Action against proposed wind turbines in Normandy

[Will]

A minimum of 100 wind turbines, most likely many more, is proposed for the Caen-Falaise plain, an area that the developers consider "not worthy of preservation". In fact it forms the eastern edge of the Suisse Normande tourist region. An online petition against this folly is available here.

More signatures are needed by the end of August.

At the same time, even Mont St Michel is threatened by the relentless onslaught of the 'eoliennes' -

see http://www.epaw.org/echoes.php?lang=en&article=n8.

This seems particularly foolhardy, coming as it does at the same time as EDF announcing the closure of the Barrage de Vezins hydroelectric plant, and the consequent loss of the associated lake. A protest march is being organised for next month.

[Catalpa]

[quote user="Will"]... an area that the developers consider "not worthy of preservation". [/quote]

And France has such a good reputation for accurately assessing what is worthy of preservation - lanscape, flora or fauna. [6]

Thank for the link. I hadn't seen it.

[powerdesal]

What a pity that the petition site will not accept my yahoo.co.uk e mail address, nor my veoliawater.com address either

[Jonzjob]

It accepted mine Steve so we will go halves on it if you like!

They are as much use as an ashtray on a motorbike and are one of my MAJOR hates on this earth!

I started a thread on this site http://www.the-anglo-french-forum.co.uk/index.php?topic=2615.0 . They will never be able to produce anything stable until mankind manage to manage the wind and when that happens it will be a cold day in hell!

[IMG]http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f180/Jonzjob/SalsinewindmillsA.jpg[/IMG]

This WAS one of 10 just a few miles North of us. There were 10 of them put there in the mid 90s. All of them have had the rotors removed and the story goes that the cowboys who put them there did a runner with all of the subsidsies. It is a fact that they have never been on line and just fell to bits. I wouldn't live near any of them.

Just google 'wind turbine problems' to get a small part of the story. There is a lot of reading there!

[powerdesal]

[quote user="Jonzjob"]

It accepted mine Steve so we will go halves on it if you like!

They are as much use as an ashtray on a motorbike and are one of my MAJOR hates on this earth!

[/quote]

 

I am in absolute, total agreement. They are the biggest "con" of all the "climate change" confidence tricks.

Someone, somewhere, is making a heck of a lot of money from these useless, monstrous, waste-of-space, blots on the landscape.

[Will]

I looked at the topic on that other forum, JJ, and it was interesting to see that even those in favour of wind farms seemed to prefer the hydro option.

So why is EDF closing the Barrage de Vezins? At the same time as a wind farm is proposed near Mont St Michel?

The Danes are the main people making the money from this industry (and the Germans).

Supporters of wind power might like to remember two or three years ago when half of Europe's power was knocked out. A sudden change of weather caused an increase in power demand in central Germany, and the same weather got the turbines going in Northern Germany. All fine, but only one transmision line was available to link the two areas, which became overloaded and the knock-on effect of this caused much of the European grid to shut down. Not directly caused by wind power of course, but it proved the turbines are a far from ideal solution.

There is also the controversial issue of the effects of wind farms on wildlife, particularly birds of prey.

[Catalpa]

[quote user="Will"]So why is EDF closing the Barrage de Vezins? At the same time as a wind farm is proposed near Mont St Michel?[/quote]

The barrage needs serious and very expensive - probably on-going maintenance work whereas windfarms receive big EU subsidies?

I read (or was told) something along those lines but though I've searched through various links, unfortunately I can't now find the reference.

[Maricopa]

[quote user="Will"]Supporters of wind power might like to remember two or three years ago when half of Europe's power was knocked out. A sudden change of weather caused an increase in power demand in central Germany, and the same weather got the turbines going in Northern Germany. All fine, but only one transmision line was available to link the two areas, which became overloaded and the knock-on effect of this caused much of the European grid to shut down. Not directly caused by wind power of course, but it proved the turbines are a far from ideal solution.
[/quote]

My bold. That is surely in an investment in infrastructure problem, and only proves that the companies need to spend more money, which can in part come from increasing bills?

