Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

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:
tethersend · 17/04/2012 14:37

Pull my finger.

YellowWellies · 17/04/2012 14:45

Entrophygirl I worked on the last two Energy White Papers for Government is this what you are referring to? I wonder if I might know your friend.

So ohanotherone you didn't answer my questions, do you drive? have glass in your windows or have a cat? All of these kill birds by a far, far greater order of magnitude.

I'll wait here until you admit you're a hypocritical NIMBY shall I? I'm guessing you are middle aged, worrying about house prices but seemingly are quite happy to leave a big mess of a planet to your children and grandkids but less keen on considering solutions which might affect your financial comfort. Shameful.

entropygirl · 17/04/2012 14:50

yellow I am suspicious of your credentials as anyone working on energy matters should get my name is entropy (not entrophy) and should know where it comes from Grin

Metabilis3 · 17/04/2012 14:54

@entropy It comes from the Doctor Who story Logopolis, right? Grin

entropygirl · 17/04/2012 14:57

the what now?

I am into Doctor who but I am even more into the arrow of time....

entropygirl · 17/04/2012 14:58

yellow he wasn't my friend he was my physics lecturer....

YellowWellies · 17/04/2012 14:58

No it comes from the second law of thermodynamics - I just made a typo Grin I used to work at AEA Technology and am wondering if your friend did too.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 17/04/2012 14:59

I don't think anyone is suggesing that wind farms alone will save the world. But they are an important part of the renewables portfolio which might save the world.

YellowWellies · 17/04/2012 15:01

Ahh clearly he did not work there, in which case he DID NOT author the Energy White Papers on which the Government's energy policies are based. He may have contibuted to it but I can think of 30 folk who did write those papers being pretty f*cked off to hear of someone else claiming credit.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 17/04/2012 15:01

Besides, I thought the theory was that if you had a Europe wide grid then the wind will always be blowing somewhere, so you could just use wind power...

ohanotherone · 17/04/2012 15:04

I rent so am not worried about house prices. Cats do kill birds but I've yet to find an Osprey or Red kite on my doorstep and without a car many sick people in the community would not receive specialist support, that's why I have one, happy to cycle everywhere else.

Since we are getting personal. I bet you've never visited the places you circle as being great for wind farms, have no real conception of flooding issues and no real understanding of the effect that these policies will have on the toourism industry.

OP posts:
DilysPrice · 17/04/2012 15:05

Pretty much the only thing I agree with in the OP is that additional grid infrastructure is required, Europe-wide in order to connect the wind farms of the North with the solar panels of the South, the geysers of Iceland and the hydro-dam batteries of Scandinavia. At which point the need to duplicate with fossil fuel powered stations becomes considerably less.

Whatmeworry · 17/04/2012 15:06

But they are an important part of the renewables portfolio which might save the world.

The world will be just fine whether we are here or not :)

Humanity as an energy guzzling species, however, has its cards marked. But most of the projections have us eating ourself into disaster before any climate change kills us....

SaggyOldClothCatPuss · 17/04/2012 15:14

Entropy is featured in Jasper Ffordes Thursday Next series. Something about coincidence, and jam jars full of beans and lentils or something! Wink

Wind power is unreliable.
They need to stick a wind farm on the Tendring peninsula where I live. It blows a force nine gale there 357 days a year! ( causing our prolific rain to fall sideways! ) even in midsummer you are more likely to get windscald than sunburn! Confused

YellowWellies · 17/04/2012 15:15

I live in Orkney - we are COVERED in wind farms. We are the testing centre for the European Marine Energy Centre so we have lots of offshore devices too. I lived within 1 km of turbines for years (that's the closest I've lived - do you live that close?).

When I was working in the industry every potential wind farm site was surveyed for a minimum of 18 months and more typically 24 months to get the appropriate ornithological data, met data, noise data, L&V imagery, archaeological data, terrestrial ecological data, baseline hydrology etc etc etc. I virtually lived on sites.

Your image of developers selecting sites on the basis of a map and a biro is laughable. Sites could however be easily DEselected on the basis of a map (usually due to grid issues, proximity to homes, location in protected landscape areas, proximity to flight paths and radar installations) but we could only SELECT them after months of study and actual site visits. I think you need to learn a bit more about the planning and EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) process - seriously read an ES (Environmental Statement, a weighty tome detailing all of the findings of the site studies) for any wind farm you can find in the planning system (the documents must be publicly available on the planning authorities website). You will be surprised at how HARD it is to get any wind farm built. Incidentally nuclear power stations and large coal and gas fired power stations don't have to jump through these hoops as they are granted planning directly by the Secretary of State. Despite the fact that they have far larger environmental impacts.

