Features
Is the energy solution blowing in the wind?
 |
| Eyesore? - Beinn An Tuirc wind farm on the Kintyre Peninsula, Scotland |
THE wind turbines are coming. Two thousand of them are slowly turning across the UK and within the next few years there could be three times as many.
Love them or loathe them, the wind farm has well and truly arrived.
South Essex has so far remained almost untouched by this revolution. Just a handful of turbines can be seen ten miles off Shoebury East Beach.
However, with up to 4,000 more to be built in the UK over the next 12 years, if Gordon Brown gets his way, how long will this last?
The Prime Minister's proposal has fuelled the great turbine debate.
On the one hand there is the need for renewable energy and to meet EU targets on CO2 emissions. On the other, there is the fact that the windmills are no magic energy solution.
Across the estuary, near the Kent seaside town of Herne Bay, some 30 turbines spin quietly on. These can be seen from Shoebury East Beach on a clear day.
Not only do they provide electricity they also provide much-needed work for the nearby harbour as they require maintainance. The local council even touts the windfarm as a possible tourist attraction.
The possibility of windfarms being located closer to the town looms large.
There is permission for about 50 turbines off the coast near Holland-on-Sea, in north Essex, with the first expected to be operational next year.
These come courtesy of the Danish firm Dong, which also has a third share in the country's flagship project, the London Array.
The ambitious Array project, further out in the Thames Estuary, would be the world's biggest offshore wind farm, with 341 turbines capable of generating 1,000 megawatts of electricity - enough to power a quarter of London's homes.
But it is not a done deal. The project hit a setback after Shell WindEnergy pulled out. It is now looking to offload its share of the £2bn investment.
A source close to the project said Shell pulling out had left the project in limbo.
On land, the technology is highly controversial.
Plans to build a small turbine at a house Rochford was thrown out by the district council as councillors discussed its aesthetics, or lack of, whether it would make any noise, and importantly, whether it would generate sufficient power.
If residents were fiercely against a 9m high turbine in the countryside one ten times the size is likely to cause even more trouble.
While Essex Wildlife Trust and Natural England had no concerns, ten residents complained, claiming the turbine would be an "eyesore" and that the environmental benefits were "not proven".
They are not alone. Anna Waite, councillor for planning in Southend, says she would not be against a windfarm, just as long as it was in the right place.
She said: "In some locations I think they look graceful, but in others they look totally incongruous."
Countryside campaigners and turbine supporters agree on one thing - the importance of how they fit in with the surrounding area.
South East Essex Friends of the Earth spokesman Denis Walker said: "Wind turbines have to be sited carefully. There is no point plonking them on a site of special scientific interest, for example.
"It is really about understanding the importance of where the turbine is going locally."
He added: "The Government has been pushing the nuclear agenda for some time and we have been calling for increased renewable energy.
"Germany is probably the best example in Europe of using renewable energy.
"At the moment some 15 per cent of the country's energy comes from renewable sources and they hope to increase it.
"There are some issues with building lots of wind turbines in that you need some backup generation through tidal power or solar power."
Whether or not this country will follow in Germany's greener footsteps remains to be seen
1:53am Thursday 10th July 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: Andrew, Shoeburyness on 7:30am Thu 10 Jul 08
[bold]These things are a blight. There used to be a nice clear view out to sea from East Beach, now the horizon is hideously transformed by these ugly windmills. I regularly travel to Wales, and there, where once there was an unspoiled beautiful landscape, hilltops are now scarred with these monstrosities.
It isn't just the turbines that damage the environment, they also require access roads for service crews, so even more green land is concreted over.
Wind turbines do not and cannot replace conventional power stations, [italic]because sometimes the wind doesn't blow[/italic]. In fact if the wind blows too hard they have to be stopped, as can be witnessed from East beach on windy days, the windfarm in the estuary will be standing still!
Instead of wasting money investing in these useless windmills we would be better off investing in the new, safer, Pebble Bed Reactor technology nuclear power stations (google it). They are much safer, it is impossible for them to 'melt down' and they generate much, much less waste than the old magnox nuclear power stations. They also destroy less landscape than windfarms, in fact they could be built on existing sites with no requirement to use more green land.
