Windfarms are noisy.
They're not, of course, but this is what the nimbies keep telling us. They're noisy, so there.
But what happens when someone actually visits a windfarm, or stays near one, and discovers that they're remarkably, surprisingly quiet?
Each time that happens - each time somebody returns to the Shire with the news that it's possible to stand directly beneath the blades of a working wind turbine and still be surprised by how quiet they are - the nimbies are caught out. Telling porkies again. Windfarms aren't noisy at all.
So the nimbies have been employing a cunning new weapon. When it is pointed out that so-and-so actually stood directly beneath the blades of a turbine on a windy day and says they're not noisy, the nimby response will be:
'Of course. Sound travels outwards. Wind turbines get noisier the further you are from them!'
This claim has the appearance of science to support it. Soundwaves radiate outwards from a source. If you're right up against the source, the soundwaves will be heading outwards into the atmosphere above your head. You won't hear them, but somebody standing further away will.
Unfortunately for the nimbies, this argument is sheer cobblers.
Sound follows the inverse square rule. The volume of a sound diminishes rapidly as you move away from it.
This is why modern turbines can barely be heard 200 metres away. Up close, they're very quiet. Even that low level sound quickly disappears as you move away from the masts.
So, no - wind turbines do not get noisier the further you move away from them.
Science nails another nimby myth.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
THE SHAPE OF THINGS TO COME
Under the stewardship of Lord Turner, yesterday the government's Committee on Climate Change (CCC) published its first annual report.
The conclusions were inescapable. Britain needs to pull its finger out.
Amongst the recommendations of the report was a call for 23 gigawatts of new wind power generation in the UK by 2020. That equates to an extra 8,000 three megawatt turbines.
The Lenchwick Windfarm will comprise 5 turbines rated up to 2.3 MW each. That's a tiny fraction - less than a quarter of one per cent - of the total required.
Now, here's the rub. Every single one of those 8,000 additional wind turbines will be in the 'wrong' environment. It's not just a few locals in the Lenchwick area who don't want a brand new windfarm near them. Nimby groups spring up everywhere a new windfarm is proposed, and they all spout the same empty arguments: 'We're all in favour of renewables, but just not here!'
So we need a massive increase in the amount of wind power generated in the UK. But nimby groups are going to fight this every inch of the way.
Maybe VVASP really do believe that they are so special, so unique, that they can be exempted from this form of national service. The government and power companies are going to have to find sites for at least 8,000 turbines, but the Lenches feel that they have the right to oppose the five we've been offered.
And if everybody else feels the same way? If everybody takes up the nimby mantra, what then?
Perhaps it's time for the anti-windfarm protesters of the area to come to their senses. Not everywhere nominated for a windfarm can be an 'inappropriate' environment. There is a national need - nay, a looming national crisis - to be addressed. The message from scientists and advisers is clear: the UK is going to get a lot more windfarms and we'll be getting them soon. It's not a question of whether we like them or not.
What kind of example are we setting? The UK needs 8,000 new turbines. The nimbies of Lench are refusing to have five.
It would certainly help matters if groups like VVASP would stick to the facts about wind power, rather than constantly trading silly stories about windfarms. With such a massive increase in wind-generated energy on the cards, such behaviour is monumentally irresponsible and immoral.
We could wise up. Accept the fact that windfarms are going to be part of the British landscape. Acknowledge that the problems we face require answers that involve us all. Recognise that windfarms are quiet, clean and green and that opposing them is socially unacceptable.
Or we could waste large amounts of money and time in fighting the inevitable.
The conclusions were inescapable. Britain needs to pull its finger out.
Amongst the recommendations of the report was a call for 23 gigawatts of new wind power generation in the UK by 2020. That equates to an extra 8,000 three megawatt turbines.
The Lenchwick Windfarm will comprise 5 turbines rated up to 2.3 MW each. That's a tiny fraction - less than a quarter of one per cent - of the total required.
Now, here's the rub. Every single one of those 8,000 additional wind turbines will be in the 'wrong' environment. It's not just a few locals in the Lenchwick area who don't want a brand new windfarm near them. Nimby groups spring up everywhere a new windfarm is proposed, and they all spout the same empty arguments: 'We're all in favour of renewables, but just not here!'
So we need a massive increase in the amount of wind power generated in the UK. But nimby groups are going to fight this every inch of the way.
Maybe VVASP really do believe that they are so special, so unique, that they can be exempted from this form of national service. The government and power companies are going to have to find sites for at least 8,000 turbines, but the Lenches feel that they have the right to oppose the five we've been offered.
And if everybody else feels the same way? If everybody takes up the nimby mantra, what then?
Perhaps it's time for the anti-windfarm protesters of the area to come to their senses. Not everywhere nominated for a windfarm can be an 'inappropriate' environment. There is a national need - nay, a looming national crisis - to be addressed. The message from scientists and advisers is clear: the UK is going to get a lot more windfarms and we'll be getting them soon. It's not a question of whether we like them or not.
