Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think that it's about time the government rethink the wind issue??????

232 replies

ohanotherone · 17/04/2012 09:50

I've spent some time investigating wind farms. I thought they were clean and green, sadly, I now realise they are not. It seems we are all being taken for a ride, a ride that will destroy our beautiful nations. The plans to cover Wales and Scotland with turbines are on a scale that many people do not comprehend. Am I being unreasonable to think that the government should objectively look at the facts and finally ditch wind power????

Here are some of the issues......looking at these factors broadens the debate from a "you are a Nimby" level, which is the level the last government wanted the debate to be as it was in their interests to do so.

1.Landscape and wildlife
2.Unreliable energy source requiring backup
3.No reduction in CO2
4.Additional grid infrastructure
5.Subsidies
6.Employment, business and property

  1. Landscape and wildlife
Windfarms reduce landscape value, kill birds and compromise wildlife habitats. They also compromise essential environmental services.

? It was established in the Public Inquiry into the Cumulative Effect of Windfarms in Powys in 2001 that windfarms always have a negative effect on the landscape; the question is whether the level of negative impact remains acceptable. The conclusions reached by the Planning Inspectorate indicated clearly that the cumulative impact of such proposals on the visual and recreational quality of the upland areas in Powys would be unacceptable; these conclusions were agreed in full by the National Assembly for Wales. The height of turbines has increased by over 40 metres since then, increasing the impact and area visually affected immeasurably.

? Installing a manmade structure out of proportion with its surroundings such as a large wind turbine affects individual perception and understanding of the view, natural and cultural landscape and distorts people&rquot;s engagement with what they see; the value of citizen&rquot;s engagement with their surroundings is acknowledged by government.

? "We need to help people appreciate the historic environment and 'read the landscape' - not just the obvious elements such as castles and chapels, but also the pattern of quarries, ancient trackways, field systems and cairns. The rewards are not simply personal satisfaction for individuals. The historic environment creates our 'sense of place' and therefore our sense of shared belonging and of roots. Nurturing a living sense of what it is to be a citizen of Wales is a key priority for the Assembly Government, and citizenship cannot be a theoretical concept. It is about emotional ties and imagined community, as much with previous generations as with ones to come." © Crown Copyright 2009. Heritage Minister's Ambition for the Welsh Historic Environment

? James Pearce-Higgins et. al. (Journal of Applied Ecology vol 46, Issue 6 pages 1139- 1357) have found that birds, including buzzards, golden plovers, curlews and red grouse, are abandoning countryside around upland windfarms. The study used upland areas because they have the strongest winds and so are preferred by wind-farm developers and are favoured, by some of Britain's most vulnerable bird species. They found evidence for localised reductions in bird breeding density; birds tended to stop nesting within half a mile of any turbine. Since the effect extends around each machine, up to three quarters of a square mile could be affected by one turbine. Results highlight significant avoidance of otherwise apparently suitable habitat close to turbines in at least seven of the 12 species studied. The impact is not huge now because there are still some areas without wind farms but the researchers warn that, with hundreds more planned, plus an increase in the size of turbines, the effect could become much worse.

? Where wind farms are proposed, their development should not contravene the protective measures that apply under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981; Schedule 1 Birds, Schedule 5 Animals and Schedule 8 Plants.

2.Unreliable energy source requiring backup
Electricity from windfarms is unreliable and cannot be stored. Wind is an intermittent and unpredictable energy source; it can provide neither the base-load nor the load-following power required by the Grid. It is beyond dispute that windfarms require at least 90% backup from reliable controllable energy sources.

? National Grid data shows that windfarms cannot be relied upon to provide us with energy when we most need it. The cold weather of December/January 2009/10 illustrated this problem. With high pressure and a lack of wind only 0.2%, of a possible 5% of the UK's energy was generated by wind turbines during this time of greatest need.

? Jeremy Nicholson, director of the Energy Intensive Users Group (EIUG), gave warning that this unreliability could turn into a crisis when the UK is reliant on 6,400 turbines for a quarter of UK electricity. He said the shortfall in power generated by wind during cold snaps seriously undermined the Government's pledge to build nine major new wind 'super farms' by 2020. "If we had this 30 gigawatts of wind power, it wouldn't have contributed anything of any significance this winter," he said. "The current cold snap is a warning that our power generation and gas supplies are under strain and it is getting worse."

? In Germany their 20,000MW of wind energy require 90% back-up from conventional sources; indeed Rupert Steele of Scottish Power/Iberdrola admitted on 22.4.09 that the 30GW of wind proposed for the UK would require 25GW of back up. What this means in practice is that as more wind farms come on line they require a greater proportion of back up by reliable generation; 90% according to EON Netz.