The people of the Isle of Lewis successfully fought off having their environment ruined by windfarms, we can do the same.[/bold]
These things are a blight. There used to be a nice clear view out to sea from East Beach, now the horizon is hideously transformed by these ugly windmills. I regularly travel to Wales, and there, where once there was an unspoiled beautiful landscape, hilltops are now scarred with these monstrosities.
It isn't just the turbines that damage the environment, they also require access roads for service crews, so even more green land is concreted over.
Wind turbines do not and cannot replace conventional power stations, because sometimes the wind doesn't blow. In fact if the wind blows too hard they have to be stopped, as can be witnessed from East beach on windy days, the windfarm in the estuary will be standing still!
Instead of wasting money investing in these useless windmills we would be better off investing in the new, safer, Pebble Bed Reactor technology nuclear power stations (google it). They are much safer, it is impossible for them to 'melt down' and they generate much, much less waste than the old magnox nuclear power stations. They also destroy less landscape than windfarms, in fact they could be built on existing sites with no requirement to use more green land.
The people of the Isle of Lewis successfully fought off having their environment ruined by windfarms, we can do the same. Posted by: LH, Southend on 10:35am Thu 10 Jul 08
So Andrew thinks that a nuclear power station is less a blight on the landscape than windmills? Everyone to his own I suppose. I agree that it is important where the windmills are placed and we obviously need back-up like utilising the tides etc.
So Andrew thinks that a nuclear power station is less a blight on the landscape than windmills? Everyone to his own I suppose. I agree that it is important where the windmills are placed and we obviously need back-up like utilising the tides etc.
Posted by: Andrew, Shoeburyness on 11:13am Thu 10 Jul 08
[bold]So LH thinks concreting over hundreds of miles of unspoiled landscape with access roads and putting up thousands of ugly windmills is less of a blight than using brownfield sites which are already used for power stations?
You only realise what you have once it is gone. People in Scotland and Wales already know this and are actively campaigning against even more destruction of their environment in the name of 'green' energy.[/bold]
So LH thinks concreting over hundreds of miles of unspoiled landscape with access roads and putting up thousands of ugly windmills is less of a blight than using brownfield sites which are already used for power stations?
You only realise what you have once it is gone. People in Scotland and Wales already know this and are actively campaigning against even more destruction of their environment in the name of 'green' energy. Posted by: 152, Rochford on 11:29am Thu 10 Jul 08
I think Andrew is taking it too far when he writes "There used to be a nice clear view out to sea from East Beach, now the horizon is hideously transformed by these ugly windmills", (you can hardly see them, and I actually find the turbines beautiful but I wouldn't want to live next to one), but he has a point about developing wind farms on land.
You can actually see the turbines referred to in the Echo article from the South-Western corner of Langdon Hills, but even more prominent are the huge things they have at Fords in Dagenham.
I have not heard of pebble bed reactor technology but I think the sooner we develop Fusion power the sooner we will have unlimited energy.
Globally though, the UK developing more environmentally friendly forms of energy will do nothing if we continue to let the developing (and indeed in Chinas case, developed) countries use coal.
I think Andrew is taking it too far when he writes "There used to be a nice clear view out to sea from East Beach, now the horizon is hideously transformed by these ugly windmills", (you can hardly see them, and I actually find the turbines beautiful but I wouldn't want to live next to one), but he has a point about developing wind farms on land.
You can actually see the turbines referred to in the Echo article from the South-Western corner of Langdon Hills, but even more prominent are the huge things they have at Fords in Dagenham.
I have not heard of pebble bed reactor technology but I think the sooner we develop Fusion power the sooner we will have unlimited energy.
Globally though, the UK developing more environmentally friendly forms of energy will do nothing if we continue to let the developing (and indeed in Chinas case, developed) countries use coal.
Posted by: Steve, Leigh on 12:14pm Thu 10 Jul 08
This is just posturing to the Greens - wind farms are not all they are made out to be, and the quantity required to power a town the size of Southend is reprehensible. THe ONLY sustainable energy route has to be 'Pebble Bed' nuclear energy.
This is just posturing to the Greens - wind farms are not all they are made out to be, and the quantity required to power a town the size of Southend is reprehensible. THe ONLY sustainable energy route has to be 'Pebble Bed' nuclear energy.
Posted by: Ty, Little Clacton on 1:48pm Thu 10 Jul 08
Why not pull the wooden huts down in Jaywick this will smarten the place and replace them with a wind farm.