What kind of example are we setting? The UK needs 8,000 new turbines. The nimbies of Lench are refusing to have five.
It would certainly help matters if groups like VVASP would stick to the facts about wind power, rather than constantly trading silly stories about windfarms. With such a massive increase in wind-generated energy on the cards, such behaviour is monumentally irresponsible and immoral.
We could wise up. Accept the fact that windfarms are going to be part of the British landscape. Acknowledge that the problems we face require answers that involve us all. Recognise that windfarms are quiet, clean and green and that opposing them is socially unacceptable.
Or we could waste large amounts of money and time in fighting the inevitable.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
VVASP NEWS
The latest VVASP newsletter (October 2009) is out.
And they have the temerity to accuse ScottishPower Renewables of practising 'deception'!
"We have the right to expect a large company like SPR to show honesty and integrity in dealings with the public but these aspects were in short supply", claimed the newsletter.
This 'party line' seems to have been agreed before SPR and its consultants held the three public information sessions in Norton & Lenchwick, Harvington and Church Lench last month. There was an assumption - a prejudice, if you will - that SPR would inevitably be lying.
In fact, there are numerous reasons why ScottishPower Renewables are unlikely to tell lies during this process. The most obvious being that it would seriously damage their cause, and the cause of other renewable energy companies seeking to solve our energy problems before they become insurmountable. There is, quite simply, too much at stake. Lying to the public would be a very foolish, and unnecessary, thing for SPR to do.
A while back, this blog asked if anyone could site a single lie told, thus far, by SPR. Still haven't found one, but do keep looking.
VVASP meanwhile can, and do, spout any old rubbish they want to with impunity.
Even before the public information sessions were held, people in Bishampton (including supporters of the windfarm) were being urged to attend the sessions because 'we have to fight this thing.' Not - you may note - to find out what's actually at stake.
This was evidently VVASP's tactic. ScottishPower Renewables, along with consultants from Dulas and an environmental campaigner, were making it possible for locals to peruse the plans and ask questions. This was the first time such an opportunity would exist since VVASP was created to mislead and misinform the locals. A concerted effort was made to limit the impact of these information sessions. While experts were in the halls answering questions (or being told, on no grounds whatsoever, that they were 'lying'), the nimbies were doing their utmost to present their own alternative reality to the villagers.
One criticism made was that the information sessions showed just two photographs with a computer generated windfarm visible - one from the Handgate crossroads and one from Spitten Farm. Where was the photo taken from the Lenches Club, for instance (which, by the way, would have shown that the view of the Malverns from the club's windows would not be obscured in any way by the turbines)?
According to the VVASP newsletter, the two photographs were "taken from viewpoints deliberately chosen to minimise the dominance of the turbines". That is, one was taken from the east and another from the north-west. For anyone who wanted to know what the windfarm would look like from other angles, there was a consultant there to conjure up the relevant diagram on a laptop.
What VVASP were so annoyed about was the simple fact that the windfarm didn't look quite so terrifying when it was in situ, as it were. VVASP had flown a blimp 125-metres up and 'most people' were 'amazed at how high the turbines would be'. Why? What did they think 125-metres would look like? Of course, when you're standing directly beneath it, a blimp flying 125 metres up in the air seems rather high up. But when you're at the distance you'd normally be at - i.e., on two of the main roads into Church Lench, it doesn't seem quite so big.
So - question: how many residents of the Lenches are going to spend significant amounts of time standing directly under the turbines, looking up at them?
Not many.
No, what VVASP were fuming about was that the images of the windfarm rather contradicted their entirely misrepresentative image of what the turbines will look like (a blimp, 125-metres up, which you stand underneath and express surprise at how high it is). SPR had taken plenty of steps to show anyone present what the windfarm would look like from either side and from any point requested. But this wasn't what VVASP wanted people to see. So, as the VVASP say of SPR, "they should be ashamed of themselves."
Ashamed of themselves for making information available. Information that showed how paltry VVASP's 'information' is.
Maybe flying the blimp at 80-metres - the actual height of the hub at the top of the turbine mast - would have been more representative.
Two things made an impression at the public information sessions hosted by SPR in October. One was the sheer level of hostility and unreasonable behaviour in Church Lench (VVASP's 'peaceful protest'). The other was the surprising degree of support for the windfarm, especially in Harvington and Norton & Lenchwick.
And although this blog has no connection whatsoever with Scottish Power or any other developers or operators of windfarms, Wind of Change is happy to point out that SPR have not yet been caught out telling lies. Whereas VVASP have consistently made claims about the windfarm which are demonstrably untrue.
Who, then, has really shown a short supply of 'honesty and integrity' in dealing with the public?
