you most definitely intrude on areas of natural beauty. Not to mention potential damage to archaeological sites and wildlife.

    The area around Afan is completely ringed with planning applications for turbines to the extent that the locals at Glyncorrwg are worried about losing the tourist trade ie you. Their valley has been raped once by outside developers, now it is going to happen again.

    If I ride to my highest point on my local ride, I can see the ones over at Afan. If nPower get their way, I’ll see 19 more, 127m tall, sitting to the north of Swansea at Mynydd y Gwair. There is a plan for an offshore windfarm to the southeast. If I ride a little to the north I can see a windfarm over to east. There are other applications to the west of Swansea as well.

    These things aren’t built to provide jobs, or cheap power, they are built to reap the subsidies, and the companies that do it stick their fingers up at local communities.

    A quote from nPower relating to the Mynydd y Gwair windfarm:

    Taking into account periods of low winds, very high winds and time for maintenance work, the Mynydd y Gwair Wind Farm would generate enough clean electricity each year to supply the average needs of about 28,000 homes. This clean electricity would make a significant contribution towards the amount of renewable energy generated in South Wales.

    So a windfarm which will be visible for around 20 – 30 miles will supply the energy needs of approximately 12% of the Swansea urban area. Better build some more then guys..

    After all we have enough wilderness in the UK that we can just wreck whats left.

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 122 total)

The topic ‘Windfarms – yes or no?’ is closed to new replies.