Why not pull the wooden huts down in Jaywick this will smarten the place and replace them with a wind farm.
Posted by: Thames Gateway, S-O-S on 8:42pm Thu 10 Jul 08
Not to mention the effect these turbines have on ATC radars, leading to aircraft not being detectable where there were previously, and the resulatnt risk of a mid-air collision occurring because the radar is not able to detect the aircraft it should. Of course the government knows of these safety problems but deliberatley ignores them in their headlong rush to prove how 'green' they are; ..read the government inspector total ignoring of the aviation safety concerns as he overturned Maldon Council'd decision not to allow the Bradwell wind farm development.
Not to mention the effect these turbines have on ATC radars, leading to aircraft not being detectable where there were previously, and the resulatnt risk of a mid-air collision occurring because the radar is not able to detect the aircraft it should. Of course the government knows of these safety problems but deliberatley ignores them in their headlong rush to prove how 'green' they are; ..read the government inspector total ignoring of the aviation safety concerns as he overturned Maldon Council'd decision not to allow the Bradwell wind farm development.
Posted by: The Controller, Hampshire on 10:42pm Thu 10 Jul 08
[quote][bold]Thames Gateway[/bold] wrote:
Not to mention the effect these turbines have on ATC radars, leading to aircraft not being detectable where there were previously, and the resulatnt risk of a mid-air collision occurring because the radar is not able to detect the aircraft it should. Of course the government knows of these safety problems but deliberatley ignores them in their headlong rush to prove how 'green' they are; ..read the government inspector total ignoring of the aviation safety concerns as he overturned Maldon Council'd decision not to allow the Bradwell wind farm development.[/quote] Errr, I think you may find that modern ATC equipment uses a transponder not radar.
Basically a radio signal is sent out and each aircraft "squawks" back giving an identity altitude and heading.
Thames Gateway wrote:
Not to mention the effect these turbines have on ATC radars, leading to aircraft not being detectable where there were previously, and the resulatnt risk of a mid-air collision occurring because the radar is not able to detect the aircraft it should. Of course the government knows of these safety problems but deliberatley ignores them in their headlong rush to prove how 'green' they are; ..read the government inspector total ignoring of the aviation safety concerns as he overturned Maldon Council'd decision not to allow the Bradwell wind farm development.
Errr, I think you may find that modern ATC equipment uses a transponder not radar.
Basically a radio signal is sent out and each aircraft "squawks" back giving an identity altitude and heading.
Posted by: Robert Peel, In my bedroom on 10:56pm Thu 10 Jul 08
I just looked at Pebble bed reactors and they may not be what you would want in the vicinity around where you live:
Lots on Wikipedia
Critics also often point out an accident in Germany in 1986, which involved a jammed pebble damaged by the reactor operators when they were attempting to dislodge it from a feeder tube. This accident released radiation into the surrounding area, and led to a shutdown of the research program by the West German government.
Another issue may be that any nuclear reactor would be a terrorist target, the thought of a plane or bomb exploding near the core don't bear thinking about.
Wind farms are not ideal but a **** sight better than power cuts etc.
It looks increasingly like the cheap energy that fuelled our progress from the industrial revolution until today may slowly be ending.
I just looked at Pebble bed reactors and they may not be what you would want in the vicinity around where you live:
Lots on Wikipedia
Critics also often point out an accident in Germany in 1986, which involved a jammed pebble damaged by the reactor operators when they were attempting to dislodge it from a feeder tube. This accident released radiation into the surrounding area, and led to a shutdown of the research program by the West German government.
Another issue may be that any nuclear reactor would be a terrorist target, the thought of a plane or bomb exploding near the core don't bear thinking about.
Wind farms are not ideal but a **** sight better than power cuts etc.
It looks increasingly like the cheap energy that fuelled our progress from the industrial revolution until today may slowly be ending.
Posted by: Andrew, Shoeburyness on 7:10am Fri 11 Jul 08
[italic]Critics also often point out an accident in Germany in 1986...[/italic]
[bold]TWENTY TWO years ago! The technology has moved on since then.[/bold]
http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Pebble_bed_
reactor
Critics also often point out an accident in Germany in 1986...
TWENTY TWO years ago! The technology has moved on since then.
http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Pebble_bed_
reactor
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
