not to want 40% of my county covered in windfarms and 150ft pylons????

[ohanotherone]

I thought windfarms were okay until I realised that 40% of upland Powys will be covered in 600- 800 turbines the size of the London Eye and that a spider web of massive electricity pylons some 150ft high will be put through valleys to connect with the national grid in Shropshire.

Then I though, ahh but we need electricity from renewable sources don't we??? But then find out that the windfarms are only 20% efficient and that the entire lot will produce 11% of the output of ONE coal fired power station WHEN THE WIND IS BLOWING!!!!

On the coldest days of winter, the wind doesn't blow and so we need to have conventional power stations ANYWAY!!!

They will need thousands of tons of concrete pouring into the hills to site these things and make new roads to the sites which will destroy peat bogs and natural habitats and actually the result will increased flooding.

Not to mention the Red Kites (were rare now increasing in numbers, bats (protected) curlews (protected) and buzzards??

Then our electricity bills will increase because all of this costs more AND we pay subsidy to the wind farm developers aswell because without the subsidy they wouldn't bother doing it????

Has the world gone mad?????? [buangry]

I'm just ranting now.....www.facebook.com/#!/MontgomeryshireAP

Don't they use more energy to build than they will ever generate?

We need to investigate and invest more in renewable energy tech, that is for sure. Not convinced there are the answer though to be honest. Happy to be convinced otherwise though!

No - typically they generate a lot more energy than they use in construction, maintenance etc. Energy payback time of 1 year is typical, but of course there are large variations. A very serious energy crisis is looming and a suite of solutions are required. Nuclear will probably play some part, but it will only be one of many options. Capital costs for nuclear plants are truly extraordinary, making investors difficult to find.

Oh good, I'm glad to be corrected on that, out of our friends DH and I are the most 'crunchy hippy' in our views on life and whenever this type of conversation rears its head that comment is always thrown back at us...to hear it might not be true is great.

Long term we're just aiming to try to be as low energy/self sufficient as possible.

I quite like windfarms: while I don't agree with the way many are planned and operated (I think they need to be planned with a national masterplan in mind, rather than exploit local schemes as and when an investor has an interest), I think they have a beauty to them as well. I'm kind of excited that I will be able to see the blades going over the top of the hill in our new home - and I would happily see the whole scheme

Thing is, there are very few places left that have a completely natural beauty - most landscapes, stunning as they may be, are a result of human interventions. The rolling green hills of farmland, drystane dykes, the traditional English hedgerow, the Scottish hydro schemes, large swathes of forestry... we've had a hand in it all. I think engineered objects can add to the landscape because of its value to people (railway lines, the Forth rail bridge (who could imagine the firth of Forth without it?), and yes - windfarms), but we need to be honest about what we are trying to protect. As beautiful as Scotland is, for example, we shouldn't kid ourselves that windfarms are being sited in unspoilt landscapes

I'm not advocating wind farms as a universal solution, and they do need to be planned considerately (and as I said before, a master plan would help), but if we want to keep the lights on (and refuse to ban the stand-by button!) something needs to give

We already have a few windfarms which are okay. But this is industrialisation of mid wales on a huge scale. We don't have many jobs. Tourism is the main industry. Caravan parks, B & B's, Red Kite centre, the dyfnant forest. It brings the local economy about 6500 jobs and about £650 million pounds. Windfarms will destroy this as no one will want to come to what will be a mass of pylons. A local estimated this loss of jobs and income will be in the region of 5000 jobs and 500 million pounds. The money from the windfarms will go out of the area, the electricity will go over our heads to cities. The 14 windfarms will employ one maintenence man each. Wales already produces enough electricity for itself. Is this right????? I'm all for microgeneration. My mums solar panels have paid for themselves. She has hot water all summer long. I'm sorry Gentleotter, it will be the same for us, it will go to the Welsh Assembley, then Westminster. We will have no say in it.

No, I don't own the county, but it IS my county and everyone I know is devastated. The 400kv pylons have been linked to childhood cancer and are either going near the local school so the health of my children is affected too.

I like turbines. I think they look nice and are quite elegant

I would prefer a wind farm to a nuclear power station in my area - it is not the cost/efficiency but storing up problems for future generations in decommissioning a nuclear power station that bothers me - at least a wind farm can be easily removed.

I also think that Governments should be investing in reducing power usage - and I don't really know enough about how to do this, but I am sure a lot of energy is wasted atm.

