RAERA WINDFARM POLL - ARE YOU IN FAVOUR?

[NickB]

.
Hope you all attended the public meeting - I found it very informative.

The Community Council have asked me to post a poll here to see how people feel about the windfarm - please vote so they can gauge public opinion.

[NickB]

.
63 views and only one person has bothered to vote - what's that about then?

[khartoumteddy]

indifference
teddy

[NickB]

.
Well, at the moment the ayes seem to have it. Many more views than votes however. We'll let this one run until the end of the month.

[NickB]

.
244 views and only 13 votes - even with an option to say you don't care one way or the other!

Hope this indifference won't reduce the value of the npower shilling when it comes to the Community Benefit.

[khartoumteddy]

even if they do eventually build a windfarm
there can be little difference the poll will make
if it is this apathetic.
the siting at raera will not affect that many people
and although it will be visible my own thought is that it wont be that bad.

maybe the benefit to the community could be a good thing
if we can persuade whoever to combine it with a phone mast.

teddy

[NickB]

RESULT
-------

After over 300 views 8 votes were cast in favour, seven against and two didn't care either way.

A landslide for the Seil Apathy Party I think.

[Seil Blubber]

Not so apathetic at Kilmelford then. It seems N-power's proposals were massively rejected at a public meeting this week. The plan for a new pier at the head of Loch Melfort was particularly unpopular. Surely it could have been an opportunity?

[Pentlandpirate]

What a waste of energy............from the Daily Mail

Wind farms failing to produce enough power... because there's not enough wind
By Fiona Macrae
Last updated at 3:51 PM on 21st March 2010

Some of Britain's most beautiful landscapes have been blighted by wind farms for only small returns in energy, research shows.

The analysis of power output found that more than 20 wind farms are operating at less than one-fifth of their full capacity.
Experts say many turbines are going up on sites that are simply not breezy enough.
They also accuse developers of 'grossly exaggerating' the amount of energy they will generate in order to get their hands on subsidies designed to boost the production of green power.
The giant wind farm off the North East coast at Blyth is one of the worst offenders
Britain's most feeble wind farm is in Blyth Harbour in Northumberland, where the nine turbines lining the East Pier reach a meagre 7.9 per cent of their maximum capacity.
Another at Chelker reservoir in North Yorkshire operates at only 8.7 per cent of its potential.
Both are relatively small and old, but larger, more modern sites fared badly too, the analysis of figures provided by energy regulator Ofgem for 2008 found.
For instance, the two turbines at High Volts 2, Country Durham, the largest and most powerful wind farm in Britain when it was commissioned in 2004, achieves an efficiency of just 18.7 per cent.
Turbine efficiency is calculated by comparing the theoretical maximum output with what the farms actually generate.
While it is possible some of the results were skewed by breakdowns, the revelation that so many are under-performing will be of great interest to those who argue that wind farms are little more than expensive eyesores.
The analysis was carried out by Michael Jefferson, an environmental consultant and a professor of international business and sustainability.
He believes that financial incentives designed to help Britain meet is green energy targets are encouraging firms to site their wind farms badly.
Under the controversial 'Renewable Obligation' scheme, British consumers pay £1billion a year in their fuel bills to subsidise the drive towards renewable energy.
The professor told the Sunday Times: 'Too many developments are under-performing.
'It's because the developers grossly exaggerate potential.
'The subsidies make it viable for developers to put turbines on sites they would not touch if the money was not available.'
Professor Jefferson, of London Metropolitan Business School, has said previously: 'We should be putting our money where the wind is and that is quite often not where the development pressure is.'
Britain has 2,741 wind turbines spread over 262 sites. But the number is due to soar, with a further 7,000 planned for the next 12 years to meet European targets on cutting greenhouse gas emissions.
The industry said that other types of energy, from hydro to nuclear, have 50 per cent efficiency at best, and that Britain's onshore wind farms are the best in Europe.
Nick Medic, of Renewable UK, which represents the wind industry, said Britain's ambitious targets for green power meant the country 'needed every bit of green energy it could generate'.
He added : 'If it's not windy, it's not profitable, so why would you build? No business is going to build something that is not profitable.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z0iqKM1gCW

[NickB]

.
You are quite right Pentland, what a waste of energy the Daily Mail is. That is why I never read it

[barky]

I wouldn't read too much into a daily hate anti-windfarm article - ain't a very reliable source of valid information.
Not enough wind isn't usually a problem here though - saying that the last few months have been unusually calm, big storms seem to have by-passed us somehow.
The actual wind farm doesn't bother me at all, my only real concern about this raera windfarm is more damage done to the already crumbling Oban to Lochgilphead road which can only get worse in the timber extraction & wind turbine construction phase - which the windfarm company has promised to 'fix later'

[NickB]

I wouldn't read too much into a daily hate anti-windfarm article - ain't a very reliable source of valid information.
Not enough wind isn't usually a problem here though - saying that the last few months have been unusually calm, big storms seem to have by-passed us somehow.
The actual wind farm doesn't bother me at all, my only real concern about this raera windfarm is more damage done to the already crumbling Oban to Lochgilphead road which can only get worse in the timber extraction & wind turbine construction phase - which the windfarm company has promised to 'fix later'

Will this be 'fixed later' in the same way that Balfour Beattie fixed the road on Seil, or can we trust N-Power? They seem to be a company with a bit more concern for their public image, so I would hope we can.

[MonaLott]

Windmills are definitely not the answer. Peeing into the hurricane, so to speak. A nonsense. Not windy enough - don't work. Too windy - don't work. Built on insecure ground, like peat or seabed mud, fall over. Folk killed trying to erect and maintain them out at sea and they'll corrode like hell.

Nuclear IS the answer. Much more than a million times more energy per penny, well tried technology, nothing but illogical fears against. Bring it on!

And, for Pete's sake, leave our Raera forest alone....

[canUsmellthat]

Pfttt...

[barky]

the raera forest was about due to be harvested anyway

[oldgit]

http://www.bmreports.com/bsp/bsp_home.htm


shows the power from wind and other sources in real time - scroll down to "Generation by Fuel Type". It was 1.3% from wind in the Uk in the past half hour. During the recent cold spell this figure rested at less than 0.5% - high demand but no wind!

[barky]

wind farms in UK are just there to top up supply right now - to theoretically get a large % of power from wind they'd need to be on every hillside, which won't happen. Over a whole year they save having to burn millions of £'s worth of fossil fuels. In these times of UK having surplus generating capacity from current demand other power sources can more than cope with patchy &/or zero input to grid from wind power.
SO ... why put up wind turbines? to help fund next generations of renewable power which RWE & the others all are involved with, keep share holders happy, have something else for 'dirty' polluters to trade carbon credits with & keep the UK factory going that manufactures the towers