Wind farm for West Berks?, Secret site for turbines Options

[dannyboy]

Exactly right, we are doing more in the UK than most countries. I'm not an eco warrior, but I do believe we have to influence people with the way we conduct our affairs in this country. The big question is how will we influence countries like China to become greener?

By not buying stuff made in China.

People should not call for the Chinese to be ecologically accountable when taking advantage of China's lax laws on ecology by the purchase of cheap consumer goods.

[Iommi]

By not buying stuff made in China.

People should not call for the Chinese to be ecologically accountable when taking advantage of China's lax laws on ecology by the purchase of cheap consumer goods.

Hear, hear, but trying to avoid China would mean denying a lot of modern electrical conveniences (like anything starting with 'i' for instance) with little alternatives.

[Richard Garvie]

Whilst there is some merit in weind power - powering single dwellings whi9ch are in the right locations etc, I have a feeling wind farms are just the 21st Flow country tax fiddle.

I see where you are coming from. On the whole, wind technology is good and works well. But there is one site in particular that I pass on a regular basis that doesn't seem to work much, and that is in South Lincolnshire, one of the flattest parts of the country!!! I'd like West Berkshire to do it's bit by having alternative "green energy" facilities, but they need to be in the right place. Turbines will possibly be an issue because of the AONB area, I'd love to know what site is being considered.

[Biker1]

By not buying stuff made in China.

Almost impossible if you are a consumer today.

[dannyboy]

Almost impossible if you are a consumer today.

We're doomed then. May was well carry on regardless!

[Biker1]

We're doomed then. May was well carry on regardless!

Seems that way.

These talks the big economic countries have on global warming seem to have little effect.

[Simon Kirby]

The discussion here has mainly been about whether a wind farm should be built, but that's not really the question here is it? Like with any other business, the only thing the developer needs to understand is whether there's a profit to be made, and like with any other business, that's nothing to do with us is it? Our legitimate concerns are that we might not like how the thing looks, or the noise, vibration, and strobing it generates might upset us - and it's my understanding that the latter issues aren't a problem if the thing is built a reasonable distance away from where people live and work, and personally I like them.

I would just take issue again with RG's comment about West Berks investing in renewables - why? It's not something local government does well, and it's not something that needs to be done collectively like roads, rubbish collection, social services, etc. So absolutely no, I don't want WBC spending my money getting involved in wind farms, leave it to the private sector. Small State and Big Society please.

[Richard Garvie]

The discussion here has mainly been about whether a wind farm should be built, but that's not really the question here is it? Like with any other business, the only thing the developer needs to understand is whether there's a profit to be made, and like with any other business, that's nothing to do with us is it? Our legitimate concerns are that we might not like how the thing looks, or the noise, vibration, and strobing it generates might upset us - and it's my understanding that the latter issues aren't a problem if the thing is built a reasonable distance away from where people live and work, and personally I like them.

I would just take issue again with RG's comment about West Berks investing in renewables - why? It's not something local government does well, and it's not something that needs to be done collectively like roads, rubbish collection, social services, etc. So absolutely no, I don't want WBC spending my money getting involved in wind farms, leave it to the private sector. Small State and Big Society please.

The thing with wind farm companies is that they only pay a land rental fee to landowners and create a small community pot of money. I didn't say anywhere about investing, but as part of our manifesto preparation we wanted to identify sites that were suitable to encourage landowners to allow projects to be built. So your point about big society and small state does indeed apply to what we looked at. No need to take issue.

[Simon Kirby]

OK, cool.

BTW, are we going to get some of the Labour candidates on here - especially candidates for the Town Council?

[Strafin]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-...wind-blows.html

[Richard Garvie]

OK, cool.

BTW, are we going to get some of the Labour candidates on here - especially candidates for the Town Council?

I doubt it!!! They probably look at the stick I get and think it's not worth it. I'll raise it at our next meeting and try and get a few on here for a Q&A session.

[Simon Kirby]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-...wind-blows.html

Ill-informed mischief, even for the Hate Mail.

It's true, wind turbines generate, on average, very much less then their rated peak output. It's because their output rises very steeply with the speed that the wind is blowing, so it's only on quite windy days that they do much significant generating. Of course none of that is particularly interesting if the average output is enough to repay the investment, and for really big turbines in good locations it is, but it does mean that small urban turbines are a complete and utter waste of money.

It's also true that turbines furl in strong wind so that they don't disintegrate. Again, not particularly interesting, but it does mean that the turbine needs designing for the site conditions so that it spends the optimum amount of time generating, which is exactly what happens.

It's true, big turbines are nett power consumers at times, but again, on average they generate enough power to make a profit.

It's true, wind turbines don't contribute a significant amount to the national generating capacity. Did anyone say they did?

No way of storing the power generated by wind turbines? Well, we do have hydro storage, but no, in general the idea is that the electricity generated by wind turbines is consumed. That is rather the point, no? A point that could have been made but wasn't is that wind turbine capacity doesn't displace very much conventional capacity because of the variability of wind. So if you install a MW of wind capacity you can't dismantle a corresponding MW gas-fired power station because there will be days when the wind doesn't blow and you'll need to fire up the gas-fired power station to take over, but even so, on average you will use the equivelent of a MW power station's supply of gas, and that's a helpful amount of CO₂ displaced, and it also improves the nation's energy security.

"Every time I drive up to North Norfolk, another crop of turbines has sprouted from the soil, disfiguring the scenery for miles around."