I do agree that wind farms are not always efficient, but think there is a place for them (the Dava wind farm and small scale local wind farms, providing energy to the people living with them seems pretty good to me, like they do at the Findhorn Foundation).

I lived in a house with a solar panel that heated the water, it was great, worked in winter in Scotland on sunny days - I do think if every building, not just homes, had solar panels it would reduce pressure on the grid, if our wood burning stove had heated the water too, when it wasn't sunny we would have still been able to heat our water without using conventional electricity, they don't always work but combined with other energy efficient measures (making homes better insulated, cavity wall and roof for eg).

I would rather go without than have to put up with having a nuclear power station in my area.

The problem is we will still need nuclear as wind power it is not reliable enough. So we still have the risk of that.

The wind farms at Cefn Groes have destroyed the peat bogs which absorb carbon monoxide and take thousands of years to develop so if we want to take them down in 20 years time as some countries are now doing, the environment is still damaged.

Agree that renewables should be encouraged and be locally based but to cover one area with 17 windfarms is extreme and the hubs and pylons that go with this scale of wind farms are not beautiful at all.

www.visitwalesnow.org.uk/

I have no problem with solar panels on buildings. Sunshine is a bit more predictable than the wind so you might be able to produce less in the conventional power plants if this were common. Wave power might work too.

But someone tell me how wind power saves us anything at all? We have to keep the conventional power plants running at full capacity anyway since we don't know when the wind will blow. So at what point do we save?

Wind is at present more economical than solar and significantly more so than wave or tidal. Wind can offer a lot but it's all about good design. Prediction models are getting better, and an effective demand side management programme where customers pay real time prices for electricity could be very effective in encouraging electricity use at times of high wind and reducing when the wind doesn't blow. Effective storage will also play it's part, both large scale (compressed air, althugh this in not economically attractive yet) and small scale (storage heaters are making a comeback, batteries for electric vehicles). A lot of this could be automated. The way we consume electricity will change a lot in the coming years. Significant interconnection could also help, as the wind is always blowing somewhere. It's right to question the logic of energy solutions, but to write of wind as part of the solution would be foolish.

The problems in the Japanese reactors were the diesel generators were too low so they were flooded and couldn't cool the reactor. This problem has been rectified in new design reactors in the country. Personally I don't have a problem with nuclear, it is the only viable low carbon alternative.

The John Muir report into wind generation is worth reading - www.jmt.org/news

The report concludes that the output across Scotland is well below the rates claimed by industry and the government, often less than 20mw of energy.

There is lots of coal under us, we have just discovered masses of shale gas and scientists are looking into producing oil biogenically.

I disagree OP, and if wind farms were to be built near me, I wouldn't care a jot.

They have them in Menorca, up on the North East Coast and they have become a bit of tourist attraction while also generating almost 20% of the Island's power. They certainly don't detract from the beauty of the landscape up there.

I feel it would be more sensible to build them offshore though, that way NIMBY's can't complain. (although I'm sure some would).

SJisontheway, I'd like to hear more about how that would work. Storage would help enormously if we had a practical method, but I don't think we do. If we could store it then the whole of the wind power output would be used. If we can't store it at all then wind power has zero effect as we must produce the same amount of electricity using conventional plants as we do now.

....customers pay real time prices for electricity could be very effective in encouraging electricity use at times of high wind and reducing when the wind doesn't blow

Are there any suggestions for how this might work in the real world?

I'm imagining a buzzer sounds to let you know it's windy somewhere and you rush to press the button on the washing machine. You've been poised all day to start it, but you would have had to pay the full price.

10 minutes later another buzzer sounds to let you know the wind has dropped and you are back on full price electricity. Too late to stop the washing machine.

As for storage heaters I have those for night time electricity. They waste a lot since you put them on and tomorrow turns out to be warm and you have to have all the windows open. You leave them off and a cold spell hits and you have to use a very expensive fan heater.

I think there is a question of scale to be addressed. There are a lot of areas whereby the wind farms take up the area for miles and miles around e.g. pretty much the entire East Anglican coast. A power station is at least confined to a small area.

However, efficiency arguments IMO are pointless. Most things are of low efficiency.

I don't mind them either, I also find them quite elegant. They have a lot of wind farms off the N Wales coast which you wouldn't have thought bothered anybody and yet there are still people who complain about them. I wonder if the people that complain are prepared to cut back on their energy consumption to make them unnecessary. I suspect not.