A little further into the VVASP newsletter comes the news that the Lenchwick Windfarm could "bring about the end of cricket in the Lenches." "Turbines Four and Five will be behind the bowler's arm at the south end of the cricket ground" (actually, they won't - turbines 4 and 5 are at the other end of the development).
Does this count as a genuine threat? The Lenches sports ground has been there for all of - what? five years? Many villagers were opposed to it, and there is unhappiness at the prospect of the sports club extending its ground, pulling up hedges (without planning permission) and adding to the noise pollution experienced by locals, as well as light pollution in a quiet country village during the evenings.
Quite why a five-turbine windfarm some distance from the cricket pitch should "bring about the end of cricket in the Lenches" isn't clear. Are cricketers unusually sensitive creatures? And, even if it was true (which anyone with a functioning brain knows it isn't), how does the "end of cricket in the Lenches" stack up against electricity black-outs and climate change?
Let's face it - the energy news isn't good. The government's chief adviser has warned that there will be electrcity black-outs by 2016 if we don't get a grip. Ofgen has now announced that energy bills could rise by 60% over the same period as the loss of nuclear and coal-fired power stations leads to an increasingly risky dependence on imported gas.
The crisis is coming. But we can take steps to avert it. And if that means the end of cricket at the Lenches sports ground, not everyone in the area will be sorry.
Then again, in the real world cricket will continue. The windfarm will look less threatening than VVASP want you to think it is. And they'll still accuse SPR of 'deception' when all the evidence points in the other direction.
They should be ashamed of themselves.
And they have the temerity to accuse ScottishPower Renewables of practising 'deception'!
"We have the right to expect a large company like SPR to show honesty and integrity in dealings with the public but these aspects were in short supply", claimed the newsletter.
This 'party line' seems to have been agreed before SPR and its consultants held the three public information sessions in Norton & Lenchwick, Harvington and Church Lench last month. There was an assumption - a prejudice, if you will - that SPR would inevitably be lying.
In fact, there are numerous reasons why ScottishPower Renewables are unlikely to tell lies during this process. The most obvious being that it would seriously damage their cause, and the cause of other renewable energy companies seeking to solve our energy problems before they become insurmountable. There is, quite simply, too much at stake. Lying to the public would be a very foolish, and unnecessary, thing for SPR to do.
A while back, this blog asked if anyone could site a single lie told, thus far, by SPR. Still haven't found one, but do keep looking.
VVASP meanwhile can, and do, spout any old rubbish they want to with impunity.
Even before the public information sessions were held, people in Bishampton (including supporters of the windfarm) were being urged to attend the sessions because 'we have to fight this thing.' Not - you may note - to find out what's actually at stake.
This was evidently VVASP's tactic. ScottishPower Renewables, along with consultants from Dulas and an environmental campaigner, were making it possible for locals to peruse the plans and ask questions. This was the first time such an opportunity would exist since VVASP was created to mislead and misinform the locals. A concerted effort was made to limit the impact of these information sessions. While experts were in the halls answering questions (or being told, on no grounds whatsoever, that they were 'lying'), the nimbies were doing their utmost to present their own alternative reality to the villagers.
One criticism made was that the information sessions showed just two photographs with a computer generated windfarm visible - one from the Handgate crossroads and one from Spitten Farm. Where was the photo taken from the Lenches Club, for instance (which, by the way, would have shown that the view of the Malverns from the club's windows would not be obscured in any way by the turbines)?
According to the VVASP newsletter, the two photographs were "taken from viewpoints deliberately chosen to minimise the dominance of the turbines". That is, one was taken from the east and another from the north-west. For anyone who wanted to know what the windfarm would look like from other angles, there was a consultant there to conjure up the relevant diagram on a laptop.
What VVASP were so annoyed about was the simple fact that the windfarm didn't look quite so terrifying when it was in situ, as it were. VVASP had flown a blimp 125-metres up and 'most people' were 'amazed at how high the turbines would be'. Why? What did they think 125-metres would look like? Of course, when you're standing directly beneath it, a blimp flying 125 metres up in the air seems rather high up. But when you're at the distance you'd normally be at - i.e., on two of the main roads into Church Lench, it doesn't seem quite so big.
So - question: how many residents of the Lenches are going to spend significant amounts of time standing directly under the turbines, looking up at them?
Not many.
No, what VVASP were fuming about was that the images of the windfarm rather contradicted their entirely misrepresentative image of what the turbines will look like (a blimp, 125-metres up, which you stand underneath and express surprise at how high it is). SPR had taken plenty of steps to show anyone present what the windfarm would look like from either side and from any point requested. But this wasn't what VVASP wanted people to see. So, as the VVASP say of SPR, "they should be ashamed of themselves."
Ashamed of themselves for making information available. Information that showed how paltry VVASP's 'information' is.
Maybe flying the blimp at 80-metres - the actual height of the hub at the top of the turbine mast - would have been more representative.
