|
The Modern Antiquarian Forum » Lewis and Harris » Sleeping Beauty |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
|
nigelswift 8112 posts |
Jan 01, 2005, 21:04
|
||
|
It doesn't make it OK, but so long as we are going to persist in wanting electricity I'm sure the Mother would prefer wind farms over everything else. Her responsibilities extend way beyond birds. Being a protestor is easy, it carries no responsibility. But if you ban the bird killing machines, as they were called, can you suggest a better replacement? I can't. As a lifelong ornithologist, I'd rather push to make them bird friendly.
|
|||
|
smallblueplanet 472 posts |
Jan 01, 2005, 21:09
|
||
|
I don't agree with your viewpoint, by the time we figure out how to make them safe, it'll be too late for some species. The RSPB support windfarms - in the right place - and thats the point about most of these, they're not sited in the right place. But I also can't see whats gonna make them aesthetically pleasing or sound good - they are not the answer.
|
|||
FourWinds 10943 posts |
Jan 01, 2005, 21:58
|
||
|
"... by the time we figure out how to make them safe, it'll be too late for some species." Like man for instance. Which may or may not be a bad thing. The fact is that the places that are good for generating electricity are the most beautiful is bound to cause conflict. It also means that locations of good wind farm sites is going to impinge on the views from prehistoric sites - many were chosen because of the views. Of course other sites should be considered before any 'sacred' site is utilised, but if it's the only viable choice in the area then it has to be.
|
|||
|
FourWinds 10943 posts |
Jan 01, 2005, 22:04
|
||
|
"We need gravel -but from Thornborough?" No we don't. We would LIKE gravel. We would like gravel to build homes, roads and other such things. There are alternatives that would improve our lifestyles enormously, but they wouldn't make anybody much profit. "And we need wind power - but from Callanish?" The people of Lewis and northern Scotland need electricity, yes. They don't all still use candles up there you know :-) Many do rely on generators though. Locally produced power would be a great thing for them. It's the way the future will have to be anyway, so we might as well start getting used to it. The fact is that to sustain our lifestyles (not necessarily a good plan) we NEED electricity and the west coast of Ireland and Scotland could provide around 25% of Europe's needs or some such equally ridiculous figure. The comparison between Thornborough gravel and Lewis wind power doesn't stand up. They're nothing like each other.
|
|||
|
smallblueplanet 472 posts |
Jan 01, 2005, 22:07
|
||
|
"......then it has to be." No it doesn't.
|
|||
|
smallblueplanet 472 posts |
Jan 01, 2005, 22:16
|
||
|
I presume this is a mock-up of what it might look like? http://www.lewiswind.com/es/LVA%20Main.htm Nice.
|
|||
|
FourWinds 10943 posts |
Jan 01, 2005, 22:28
|
||
And you're going to be the one to personally tell the people of Lewis that they can't have cheap, clean, locally produced power, because you think the views will be ruined?
|
|||
|
FourWinds 10943 posts |
Jan 01, 2005, 22:33
|
||
Well for one thing that's not <b>on</b> the Sleeping Beauty is it.
|
|||
|
smallblueplanet 472 posts |
Jan 01, 2005, 22:41
|
||
|
Wind" farms" are such a recent phenomenon that it is hard to be certain of their long-term ecological impact. However, the Flaight Hill Opposition Group at Hebden Bridge, Yorkshire, commissioned an hydrologist and a number of engineers to examine the neighbouring Ovenden Moor wind "farm". They found that the erection of turbines 200 feet high had cracked the bedrock of this upland moorland and diverted natural watercourses. Around the turbines and along the cable trenches the thin layers of peat were drying out rapidly and it is likely that these sections of peat bog will simply blow away. Moreover, tracks to and between turbines have acted as dams and formed deep pools of peat "soup" - fetid surface water which cannot run or drain away. There is certain to be a knock-on effect on flora, insects and birds which depended on the ecological status quo before the turbines were built. The hole excavated for a turbine's foundation has a volume equivalent to a 25m swimming bath. The extracted material has to be put somewhere else. The hole is filled with sand, aggregate and cement which has to come from somewhere else and has to be transported by heavy lorries. Several miles of service roads and cable trenches need to be constructed at a large wind "farm" site. If the site is at any distance from the grid, there will be pylons and overhead transmission lines to form the necessary connection. Wind enthusiasts admit that they need huge quantities of concrete for foundations and roads and are on record as claiming that many jobs are created or safe-guarded thereby. Yet the concrete industry is the biggest man-made source of CO2 on the planet - about 7% of the world's total. Wind turbines produce significant amounts of CO2 - they merely do it in advance. If the emissions created during manufacture and erection are averaged over the units of electricity generated during the lifetime of a turbine, the CO2 cost is 50g per unit (Algemeen Dagblad - Netherlands - 8.2.2000). What was once inaccessible upland becomes accessible for more intensive agriculture. Applications for further development can use the argument that the landscape is already degraded by wind turbines: this has happened in an application for a landfill site at Llanidloes in Powys, where the Llandinam turbines have been cited in the landscape assessment. Dr John Hedger at the Institute of Biological Sciences at the University of Wales, Aberystwyth, has written: <b>"Wind energy is not as clean as its proponents would have us believe. It is an industrial development and as such causes degradation of the environments where turbines are sited. </b>The result is a loss of habitat for wildlife. The proposed environmental benefits of windfarming...will only come from the very large-scale use of turbines. One environmental problem will simply be replaced by another." Paul Gipe, the California-based wind enthusiast, has recently taken the American wind industry to task for ignoring the serious problem of soil erosion found at wind "farm" sites. Not as straightforward a case as the proponents would have you believe. http://www.countryguardian.net/case.htm
|
|||
pixie1948 171 posts |
Jan 01, 2005, 23:23
|
||
So you don't like wind farms and we need energy from somewhere. Do you have any alternatives that do provide the energy without damaging the environment?
|
| Pages: 14 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| The Modern Antiquarian Forum Index | |