Personally, I find wind farms graceful and calming.

[Will]

Yes, you are right, there was an infrastructure problem, I believe one line was out for maintenance and a second had been taken out so that a ship could safely go down the river that the line spanned. I qualified it by saying that the problem wasn't related directly to wind power, more to the fact that where the electricity is needed is normally a long way from where the wind produces it. The same thing applies to hydro and other renewables of course, but they are somewhat more consistent and predictable so less prone to sudden surges.

I think that energy policies cannot rely on just renewables, just nuclear or just conventional power stations. Stopping wasted energy is the highest priority, and long transmission lines are one of the things that are basically wasteful. Local waste-to-power projects should be promoted more than they are now, and above all a joined-up, integrated system that can cope with different weather conditions and surges in demand without undue overall harm to the environment is needed - not just building more wind farms because they attract subsidies.

[Just Chris]

Powerdesal, I think an even bigger con is the "carbon trading" scam. I note that there have been seven arrests for fraud already. It wasn't long before that particular bandwaggon was jumped on!

Windmills come a very close second...

Chris

[buelligan]

Wind farms eh..?  I'm sure most on this forum (and elsewhere) want to use electricity.  How many of us would prefer to live next to a nuclear or fossil fuelled power station as opposed to a wind or solar farm?  Of course, what we really want is power at the flick of a switch and someone else living next to the mess...  It's a total PITA when we have to actually see and live near the results of our own consumerism isn't it...?  I'm with Maricopa on this one...[:D]

[powerdesal]

[quote user="buelligan"]Wind farms eh..?  I'm sure most on this forum (and elsewhere) want to use electricity.  How many of us would prefer to live next to a nuclear or fossil fuelled power station as opposed to a wind or solar farm?  Of course, what we really want is power at the flick of a switch and someone else living next to the mess...  It's a total PITA when we have to actually see and live near the results of our own consumerism isn't it...?  I'm with Maricopa on this one...[:D][/quote]

I would have no objection to living next to a modern, well designed, power station of whatever fuel.  Modern stations are designed to sympathetically blend (as much as is practical) into the landscape. Wind and solar generation stations are impossible to blend in by their very nature.

Mind you, I have worked in the Power (and water) industry for almost all my working life.

I will reiterate my previous comments, wind powered electrical generation is a confidence trick. The production of the units uses more energy than they can ever realistically be expected to produce over their lifetime (including subsequent decommissioning and removal). They have a bigger 'carbon footprint' during their construction than they save in use. They are innefficient and require thermal power station back up for when the wind doesn't blow hard enough or blows too hard. Such thermal stations need to be on either 'hot standby' (burning fuel and using power to keep the turbines rotating slowly - called 'barring') or already running at low load (very innefficient). The idea of firing up a thermal staion from cold is just not on, it takes hours. The idea of using gas turbine plant to start up when the wind drops is fine in theory but not in practice. Large GTs need to be on barring for a period before start and still take tens of minutes to get to load after start initiation. Such plants also need manning round the clock.

The only alternative to hot standby etc is to have very rapid start standby plant such as pumped storage hydro with stopped to full load times of very few minutes. This would involve considerable flooding of various valleys, creation of dams etc.

Small scale, low head, local hydro is an area which is being totally ignored and would address the power line loss issue as well as diversifying generation.

In short, wind powered generators are a waste of resources, they are certainly not calming and are far far from pretty objects. Its a confidence trick to make money out of subsidies.

[buelligan]

Of course, you're absolutely right powerdesal, silly old me!  No one in their right mind could possibly object to living next to a "traditional" style power station.  There is no need whatsoever to review how we supply power to the world.  Everyone is happy!  Super![:D][:D][:D]

[Jonzjob]

Steve, my OH has jist said that what you said should be "shouted from the rooftops!" and I agree with her.