Two things made an impression at the public information sessions hosted by SPR in October. One was the sheer level of hostility and unreasonable behaviour in Church Lench (VVASP's 'peaceful protest'). The other was the surprising degree of support for the windfarm, especially in Harvington and Norton & Lenchwick.
And although this blog has no connection whatsoever with Scottish Power or any other developers or operators of windfarms, Wind of Change is happy to point out that SPR have not yet been caught out telling lies. Whereas VVASP have consistently made claims about the windfarm which are demonstrably untrue.
Who, then, has really shown a short supply of 'honesty and integrity' in dealing with the public?
A little further into the VVASP newsletter comes the news that the Lenchwick Windfarm could "bring about the end of cricket in the Lenches." "Turbines Four and Five will be behind the bowler's arm at the south end of the cricket ground" (actually, they won't - turbines 4 and 5 are at the other end of the development).
Does this count as a genuine threat? The Lenches sports ground has been there for all of - what? five years? Many villagers were opposed to it, and there is unhappiness at the prospect of the sports club extending its ground, pulling up hedges (without planning permission) and adding to the noise pollution experienced by locals, as well as light pollution in a quiet country village during the evenings.
Quite why a five-turbine windfarm some distance from the cricket pitch should "bring about the end of cricket in the Lenches" isn't clear. Are cricketers unusually sensitive creatures? And, even if it was true (which anyone with a functioning brain knows it isn't), how does the "end of cricket in the Lenches" stack up against electricity black-outs and climate change?
Let's face it - the energy news isn't good. The government's chief adviser has warned that there will be electrcity black-outs by 2016 if we don't get a grip. Ofgen has now announced that energy bills could rise by 60% over the same period as the loss of nuclear and coal-fired power stations leads to an increasingly risky dependence on imported gas.
The crisis is coming. But we can take steps to avert it. And if that means the end of cricket at the Lenches sports ground, not everyone in the area will be sorry.
Then again, in the real world cricket will continue. The windfarm will look less threatening than VVASP want you to think it is. And they'll still accuse SPR of 'deception' when all the evidence points in the other direction.
They should be ashamed of themselves.
Friday, October 9, 2009
TALL STOREYS
How many storeys does a wind turbine have?
According to VVASP: 40.
According to the English language: none.
By definition, a 'storey' is 'any of the parts into which a building is divided horizontally'. In other words, it's a 'floor'. So turbines, obviously, don't have storeys.
Constantly announcing that the Lenchwick Windfarm turbines will be 'forty storeys high' is yet another example of the nimbies' tendency to twist language. When fully perpendicular, the height to the tip of a blade might be equivalent to a forty-storey building. But there the resemblance ends.
Another question: how many windfarms are there in the UK?
As of 1 May 2009, there were 211 operational windfarms in Britain - a total of 2,434 turbines and 3,391 megawatts of installed capacity, with a further 2,192 MW worth of schemes under construction, another 6,694 MW having secured planning consent and some 8,486 MW waiting for planning approval.
But if you talked to VVASP, you might be forgiven for thinking that the grand total of windfarms in the UK is ... two. And that everyone living near those two windfarms is passionately opposed to them.
One of the windfarms visited by members of VVASP was Coldham, near March in Cambridgeshire. Eight turbines went operational at Coldham in 2005. So awful are they that plans to extend the site to the tune of seven more turbines were not opposed by local residents and were granted approval in 2008.
The site of the Coldham windfarm is a farm owned by the Co-operative Group since 1914. The Co-op does not really have a reputation for investing in noisome, anti-social projects. Joining forces with Scottish Power, the Co-op established the windfarm, gaining planning permission in 2003 after some opposition from local residents.
Evidently, that opposition was unfounded. The residents have grown accustomed to the windfarm and haven't objected to the addition of seven more turbines. Coldham turned out to be such a success that the Co-op received approval from East Riding Council to build a 14 turbine windfarm near Goole.
Overall, local residents seem to have done rather well out of the Coldham windfarm, which has brought educational and financial benefits to the area, as well as putting Coldham 'on the map'.
But when VVASP visited, they ignored all this. Instead, they tracked down a couple of farmers who were prepared to grumble about the windfarm.
Now, Wind of Change rather likes farmers, but we do recognise that many are experts in the art of griping. Perhaps the two VVASP spoke to were jealous, knowing that if the turbines were on their land they'd be receiving a handsome income while still being able to farm around them.
Whatever - the story that came back from Coldham was not one of community benefits, local approval of the windfarm and no resistance to the site's extension. No: what VVASP returned with was some 'alarming' information that two farmers didn't like the windfarm.
Case closed, as they say.
The only other windfarm VVASP like talking about is at Deeping St Nicholas in Lincolnshire. The area is home to Toni Chapman, who moved to the village as the first eight turbines were being erected and who sees no reason to object to the further sixteen turbines which have been proposed (source: Spalding Guardian).