I was stunned by just how much of N France is covered in them too. They seem to have made quite a commitment to wind power. Again, I don't think they detracted from the landscape that much.

I have been reading this thread and wracking my brains to try and remember where I heard this but I think there is some technology in development that is looking at releasing energy from water - I think it was releasing the hydrogen atoms. Anyway, I am no scientist and I didn't fully understand but making energy by breaking down water sounded like a good thing. I think it Bang Goes the Theory but I'm not sure. The by-product would be oxygen presumably. Is that harmful in any way? I am sure there are bound to be downsides, there always are, but sounded like a the good solution from what little they told us.

real time pricing in terms of demand side management is more effective for large scale customers. A lot of industrial processes can scew their energy usage to times of low cost. For domestic customers, it's a very real posibility for the future. There is a lot of research going on into smart meters. The idea would be that when electricity goes above a certain price (user controlled) certain non essential appliances would switch off automatically. Also, the likes of storage heaters and batteries can be set to charge only below a certain price. This research is real and ongoing and may well be a part of everyday life in the not too distant future. Although large scal storage is uneconomical at present, it may not always remain so and this is another major area of research.

Diablo. So you would be okay about having a 56 metres high metal pylon placed next to your house making it unsellable with no compensation if it does not actually touch your boundary???? Or a 20 acre electricity substation placed near a school with the pylons covering the whole village. The visual impact is massive. Or would you not mind the constant hum of the turbines. There are people in this country who have to sleep away from their own houses because they can't sleep because of the noise from them! That's great, where do you live??? You can have my house, I'll have yours!!!!

Avg. house price paid in Findhorn with wind turbines and RAF base £278,525
Average price for Scotland : £158,213 - I don't think wind turbines impact on the cost of housing... Or maybe they make houses more affordable for some, not that we can afford even the average house price in Scotland, but that is a different debate.

SJisontheway, it's interesting stuff, but when I think of it applied to the real world I shudder.

"when electricity goes above a certain price (user controlled) certain non essential appliances would switch off automatically"

I don't think I have any non essential appliances. I'm trying to imagine what I would want turning off automatically because I couldn't afford it at that time.

Fridge? no
Freezer no
TV - In the middle of watching something? of course not!
lights? no
PC? no
Heating? no

Already electricity prices are being allowed to rise to discourage waste. Of course this actually means "waste by poor people" since it wouldn't be a deterrent for the rich.

The thing is, electricity prices could change enormously from one hour to the next. When the expensive peaker plants get turned on, prices go through the roof. At the moment the technology doesn't exist for us to react to the price signals because we don't have real time pricing. But if the price was to suddenly soar, most people would be happy for their tumble dryer to switch off. If the price was high enough, people may even be happy to go without a lot of appliances we use. Phone chargers, electric lawn mower, dish washer etc. etc. A lot of things can wait. Turning your fridge off for an hour won't cause any major problems, but if enough people do it, it eliminates the need for the expensive peak plant to be operating. Peaks don't tend to last long, but they are prolonged because the average customer does not have the option to respond. There's nothing to be afraid of. No one will force you to turn anything off. But if the price is high enough, you may choose to. Energy prices are going up, and as a result the way we use it will eventually have to change.

I see people in the community with 24 feeds, pressure care mattresses, 24 oxygen and other equipment which supports them to live at home. They need 24 hour electricity. Not just when the wind blows. Also it's a myth that the wind blows somewhere all the time. For turbines, it needs to be a certain windspeed for them to generate electricity, if the wind is too strong, they are switched off to prevent power surges. Sian Lloyd the weather person got up at a recent meeting and quoted how much the wind DOESN'T blow somewhere and especially when we need it most, when it's -13 degrees outside.

The price of electricity is going up because it costs alot to pump electricity from far away to the cities from wind farms + have back up conventional power stations. It will cost National grid £250 million pounds to connect mid wales to the main grid. Everybody's energy bills will rise. The wind farms are 100% subidised. If that subsidy was distributed to individual homes for solar, ground source or other sustainable forms of microgeneration then it would be more efficient and REDUCE peoples bills. But they won't do that because at the end of the day the major companies and the people on the stock market who buy and sell energy would not be making a profit. Windfarms are total scams.

I misread that as 150ft pythons!

YANBU. Wind farms are not the answer to our coming energy problems.