Oh, right, you don't like how they look. Sure, not everyone like them, but it would have been more honest just to say that instead of having a spume-fest, but hey, that's the Hate Mail.

[NWNREADER]

It is not only the Daily Mail that has published the opposing perspective on wind turbines - as mentioned in my earlier post.
There is a substantial body of evidence(?) that challenges the spoon-fed mantras that wind farms are the solution to the energy needs of the planet. Some even identifies the carbon footprint of turbine systems to be greater than fossil-fuel power stations (let alone nuclear).

Physical beauty is barely grounds for choosing a partner, let alone a method of generating power!!

[Simon Kirby]

It is not only the Daily Mail that has published the opposing perspective on wind turbines - as mentioned in my earlier post.
There is a substantial body of evidence(?) that challenges the spoon-fed mantras that wind farms are the solution to the energy needs of the planet. Some even identifies the carbon footprint of turbine systems to be greater than fossil-fuel power stations (let alone nuclear).

Physical beauty is barely grounds for choosing a partner, let alone a method of generating power!!

I wouldn't disagree with any of that.

The cost of small wind turbines is high in proportion to their generating capacity, and it's not until they get quite enormous (like 50m across) that there's a realistic chance of getting a return on the investment. Small turbines, most especially the silly little things that you see in housing estates, won't in their entire lifetime generate as much electricity as went into their production. The site is also crucially important as efficiency suffers badly if the
air is turbulent such as you get pretty much anywhere that isn't right out in the middle of a flat treeless wildernes, and efficiency is also strongly dependent on the strength of the wind, and it's a cruel irony that the best sites tend to be the most remote and inaccessible so high installation and maintenance costs further squeeze narrow margins.

And no, wind turbines will not save the planet, but as part of a combination of technologies and approaches they have their place.

As you allude, if it's zero carbon you're after then fision reactors are really rather good there, though they have other issues.

And no, even though I'm a bit of a fan of their technology and aesthetics that's no reason at all to wish one on my neighbours, but all that said, there are situations where a wind farm can turn a profit, and if there's a developer who thinks there's a suitable site in West Berks then I have no objection on the basis of what they look like, and I believe that is the issue here.

As much as I despise the spoon-fed green-is-good mantras - and I do despise it - I also despise the lazy snideness of the Daily Mail, pandering to their smug reactionary readership. [Edit: not that everyone who reads the Daily Mail is a smug reactionary, of course. ]

[Bofem]

Everytime there is talk of wind turbines, the refuseniks come out in force to talk garbage.

Get those turbines up in West Berks I say and lets slash our emissions! Get building!

It's not about refuseniks, it's about WBC applying the SAME rules to building a windfarm in the AONB as an incinerator. WBC's Property team and Planning dept have huge misgivings over this site, and the rest has been emailed to the NWN.....so read about it next week.

It's important we agree what is and isn't appropriate for an AONB. We've done bypasses, power stations, phone masts, bomb depots, motorway serviec stations.

A windfarm's probably worth the aesthetic sacrifice if the economics work, it would seem. So surely the same for an incinerator.

[Strafin]

I just posted the link becase they are a lot of factors that people don't think about when being reactionary to the wind turbines. They need to be heated for starters I didn't realise that, how does that fit in with the whole eco warrior global warming nonsense? And they don't work most of the time because they are switched off, not because the the wind isn't strong enough. I like that when the opposing argument is put forward it is considered spoon feeding and hatemongering, but when information is put in the exact same way from the other side it is alright.

[Richard Garvie]

It's not about refuseniks, it's about WBC applying the SAME rules to building a windfarm in the AONB as an incinerator. WBC's Property team and Planning dept have huge misgivings over this site, and the rest has been emailed to the NWN.....so read about it next week.

It's important we agree what is and isn't appropriate for an AONB. We've done bypasses, power stations, phone masts, bomb depots, motorway serviec stations.

A windfarm's probably worth the aesthetic sacrifice if the economics work, it would seem. So surely the same for an incinerator.

It depends where the proposed wind site is. As for the incinerator, there will be no local demand for it once Padworth is built, so all that will happen is we will be generating extra traffic carrying waste from other parts of the country. Wind energy costs the council nothing, it's not polluting the district and the landowner will benefit financially, as will the community. It's difficult to say you support the technology universally, because it all depends where they are sited.

[Simon Kirby]

I like that when the opposing argument is put forward it is considered spoon feeding and hatemongering, but when information is put in the exact same way from the other side it is alright.

Unless I'm mistaken the "spoon-feeding" comes from the pros and the "hatemongering" comes from the antis.

[dannyboy]

It depends where the proposed wind site is. As for the incinerator, there will be no local demand for it once Padworth is built, so all that will happen is we will be generating extra traffic carrying waste from other parts of the country. Wind energy costs the council nothing, it's not polluting the district and the landowner will benefit financially, as will the community. It's difficult to say you support the technology universally, because it all depends where they are sited.

Grundon want to build it as a commercial enterprise, nothing more nothing less. It is ideally sited as it is in an already disfigured landscape & slap bang on a motorway junction.

[Exhausted]

There used to be in days of yore, a water turbine down by the millwater at the foot of Boundary Road which I understand generated 40kW day and night. Now everytime I walk through Victoria Park and look at the bleed off of the Kennet by the police station, I wonder what use could be put to that water flow. That must be able to contribute a good whack of electrical stuff, certainly enough to power the library I would have thought.