Deeping St Nicholas is also home to a community initiative, known as the Fenland Green Power Co-operative, which saw massive positive interest in 2007 when it offered shares to local residents in two of the turbines (source: Spalding Today).
In January 2006, Mr Watts, whose organic farm hosts the turbines, welcomed a visit to the windfarm (http://www.colchesterfoe.org/ARCHIVE/ESSAYS/Deeping_St_Nicholas_Visit_(06-01-07).pdf). Mr Watts lives 750 metres from the turbines and had experienced no problems with noise at any time. Neither had he seen any evidence of 'bird strikes' (although he does offer a good explanation for how this myth came about). One member of the visiting group discovered that, at 250 metres distance, the turbines could not be heard.
Overall, there seems to be quite a lot of good news about Deeping St Nicholas. But you'll not hear any of it, because Deeping St Nicholas is home to Jane Davis.
If the nimbies had their way, Jane Davis is the only person in the entire country who would be allowed to talk about windfarms. She claims that she and her husband were forced to leave their home (which is 200m further away from the turbines than Mr Watts's is) because of 'noise'.
Naturally, Mrs Davis's concerns were looked into. Environmental Health Professionals working for South Holland District Council spent 26 days and nights trying to monitor this 'noise' in October 2007. The experts failed to find a problem.
At one stage, attempts by consultants to gather and review data relevant to the case were delayed by the Davises themselves.
Jane Davis would seem to be unique. There have been no complaints from the other six households living at a comparable distance from the windfarm. Locally, indeed, the windfarm would appear to have done a great deal of good, and many locals have joined the Fenland Green Power Co-operative scheme. But all of that is irrelevant, because the nimbies really like Jane Davis. She says what they want to hear.
Regardless of all the positives surrounding Coldham, all that we've heard from VVASP is that two farmers don't like it. And regardless of all the good news surrounding Deeping St Nicholas, all that VVASP have announced is that Jane Davis had to leave her house, in a case which is still problematic because the objective facts in the matter are proving elusive.
It's this utterly selective 'cherry-picking' of the evidence which undermines VVASP's case. Six months ago, there were nearly 2,500 wind turbines operating in the UK. One couple claim to have been forced to move because of an alleged 'noise pollution' which remains unproven and which failed to affect others living nearby.
Now, let's try a thought experiment. Imagine the VVASP representatives visiting Coldham earlier this year and coming back with the news that the turbines aren't all that bad actually and by far the majority of local residents approve of them.
Likely? Not really. Because VVASP are committed to opposing Lenchwick Windfarm regardless of the facts. For their own reasons, ranging from abject NIMBYism and the desire to protect investments to some rather random worries about something-or-other, VVASP have consistently sought out any 'bad news' they can find.
This has required them to ignore most of the information available and to trumpet unscientific reports, unsubstantiated rumours, Chinese whispers and claims which simply don't add up.
The many who are benefitting already from windfarms are ignored. A miniscule, totally unrepresentative sample is all that VVASP are interested in.
So - how many stories does a wind turbine have?
Many. But VVASP don't want you to hear most of them.
According to VVASP: 40.
According to the English language: none.
By definition, a 'storey' is 'any of the parts into which a building is divided horizontally'. In other words, it's a 'floor'. So turbines, obviously, don't have storeys.
Constantly announcing that the Lenchwick Windfarm turbines will be 'forty storeys high' is yet another example of the nimbies' tendency to twist language. When fully perpendicular, the height to the tip of a blade might be equivalent to a forty-storey building. But there the resemblance ends.
Another question: how many windfarms are there in the UK?
As of 1 May 2009, there were 211 operational windfarms in Britain - a total of 2,434 turbines and 3,391 megawatts of installed capacity, with a further 2,192 MW worth of schemes under construction, another 6,694 MW having secured planning consent and some 8,486 MW waiting for planning approval.
But if you talked to VVASP, you might be forgiven for thinking that the grand total of windfarms in the UK is ... two. And that everyone living near those two windfarms is passionately opposed to them.
One of the windfarms visited by members of VVASP was Coldham, near March in Cambridgeshire. Eight turbines went operational at Coldham in 2005. So awful are they that plans to extend the site to the tune of seven more turbines were not opposed by local residents and were granted approval in 2008.
The site of the Coldham windfarm is a farm owned by the Co-operative Group since 1914. The Co-op does not really have a reputation for investing in noisome, anti-social projects. Joining forces with Scottish Power, the Co-op established the windfarm, gaining planning permission in 2003 after some opposition from local residents.
Evidently, that opposition was unfounded. The residents have grown accustomed to the windfarm and haven't objected to the addition of seven more turbines. Coldham turned out to be such a success that the Co-op received approval from East Riding Council to build a 14 turbine windfarm near Goole.
