Motoring1 min ago
Wind Farms
There is so much negative rubbish in the papers about wind farms.Supports have to be factual, anti's spout any old rubbish. Recent surveys suggest that 75% of people in the UK support them. As a Renewable Energy Engineer I support them (although I admit, like all things, they are not perfect). Do you support them? If not can you present credable ways forward for clean energy, most anti's don't feel that necessary!!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by mash. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I support them!
What I am anti, is NIMBYISM - it is short sighted and selfish and shows no regard for other people, our planet, or future generations.
It's all very well and good saying they're ugly, but we are running out of options. This is a practical problem and needs to be supported in a practical and efficient way. If people can't cut down on their energy consumption, this is the way we will have to go.
PS - They should put one in the Owen's Park Quad in Fallowfield Manchester. I walk through it every day with a HUGE struggle - the place is a veritable wind tunnel!
Hurrah for Mash!
Yes, I think we should ditch them, pull down all the ones that are there and don't put up any more. They are a huge blight on the landscape, they are inefficient, they require huge areas of land for poor returns and they have other environmental impacts by virtue of their materials and design.
The best way forward for clean energy is nuclear: just look at France. Of course, it should be done properly, no more Sellafields or Dounrays, but the environmental impact is TINY and they are highly efficient.
I do also agree with MargeB to the extent that nuclear is the way forward. The expected loss from nuclear is TINY and the costs of not using it far outweight that risk. Whilst the media has their say though - I don't know which we'll end up with - wind farms, nuclear, or blackouts. (Sorry - according to another thread, we now have to say "non-white outs" or something similar!)
I live in Great Yarmouth 500 yrads from the beach - there are loads of these wind turbines on Scroby sands just off the beach.
PErsonally speaking, I quite like them - my wife is indifferent. There is no noise from them.
Would also quite happily support nuclear power aswell - wouldn't be so keen on that in back yard though (more due to terrorism threat than fall out) - but if it happened would not complain that much.
Lets face it, pretty much everything is dangerous and carcenogenie from peas and salmon through to electic pylons. What's the problem with nuclear power?
PErsonally speaking, I quite like them - my wife is indifferent. There is no noise from them.
Would also quite happily support nuclear power aswell - wouldn't be so keen on that in back yard though (more due to terrorism threat than fall out) - but if it happened would not complain that much.
Lets face it, pretty much everything is dangerous and carcenogenie from peas and salmon through to electic pylons. What's the problem with nuclear power?
To MargeB. It seems you fall into the camp of the ill educated anti group! They do take up land, however it can still be used for other purposes, many are sited on working farms. They are not inefficient, I admit not as productive as fossil fuel generation, however the significant thing that people forget is the fuel is free which compensate for this. They do not offer poor returns, what companies would install them if this were true? Yes they use materials (metals plastics etc), doesn't everything you buy? As for Nuclear having a TINY environmental impact I recommend you study this a little deeper, they are a nightmere and additionallly one of the most expensive power plants to run longer term.
Here's a different view from the poet Sheenagh Pugh
http://www.geocities.com/sheenaghpugh/poems.html
Scroll down to the poem called "windfarm angels"
The long term vison must be fusion reactors :- Clean nuclear but I'll think myself very lucky if I see it in my lifetime.
In the meantime I'd say we need a diverse policy reducing reliance on fossil fuels both for environmental reasons and to conserve stocks ( Our grand children wont be able to make plastics from the wind! ).
But you can't run the entire country on windfarms and personally I think nuclear fission reactors are still politically impossible. Can you see a politician about to take the "credit" for building more?
I guess the recipe is as much renewable as practical and investment on more efficiency in conventional power stations
Oh and can somebody please give the French and the Japanese a slap and ask them to make up their minds where they're going to build ITER
Trouble with nuclear fission power stations though is as mash says they're far and away the most expensive.
The generating industries were exempt from decomissioning costs first time around. You try and find a commercial business willing to build and operate a nuclear power plant - no chance - what does that tell you about them?
France is a highly centralised country - the government runs it all - everybody subsidises nuclear energy from their taxation.
The only way to make nuclear energy competetive is a huge carbon emission levy on conventional power stations.
Who's in favour of paying higher electricity bills?
I'm in favour. I don't actually see why so many people think they're ugly. No-one seems to think windmills look ugly, and what are wind turbines (appearance wise) other than stripped down, futuristic windmills? Perhaps it's because they're (shock, horror) modern that people don't like them. I remember driving through Northern France a couple of years back and seeing loads of the things set against the skyline - I thought they looked quite elegant. Certainly, knowing that they are doing some good doesn't hurt either.
You want ugly? A grimy factory belching black smoke into the air - that's ugly.
You want ugly? A grimy factory belching black smoke into the air - that's ugly.
This the type of 'question' I dislike most on the Answerbank, the type that's not a question at all but a self-built forum where the questioner abuses the site to try to force his 'opinion' on other people and ridicules anyone who disagrees with him. The "question", if I can call it that, read 'Do you support them? If not, can you present credable (sic) ways forward for clean energy..'.
So, being 'the answerbank', I reply to the question as I see it, reading what others have to say so that I can inform myself. Only to come back and see the questioner's comment 'To MargeB. It seems you fall into the camp of the ill educated anti group!', and then a classic abuse of the 'starring' system, where the views that support the questioner are given 3 starred, everyone else ignored.
Please don't waste our time by using the forum to thrust your views on others. It's a question and answer site.
Oh dear, it seems some people are very easily upset! I felt it appropreate to respond because my question was based on the fact the 'anti's spout any old rubbish' and one person walked straight into this camp. I also asked for credable (sic) alternatives. I think it is a shame for it to be inappropreate for someone to disagree with a statement made in answer. Look back over the site you will find loads of questions which become debate.
Give me a star and we'll call it quits.
Look, we're all products of the UK education system. Everything is 'star' based. It's in our blood. I didn't even get one star.
I don't know enough about wind farms to comment. However I am interested very much in Jake's comment about plastics. What would the ideal be? Stop use of oil for non-plastic uses, to conserve it for future plastic needs? If not, what do we do for plastics when oil is depleted? I suppose we could always just pull down the wind farms and use them...
Where are all the foxes,
where are all the vixens,
They're all buried,
beneath a new branch of Dixons.
and, oneeyedvic in Yarmouth last week is where I saw them! I remember cos they weren't there before the last time I went!! We all noticed one day that they had turned and faced a different direction; obvious really that they should do that, but I never thought too much about them. At Caister there is a sign up on the beach cafe explaining how, what, when & why they are there, and I am ALL FOR IT.
hah i thought it was hilarious that everyone else got 3 stars except for Marge B, textbook example of trying to divide and conquer. Here some facts about alt. energy i learnt off by heart for geography; UK has the potential to supply max. 20% of energy demand with wind power, it is curently less than 5%. Hydro electric power is only supplying 1% of UK's energy, nuclear power is supplying 28% (a cut back since 60s). Alt. energy is unreliable, unable to meet sudden demand, and produce little energy. Everyone knows their advantages. Nuclear power; waste is costly to dispose of and not to mention dificult and still radioactive, more efficient than fossil fuels, almost unlimited, expensive to set up, but its easy for LEDCs to import small amounts of uranium (thus break out of poverty cycle). Make your own mind up.
personal opinion: Alt. energy is def. the way forward because to problem of nuclear waste is too great. But if they do develop nuclear fusion then i may change my mind.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank3 mins ago
Crosswords16 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles37 mins ago
Film, Media & TV50 mins ago