? E.ON said that it could take 50 gigawatts of renewable electricity generation to meet the EU target. But it would require approximately 90% of this amount as back up from coal and gas plants to ensure supply when intermittent renewable supplies were not available. This will require a significant increase in Britain's generating capacity, at considerable cost, simply to maintain the current level of secure supply, as evidenced by National Grid's own estimates, which show that by 2025 the Nation needs a 21% increase in generating capacity to meet a 2% increase in demand.

? The impact of ensuring reliable backup is:

  • Capital cost of building 90% more generation than we actually need in inefficient plant that will give lower return to investors as it will frequently be idling rather than producing energy for which they will be paid. UK government has already committed £10 billion to back-up generation in 2011.
  • Increased wear and tear on plant that has to be turned up and down with less than four hours notice. Higher costs of maintenance and reduced life of machinery.
  • Reluctance to build conventional power plants where the maintenance and reduced life are unknown costs.
  • Increased payments from National Grid to generators when they are required to go off-line, as their generation is not required. Wind is most expensive so National Grid uses all available wind as first option and compensate conventional generators when the wind is blowing. In Scotland (01.05.11) wind generation exceeded demand and National Grid paid wind farm companies £1.2 million to switch off the turbines. In 2012 National Grid paid windfarm companies £25 million to switch off line.
  1. No reduction in CO2
There is no evidence that increasing the number of windfarms is reducing national CO2 emissions in UK or any other country adopting wind energy.

? Recent work by Fred Udo is based on EIRGRID real time data on carbon emissions and wind energy production. His abstract states: "In the absence of hydro-energy the CO2 production of the conventional generation increases with wind energy penetration. The data shows that the reduction of CO2 emissions is at most a few % if gas fired generation is used for balancing a 30% share of wind energy."

? A carbon payback equation should be part of each Environmental Statement. The Scottish Government has made an algorithm to calculate this for peat land. (Ref: The Scottish Government Calculating carbon savings from wind farms on Scottish peat lands - A New Approach www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/06/25114657/9)

? A full carbon equation should count of the carbon cost of:

  • Building, transportation to site and construction
  • Grid connection
  • Running a turbine
  • Clean coal, gas, nuclear power stations running less efficiently, developing and maintaining the back up power stations
  • Upgrading highways
  • Peat displacement by an average of 300cu m concrete per turbine, as well as aggregate for turbine bases, crane pads, sub-stations and access roads.
  • Forestry clearance
  • The Capacity Credit, i.e. the percentage of wind generated energy that actually displaces conventionally generated energy. Bearing in mind that a percentage of this is nuclear and therefore would be carbon free anyway.

? There is no evidence that wind is an alternative to nuclear. As early as 1994 Welsh Affairs Select Committee, the British Wind Energy Association (now RenewablesUK) have admitted that the future is a mix of nuclear and renewables.

  1. Additional grid infrastructure
Additional grid connection is needed to meet the installed capacity of wind installation; increasing the number and size of transmission infrastructure and cost to the consumer; increasing impact on landscape value.
  1. Subsidies
No developer will build windfarms without subsidies. Electricity companies are compelled to buy this expensive electricity. Both are funded by an extra charge on every electricity bill. This is not a government subsidy, which would be open for scrutiny. We are now paying £1 billion a year.

? Electricity Companies are compelled to buy this expensive electricity using Renewable Obligation Certificates (ROCs), and put an extra charge on every one of your electricity bills. The cost of onshore wind to the consumer is some £200/MWhr taking into account the ROC subsidy, back up generation and additional transmission costs. This is over four times the cost of energy from conventional or nuclear sources. The cost of off-shore wind is even higher at over £250/MWhr (March 2011 Sir Donald Miller, former Chairman Scottish Power). For industry the cost is incrementally higher making electricity in the UK a very expensive and possibly unaffordable overhead. This may lead to relocation of industry abroad where energy costs are less.

? Subsidies for on-shore wind are higher in the UK than for virtually any other European country with a large wind investment. (EU Report into European Energy Market 2010).

? Even taking into account the minimal 10% reduction in subsidies currently being considered it is likely that by 2020 the cost of ROCs will be £15 billion ? 1% of GDP. The UK is already facing unprecedented levels of fuel poverty and, although not solely attributable to wind power generation, this will inexorably increase with subsidies, the cost of large infrastructure projects from remote locations, the cost of expensive 90% back-up; research and development of storage projects essential for use of wind power such as development of a smart grid.

  1. Employment, business and property
There is no evidence that windfarms bring significant local employment, but they can impact adversely on traditional industry and tourism and on property values, and thus the level of available investment in local businesses.