As for living down the road from a nuclear power station. I lived close to 2 for 23 years with absolutly no fears about them. Oldbury and Berkley, both on the banks of the Severn. Berkley has now been decommisioned at the end of it's very productive life even though it was either the first or one of the first in the U.K. Ok the site will not be able to be used for 1000 plus years, but it is a fairly small footprint and will not be missed. ot only did I live fairly close but I also used to look after the IBM kit in the Labs. Lovely pint of Abbot in their club and it didn't glow in the dark![B]

The overall answer to the power problem is not to produce more, but to use less and that is possible by using low wattage appliences and switching units off instead of leaving them on standby all the time. There are a boatload of other ways to do so and it seems to me to be a great shame that some of the cash being doled out for the huge revolving (sometimes) white elephants can't be turned to education on how to use power correctly!

Next will be the story about low wattage light bulbs being dangerous?[:-))]

[buelligan]

My mother lived opposite Berkeley for many years.  She was Chairman of the Macmillan Cancer Support group in the area and was well aware of the number of cancer deaths there.  She knew people who worked at the power station and who freely admitted that they would cause alerts and shut-downs on days when they wanted to go home early.  She died at a young age of cancer herself.  She didn't drink or smoke ever. 

[powerdesal]

[quote user="buelligan"]My mother lived opposite Berkeley for many years.  She was Chairman of the Macmillan Cancer Support group in the area and was well aware of the number of cancer deaths there.  She knew people who worked at the power station and who freely admitted that they would cause alerts and shut-downs on days when they wanted to go home early.  She died at a young age of cancer herself.  She didn't drink or smoke ever. [/quote]

Buelligan,

People who work in power stations do not get to go home early in the event of an 'alert' or shut-down, on the contrary, they end up working longer hours to overcome any problems. Thats just the day staff of course, the shift staff man the station all the time, they never get to leave shift early, they leave when relieved by the oncoming shift. Unless of course they stay on to help overcome the problems.

Please do some research before posting utter bulls**t.

Of course you have my sympathy on the loss of your Mother, but please dont sully her memory by your misplaced attitudes.

[buelligan]

I'm sorry powerdesal, I have no attitude about this whatsoever, I am simply reporting what was said by those who worked at the station.  As I have never worked in that industry I am not in a position to prove or disprove the words of those individuals.  I suppose I should come clean though and reveal my vested interest.  It is that humans can continue to live on this planet in a healthy, reasonably civilised and happy way.  As far as sullying my mother's memory goes, I thank you for your concern.[:D]

[powerdesal]

[quote user="Jonzjob"]

Next will be the story about low wattage light bulbs being dangerous?[:-))]

[/quote]

It depends on how low the wattage is I suppose.

I can imagine it being quite dangerous for a surgeon to operate by the light of a 15w bulb [:P]

I suppose you are really referring to the low wattage replacements for conventional tungsten bulbs, you know, the ones that contain mercury and need special disposal techniques. The ones that take a while to come to full brightness, that could be a danger - possibly.

[Jonzjob]

"I can imagine it being quite dangerous for a surgeon to operate by the light of a 15w bulb "

You could always be under 'Tock-H surgery" done by 'profesional ladies'?[Www]

Yes I am on about compact flourescent bulbs, the ones with the huge amount of approx 5 milli grammes of mercury in each one and if you were to break about a dozen in a small enclosed room and then go round sniffing up the released mercury with a straw then it could be bad for your health. The fact that flourescent tubes have been around for decades and have the same amount, if not more, mercury and we are still here.

I wonder if the same people who are all in for wind turbines are trying to rubbish the compact flourescent lamps so that we will continue to need more power that they promise to give with no greenhouse gasses? Well, as has been said, apart from the gasses that have been given off making the white elephants? More like  whirling dervishes  me thinks!

[Jonzjob]

I wonder if the 'con' is going to diversify?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8223528.stm