Overall, local residents seem to have done rather well out of the Coldham windfarm, which has brought educational and financial benefits to the area, as well as putting Coldham 'on the map'.
But when VVASP visited, they ignored all this. Instead, they tracked down a couple of farmers who were prepared to grumble about the windfarm.
Now, Wind of Change rather likes farmers, but we do recognise that many are experts in the art of griping. Perhaps the two VVASP spoke to were jealous, knowing that if the turbines were on their land they'd be receiving a handsome income while still being able to farm around them.
Whatever - the story that came back from Coldham was not one of community benefits, local approval of the windfarm and no resistance to the site's extension. No: what VVASP returned with was some 'alarming' information that two farmers didn't like the windfarm.
Case closed, as they say.
The only other windfarm VVASP like talking about is at Deeping St Nicholas in Lincolnshire. The area is home to Toni Chapman, who moved to the village as the first eight turbines were being erected and who sees no reason to object to the further sixteen turbines which have been proposed (source: Spalding Guardian).
Deeping St Nicholas is also home to a community initiative, known as the Fenland Green Power Co-operative, which saw massive positive interest in 2007 when it offered shares to local residents in two of the turbines (source: Spalding Today).
In January 2006, Mr Watts, whose organic farm hosts the turbines, welcomed a visit to the windfarm (http://www.colchesterfoe.org/ARCHIVE/ESSAYS/Deeping_St_Nicholas_Visit_(06-01-07).pdf). Mr Watts lives 750 metres from the turbines and had experienced no problems with noise at any time. Neither had he seen any evidence of 'bird strikes' (although he does offer a good explanation for how this myth came about). One member of the visiting group discovered that, at 250 metres distance, the turbines could not be heard.
Overall, there seems to be quite a lot of good news about Deeping St Nicholas. But you'll not hear any of it, because Deeping St Nicholas is home to Jane Davis.
If the nimbies had their way, Jane Davis is the only person in the entire country who would be allowed to talk about windfarms. She claims that she and her husband were forced to leave their home (which is 200m further away from the turbines than Mr Watts's is) because of 'noise'.
Naturally, Mrs Davis's concerns were looked into. Environmental Health Professionals working for South Holland District Council spent 26 days and nights trying to monitor this 'noise' in October 2007. The experts failed to find a problem.
At one stage, attempts by consultants to gather and review data relevant to the case were delayed by the Davises themselves.
Jane Davis would seem to be unique. There have been no complaints from the other six households living at a comparable distance from the windfarm. Locally, indeed, the windfarm would appear to have done a great deal of good, and many locals have joined the Fenland Green Power Co-operative scheme. But all of that is irrelevant, because the nimbies really like Jane Davis. She says what they want to hear.
Regardless of all the positives surrounding Coldham, all that we've heard from VVASP is that two farmers don't like it. And regardless of all the good news surrounding Deeping St Nicholas, all that VVASP have announced is that Jane Davis had to leave her house, in a case which is still problematic because the objective facts in the matter are proving elusive.
It's this utterly selective 'cherry-picking' of the evidence which undermines VVASP's case. Six months ago, there were nearly 2,500 wind turbines operating in the UK. One couple claim to have been forced to move because of an alleged 'noise pollution' which remains unproven and which failed to affect others living nearby.
Now, let's try a thought experiment. Imagine the VVASP representatives visiting Coldham earlier this year and coming back with the news that the turbines aren't all that bad actually and by far the majority of local residents approve of them.
Likely? Not really. Because VVASP are committed to opposing Lenchwick Windfarm regardless of the facts. For their own reasons, ranging from abject NIMBYism and the desire to protect investments to some rather random worries about something-or-other, VVASP have consistently sought out any 'bad news' they can find.
This has required them to ignore most of the information available and to trumpet unscientific reports, unsubstantiated rumours, Chinese whispers and claims which simply don't add up.
The many who are benefitting already from windfarms are ignored. A miniscule, totally unrepresentative sample is all that VVASP are interested in.
So - how many stories does a wind turbine have?
Many. But VVASP don't want you to hear most of them.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
LIFE IN THE MIDDLE
Someone seems to think that they will be living 'in the middle' of a windfarm when the Lenchwick development gets the go ahead.
How odd. Looking at the map, it's hard to see how anybody will be 'in the middle' of the windfarm. Outside the windfarm, yes. Within so many hundred metres of a turbine, yes. But 'in the middle'? That's not really possible, is it? Unless they're planning on erecting a tent on private land, in between a couple of turbines. Which is not really likely to happen.
Aside from the paranoid guff that everyone in favour of windpower (or this blog) works for a windfarm company, there has also been the suggestion that anti-NIMBY, pro-windfarm people don't live anywhere near windfarms (and certainly not 'in the middle' of one).
But, as usual, a VVASP 'statement' turns out to be laughably easy to refute. There's quite a rich crop of community windfarm projects to consider.
