windfarms in the uk

[bob golding]

thought this might be of interest.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/ican/A2369892

 a few views on windfarms in the uk. what gets me is the pro nuclear lobby never think to mention is the qauntity of rock needed to make 1 kg of uranium ore. i was invovled, briefly, in an anti uranium mining project in france in the early 80's the area was vast and included something like 50, 30 ton trucks a day driving past the front door. ermm  clean energy.

bob golding

[BeenzMeenzWind]

Good link.

While I personally think a few wind farms here and there add a little interest to the skyline, I suppose I can see where detractors are coming from.

There is a little noise generated. However, I live within 50 yards of a busy railway line, at the bottom of a cutting, which makes a LOT more noise than a windfarm a mile away does. The steelworks 1/2 a mile across the river makes more noise, too. And the gas fired power plant 1 mile away sometimes generates more noise than either, usually at 3 in the morning. I can't honestly say any of the above unduly bother me, so can't really imagine a much lower level of radiated noise being something most people wouldn't soon tune out.

They ARE more expensive, per MW. That's gradually coming down as technology improves and economy of scale begins to take effect. Besides, build a new nuclear plant and see what it costs you!

They do definitely interfere with coastal radar sites. I used to repair and service radars for the RAF, so I've seen the clutter that results when the scan passes over a windfarm. Can't really imagine a fleet of bombers deciding to 'come in under the windfarm', though. I'd imagine that any vaguely sane pilot would want to stay well away from something that can chop his tin foil airplane into tiny bits if he gets too close. Besides, all modern radars have the ability to digitally filter out areas of constant clutter. It does leave a small blind spot, I'll grant you. I somehow doubt that we'll ever see the costlines of the world ringed with wind turbines, though. (you wouldn't need all that many to totally power the world, anyway, compared to the number of available locations)

The pro-nuclear lobby should get smart and revise their argument. While well-regulated and intelligently operated nuclear plants are as close to non-polluting as is possible for a steam-cycle plant, I totally agree with you regarding the effort involved in mining, processing and transporting the fuel in the first place. Then there's the additional complications of processing and / or disposing of the 'waste', which aren't as bad as many people think but exist nonetheless.

The lobbyists would get a lot more support if they used the line: 'We accept that nuclear power generation isn't ideal, but it's one of the best options until something better comes along,' while quietly funneling resources to the folks involved in fusion research, which probably will be the clean energy they would like us to believe fission is at present.

[jamesjones]

From my experience those that are against windfarms are a very small minority (less than 10%) of the people who actually live near them, but they are very vocal. I call it  the 'head in the sand' phenomenon - they prefer to have nuclear power because they can't see radiation, as if that somehow makes it better than the awful inconvenience of having to look at a windfarm.

Nuclear waste will be dangerous for thousands of years - that alone is enough reason to stop all nuclear power. A windfarm could be dismantled in a few days without leaving a trace.

I also don't understand why wind turbines are predicted to have a life of only 20 years or similar, as surely all the parts can be repaired, updated, etc.? (Wouldn't the tower last for hundreds of years anyway?)

[richardyoung]

Wind Power in the UK is definately on the rise. Another way to make use of clean energy in the UK is to purchase power from a clean electricity utility like Ecotricity. See this article for more information:

Ecotricity - Clean Energy Company