Metabilis3 · 17/04/2012 15:16

@saggy Yes, but he was copying Doctor Who (well, let's say paying an homage). Grin

YellowWellies · 17/04/2012 15:16

I used to write the hydrology chapters for EIAs - I have a wonderful understanding of flooding issues thank you after 12 years of working and professional study in this area. Where did you get your qualifications - Mr Google?

Jins · 17/04/2012 15:19

I have a concept of all those things. I'm a planner - specialising amongst other things in Alternative Energy

YellowWellies do you still do EIA work?

Hopandaskip · 17/04/2012 15:20

OP you should get the 'blah blah blah' medal. My head hurt after trying to read that.

As for the wailing about how they don't look pretty. (I think they do look pretty btw)

How about this as an alternative. These are our local nuclear power generators. They sit on an otherwise lovely beach and their 'nipples' glow in the dark. They also aren't working right now. So attractive.

inhabitat.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2012/03/San-Onofre-Nuclear-Threat-3-537x392.jpg

The reality is that the best 'power station' is to cut the electricity we use by a tiny bit. We don't have to cut back that much if we all do it to do the equivalent of putting in a new power plant.

entropygirl · 17/04/2012 15:24

yellow oh that will be my mistake not his (although I never mentioned writing white papers and I dont even know what they are)! He is a very humble person. I have checked out and it seems he was only working as chief scientific advisor to the climate and energy lot.

He also wrote a book which may be where I got confused (imagining him giving the book he wrote to the PM etc.)

entropygirl · 17/04/2012 15:26

Also the guy is a genius...the numbers in his book are definitive in my mind!

entropygirl · 17/04/2012 15:27
YellowWellies · 17/04/2012 15:31

ohanotherone here is an example of the NTS (Non Technical Summaries) of a windfarm EIAs for you to read, using real science - I suggest you start on these and let me know your thoughts. Just google the name of the wind farm you are concerned about and if it is in planning you should be able to access these documents (if the planning proposal has been formally submitted, if the investigations are still underway you should be able to find the scoping report) www.btplc.com/Responsiblebusiness/Protectingourenvironment/Windforchangeproject/Windfarmlocations/RedGap/FINALNTS.pdf

ES and NTS are legal public domain documents. They do not contain mistruths, lies or any hocus pocus. They are reviewed and commented on by vested interests i.e. English Heritage, the RSPB, Natural England etc so they are not a whitewash.

These documents are pulled together for all sites under investigation (not dismissed at the map stage) and many thousands of sites never make it to planning because of issues discovered during the site investigation stage. The last wind farm I worked on abandoned the site because of protected birds breeding nearby which were only discovered by our site surveys (we do model bird collision projections and these are an important part of the planners decision making, and no we don't make the figures up - the RSPB is a statutory consultee that has to inspect the data and give their yay or nay to the proposals)

I do hope they help calm your case of the raging NIMBYs... I'm all for folk being against wind but as long as they cite real arguments not made up nonsense. Ok so you are not against their impact on house prices - let me guess - you read the Daily Mail don't you? Please don't it really is bad for your health. I also notice you didn't deny that you are facing a local wind farm application... if you are, go along to the public exhibition and ask questions if you are worried.

One thing you should treasure it that wind farms are the most temporary forms of power generation - within a fortnight of decommissioning you would be hard pressed to see where the turbines had been. Now you can't exactly say that about Drax or Chernobyl can you?

YellowWellies · 17/04/2012 15:36

Entropygirl are you talking about Sir David King or Robert Watson? In which case those guys are total total dudes and I loves them very much Grin

Jins I'm updiffed at the moment so am mostly knitting and eating (!) but still doing some EIA stuff on a freelance basis - not so much on windfarms but would happily work on them again - even if the public exhibitions are a great way of meeting those members of the public with window licking tendencies and a disbelief in the laws of physics Grin

Jins · 17/04/2012 15:40

Lucky you with the knitting and eating. I'm coordinating an EIA at the moment. Just a year into it so far but we're nearly there with the first draft. Hopefully another 6 months should do it.

I wish it was as easy as a biro on a plan :(