But wouldn't you just know - another contributor has been in touch to point out that villagers in Fintry, Stirlingshire, took a most unusual step when a windfarm was first proposed for their locality.
Did they form a NIMBY group to fight the proposals?
No. They asked the developer (West Coast Energy) to install an extra turbine which the villagers themselves would pay for!!!
With the Fintry windfarm now up and running, the villagers, in the form of the Fintry Development Trust, are receiving an income from their own turbine, as well as seeing their domestic energy bills reduced by a huge amount.
Here's the link:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/may/10/windpower-energy
So - in conclusion. Some pro-wind people live in close proximity to windfarms, and are really rather proud of them (as well as benefitting directly from them). Some people don't get their knickers in a twist over phantom fears. Some people are capable of recognising a Good Thing when they see it.
Once again, it seems, VVASP can only shout, threaten and regurgitate inaccurate information.
How odd. Looking at the map, it's hard to see how anybody will be 'in the middle' of the windfarm. Outside the windfarm, yes. Within so many hundred metres of a turbine, yes. But 'in the middle'? That's not really possible, is it? Unless they're planning on erecting a tent on private land, in between a couple of turbines. Which is not really likely to happen.
Aside from the paranoid guff that everyone in favour of windpower (or this blog) works for a windfarm company, there has also been the suggestion that anti-NIMBY, pro-windfarm people don't live anywhere near windfarms (and certainly not 'in the middle' of one).
But, as usual, a VVASP 'statement' turns out to be laughably easy to refute. There's quite a rich crop of community windfarm projects to consider.
But wouldn't you just know - another contributor has been in touch to point out that villagers in Fintry, Stirlingshire, took a most unusual step when a windfarm was first proposed for their locality.
Did they form a NIMBY group to fight the proposals?
No. They asked the developer (West Coast Energy) to install an extra turbine which the villagers themselves would pay for!!!
With the Fintry windfarm now up and running, the villagers, in the form of the Fintry Development Trust, are receiving an income from their own turbine, as well as seeing their domestic energy bills reduced by a huge amount.
Here's the link:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/may/10/windpower-energy
So - in conclusion. Some pro-wind people live in close proximity to windfarms, and are really rather proud of them (as well as benefitting directly from them). Some people don't get their knickers in a twist over phantom fears. Some people are capable of recognising a Good Thing when they see it.
Once again, it seems, VVASP can only shout, threaten and regurgitate inaccurate information.
Wednesday, October 7, 2009
DAVID ATTENBOROUGH
Few people can be more alert to the progress and perils of climate change than David Attenborough.
Well, this is what he said after visiting the site of a windfarm application in Sussex (Times Online, 26 February 2008):
"Having visited the proposed site, I noticed that it is close to a place where not long ago, a windmill once stood. I suspect that were that windmill still in existence, many of us would regard it as a welcome feature in the essentially domesticated Sussex landscape and would speak passionately in favour of its protection. That, surely, is because most of us have a care and affection for the past. I certainly have.
"But I also have a care and affection for the future. A wind turbine, with its graceful lines, collecting energy from the environment without causing any material damage, is a marvellous demonstration of the way we can minimise our pollution of the atmosphere, if we wish to do so. It would help protect not only the countryside we have known for centuries but also the wider world beyond."
Can you feel that?
That's a breath of fresh air, a few measured words of common sense.
VVASP once claimed that Lenchwick Windfarm would 'kill the Vale countryside'. But David Attenborough recognises that such windfarms are a way to 'protect not only the countryside ... but also the wider world beyond.'
Whose view do you reckon is the more impartial, the more reliable? David Attenborough, who has spent a lifetime studying the natural world, or VVASP, who haven't?
Well, this is what he said after visiting the site of a windfarm application in Sussex (Times Online, 26 February 2008):
"Having visited the proposed site, I noticed that it is close to a place where not long ago, a windmill once stood. I suspect that were that windmill still in existence, many of us would regard it as a welcome feature in the essentially domesticated Sussex landscape and would speak passionately in favour of its protection. That, surely, is because most of us have a care and affection for the past. I certainly have.
"But I also have a care and affection for the future. A wind turbine, with its graceful lines, collecting energy from the environment without causing any material damage, is a marvellous demonstration of the way we can minimise our pollution of the atmosphere, if we wish to do so. It would help protect not only the countryside we have known for centuries but also the wider world beyond."
Can you feel that?
That's a breath of fresh air, a few measured words of common sense.
VVASP once claimed that Lenchwick Windfarm would 'kill the Vale countryside'. But David Attenborough recognises that such windfarms are a way to 'protect not only the countryside ... but also the wider world beyond.'
Whose view do you reckon is the more impartial, the more reliable? David Attenborough, who has spent a lifetime studying the natural world, or VVASP, who haven't?
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
WHAT IS A NIMBY?