? Turbine manufacturers use their own trained staff for construction, off-site monitoring and maintenance. The majority of wind farm developers in Britain are non-UK so "for an average £50m wind farm, approximately £35m will go abroad. The employment they bring to a local community is limited. During construction there may be several jobs, but once completed a large wind farm can be run by two or three staff with technicians called in for maintenance, they are certainly not the answer to stimulating the jobs economy." (Mary Scanlon, Scottish Conservative MSP for the Highlands and Islands).

? Site preparation is specialist and few contractors have the equipment available e.g. Cefn Croes windfarm was said to use local labour; in fact Jones and Co, the contractors building roads and turbine bases were from Rhuthin, some two hours away.

? In the case of Fullabrook Down the developers, Devon Windpower, were bought out by the Electricity Supply Board, Ireland's largest utility company. During the construction process nearly all of the ground-works were carried out by an Irish labour force, but Vestas required its own trained Danish workers to erect and commission the turbines. In fact Vestas recently confirmed that they had not employed a single UK resident over the previous 24 months during the installation of their turbines throughout England, Scotland or Wales. They also confirmed that they did not foresee a change in their employment policy over the next three fiscal periods. Other manufacturers responded similarly and confirmed no local labour had been employed during the construction phase as all used their own certified engineers. (Written communication).

? A major renewables study commissioned by the European Commission (Employ- RES research project for European Commission DG Energy and Transport 2009) drew a number of interesting conclusions:

  • The renewables sector has the potential to create many jobs, predominantly in the solar, hydro and biofuels areas;
  • Wind energy is only an important contributor to the labour economy where the country manufactures the turbines;
  • The countries that could benefit the most from the growth of renewables are Eastern European (biomass production);
  • Some countries (UK and Spain are cited as examples) will experience a net loss of jobs.

There is evidence that wind power does not stimulate the economy across Europe:

? "Wind power costs Spain ?1.1 million per job in subsidy and setting minimum prices for renewably generated electricity far above market prices, wastes capital that could be allocated to other sectors. This has resulted in 2.2 jobs being destroyed for every 'green job' created." (Gabriel Calzada Álvarez, et al (2009) Study of the effects on employment of public aid to renewable energy sources. Universidad Rey Juan Carlos)

? Evidence gathered shows that local enterprises are often developed by releasing collateral in the family home by re-mortgaging. The reduction in value of homes where windfarms and associated infrastructure are proposed is impacting upon the money available to develop small local businesses.

? Tourism enterprises, especially but not exclusively where the individual caravans and chalets are owned, have suffered considerably when windfarms and associated infrastructure affect them. For example, there has been a 40% drop in lettings and a collapse in caravan sales at Nab's Wood site in North Yorkshire after construction of a wind turbine site in the vicinity two years ago.

? A survey carried out by the Welsh Tourist Board indicated that the commonest reasons for visiting the country were the scenery, wild landscapes and an unspoilt environment whilst for 71% of respondents the things which most spoilt landscape views were pylons, transmission lines or wind turbines. Remarkably similar results were found from research carried out for a Visit Scotland and here over a quarter of respondents said they would actively avoid areas with windfarms and a further 25% preferred areas without windfarms.

OP posts:
TeWihara · 17/04/2012 09:51

You have serious issues and I like windfarms.

lavenderbongo · 17/04/2012 09:54

I have so many problems with so much of what you have written that I don't know where to start.
I live in NZ at the mo and we have loads of wind farms. In fact the city in which I live is powered entirely by a wind farm. It is the way of the future and I think they are fab!

WibblyBibble · 17/04/2012 09:55

Hi Donald, nobody cares about the view from your golf course you great stupid trump. HTH.

ohanotherone · 17/04/2012 10:15

That's great if they work in NZ. Is it consistent wind? If not, how do they back up the power?

OP posts:
ReallyTired · 17/04/2012 10:16

Many windfarms can be put out at sea.

Nuclear power is unpopular and we are running out of coal and oil. The use of fossil fuels is bad for global warming. Tidal power damages the enviroment more.
Solar panels are of limited use in the UK due to our climate.

How do you plan to make electricity?

ohanotherone · 17/04/2012 10:22

Solar is pretty good actually, you don't actually need a hot sun, just light! Locally many people have had solar panels installed and are really happy with the amount of energy they produce.

It is a myth that wind replaces coal, nuclear and gas. We will still need coal, nuclear and gas because wind cannot be stored.

I would also increase mini hydro electic stations. They are sustainable and produce more consistent energy. Weirs with archimedes screws!!!!

OP posts:
AMumInScotland · 17/04/2012 10:24

I can't be bothered reading through every word of that.

But a couple of things jump out -

  1. Yes you can easily back up wind power. For one (green) example, you can use it to pump water up hydro-electric schemes, creating a "reservoir" of potential power at the top, which you then use to "re-generate" electricity when you want it.
  1. You haven't said what you'd like the government to put in place instead of wind farms - more coal and oil fired power stations? Nuclear? Giant hamster-wheel turbines attached to lesiure centres?
ohanotherone · 17/04/2012 10:28

If the government's plans are realised, most of the UK, but predominently Scotland and Wales, Cumbria and Anglia will be covered in turbines with the associated pylons and hubs that go with them. It will mean the end of non industrialised landscapes as we know them.

Trump made a valid point about Scotland, people won't go there to look at turbines, they will go elsewhere and the tourism industry will be ruined.

OP posts:
Cremeeggsandkitkatsoldiers · 17/04/2012 10:30

they're all over ireland and it hasn't spoilt the view or the tourist industry (the euro/prices have done that!)

yabu!

LentillyFart · 17/04/2012 10:30

Sorry OP - I started bleeding from a large and ever widening hole in the back of my head before I even got a third through your mahoosive post. Can you put your case in a form that is not a bloody dissertation?

ohanotherone · 17/04/2012 10:30

You cannot back up wind power, turbines are only 20% efficient, they only work when the wind blows. During the very cold spell last winter, there wasn't enough wind to generate any useful amount of power.

OP posts:
hathorinareddress69 · 17/04/2012 10:33

ohanotherone - you have mail

COCKadoodledooo · 17/04/2012 10:33

They should have a windfarm in Westminster. Plenty of hot air there.

WorraLiberty · 17/04/2012 10:33

I like wind turbines

They remind me of windmills

WorraLiberty · 17/04/2012 10:34

COCK Grin Grin

Kladdkaka · 17/04/2012 10:35

Solar is pretty good actually, you don't actually need a hot sun, just light! Locally many people have had solar panels installed and are really happy with the amount of energy they produce.

You really need to inform yourself better. Solar is one of the dirtiest forms of energy known to man. Solar panels may be great and clean when in use but you have to look at the whole life of the product. The production of solar panels uses some of the nastiest most toxic chemicals around. Infertility in people working in and around the production industry is extremely high.

And what about disposal? They can't go into landfill or to incinerators. They're far too toxic for that. Currently there is no known way of extracting the toxic chemicals from them or recycling any of the materials used. So what happens to those who have reached the end of their working life? They're stored in great big solar panel mountains that nobody has a clue what to do with.

Kladdkaka: wife of Professor of Industrial Recycling whose primary area of research is 'holy crap what are we going to do with all these solar panels'.

AMumInScotland · 17/04/2012 10:36

Back to the other question - what do you propose instead?

Oh and I live in a rural part of Scotland, and am perfectly happy to have more wind turbines nearby. Where do you live?

lavenderbongo · 17/04/2012 10:38

In fact NZ gets the majority of its electricity from renewables. Geothermal, wind and hydro. Yes the wind farm does produce all the electricty consistently. This particular city is very windy. The UK really needs to build more wind farms. It has no choice. Coal, oil and gas will not last. Nuclear is too expensive and too dirty in the long term.

ohanotherone · 17/04/2012 10:38

In brief then.....

We all have been led to think that wind farms are green as they cut carbon emissions and we won't need nuclear, gas or coal. This is actually untrue so why are we subsiding this industry with tax payers money????????

OP posts:
lavenderbongo · 17/04/2012 10:40

Not sure where you are getting your info on wind farms from. Lavenderbongo - wife of renewable energy expert.

Kladdkaka · 17/04/2012 10:43

I too like wind turbines but think they should be improved by being painted in pretty colours instead of grey. They also need some ribbons on the blades.

FannyFifer · 17/04/2012 10:43

WibblyBibble Grin

Have no problem with wind farms, a lot of them can be out at sea anyway.

Cremeeggsandkitkatsoldiers · 17/04/2012 10:43

ohanotherone who is leading us to believe that, I never believed that wind could REPLACE all other forms of energy, and noone has ever tried to convince me otherwise. I've never met anyone who has thought or claimed that wind ALONE is the one answer

but any dent is good IMO

strangenoisesfromthebathroom · 17/04/2012 10:44

So WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE AS THE ALTERNATIVE?

AMumInScotland · 17/04/2012 10:45

I don't think anyone has claimed we "won't need nuclear, gas, or coal", have they? Not in the near future at any rate. Only that we will need less nuclear, gas and coal, as we increase the amount of electricity generated from renewables.

You really aren't answering the question - what do you think should be done instead?

Fossil fuels are in limited supply. Nuclear power produces waste which will be toxic for generations ahead. Kladdaka has pointed out the "cradle to grave" impact of solar panels makes them not exactly a green option.

I would like to see more work done on offshore wind farms, and on tidal power, and hydro schemes. But the reality is that we will need a full range of renewables, starting now (actually starting two generations ago, but I'll take what I can get)