In the 1950s, the Corporation of Liverpool decided that it needed more water. This was not for the citizens of Liverpool, who had plenty of water. The Corporation believed that it needed more water for its proposed programme of industrial expansion.
Bypassing local democracy, the Corporation of Liverpool acquired an Act of Parliament allowing it to flood a Welsh valley. Naturally, there was massive opposition. Nothing did more to promote the growth of Plaid Cymru, the Welsh nationalist party. There were even outbreaks of what we would now call terrorism.
Still, in 1965, families living in Capel Celyn were evicted. Bodies were exhumed from the cemetery, which was then concreted over. Twelve houses and farms were drowned, along with the post office, the school and the chapel.
Even today, Liverpool does not use all the water stored in the Tryweryn Reservoir created by the flooding of Capel Celyn.
The Welsh-speaking people of Capel Celyn could not have been described as 'NIMBYs'. Partly because the word (or acronym) didn't exist. It was invented in the 1980s - the 'me' decade. Even so, those families who had lived in Capel Celyn all their lives were not campaigning against the reservoir on the grounds of 'Not In My Back Yard'. They were campaigning for their homes, their village, their family property to be saved.
The threat which faced the people of Capel Celyn was a very real one.
NIMBY groups form to confront a threat that isn't real.
Let's take a fairly recent, and utterly disgraceful, nimby campaign.
When, in 2007, the Ministry of Defence opened a new 30-bed annexe at the Defence Medical Rehabilitation Centre in Surrey, the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Association (SSAFA) decided to convert a local house into a temporary home-from-home for families visiting seriously wounded service personnel. The place they chose was in Gray's Lane, Ashtead.
83 letters of objection were lodged by local residents. The objectors cited 'increased traffic noise', 'additional pollution' and the slim chance that the area would become a 'soft target' for 'these awful terrorists'.
One local resident kept demanding, 'would you be happy with the relatives of a bunch of soldiers on your lawn?'
It goes without saying that most of the Ashtead residents were only too happy to see British service personnel going overseas to protect British interests. But when some came back with hideous wounds and injuries, those same local residents were not prepared to allow the families of the wounded to stay nearby.
Unlike the people of the lost village of Capel Celyn, the Ashtead residents were categorically not fighting to protect their homes. Rather, they seem to have had a mental image of their well-heeled area which did not include any kind of temporary home for the families of wounded soldiers. They were not opposing a direct threat - for all that laughable nonsense about becoming a terrorist target. They were fighting an imaginary one.
It's easy to spot a NIMBY campaign. The language tends to be hysterical (like, the turbines of Lenchwick Windfarm will "kill the Vale countryside" - a monstrous suggestion if ever there was one). The 'facts' turn out to be merely opinions. Crazy rumours spread like wildfire.
The threat confronted by nimbies is a perceived threat - it is not a real threat. Although dramatic claims are made about the impact on house prices, the evidence fails to support the claims. Imaginary threats (such as 'noise') are blown out of all proportion. A deliberate campaign of misrepresentation, often supported by strong-arm tactics, is engineered to scare or force other residents into supporting the nimby cause.
In Capel Celyn, a community existed and struggled, unsuccessfully, to defend itself. In stark contrast, nimby campaigns tend to be illustrative of a community breakdown. A sense of community is manufactured by creating an illusory threat against which locals are obliged to combine. But a real community would not object to a home for families visiting badly wounded soldiers. The very existence of that shameful campaign was proof that all community spirit in the area had vanished.
The perceived threats conjured up by those opposed to a windfarm in their local area are illusory threats. This blog came into existence largely as a result of the barrage of propaganda being unleashed by VVASP. The protesters claimed to be 'informing' the community. In reality, they have been misinforming, misleading and terrifying their nieghbours with unfounded scare stories. Had they really been interested in 'informing' the community, there would have been a bit of balance, not to mention reliable science, in the information they provide.
No one is obliged to like the idea of a windfarm nearby. But spreading unsubstantiated rumours about windfarms with the sole purpose of whipping up opposition to the proposals is deeply immoral. VVASP have planted a psychological timebomb. There will, unfortunately, be those who believe the misquoted reports, the misrepresented studies, the misleading myths. When Lenchwick Windfarm becomes operational, these poor people will expect problems. They will blame anything and everything on the windfarm.
The reality is that the windfarm poses a negligible threat. It is all in the mind. Unlike Capel Celyn, the village, the community, does not face the genuine threat of extermination.
By pretending that it does, and by mounting vociferous opposition to what is essentially a much-needed and beneficial development, VVASP have proved that they are NIMBYs, products of the 'me' generation, with little or no concern for anything but themselves.
Bypassing local democracy, the Corporation of Liverpool acquired an Act of Parliament allowing it to flood a Welsh valley. Naturally, there was massive opposition. Nothing did more to promote the growth of Plaid Cymru, the Welsh nationalist party. There were even outbreaks of what we would now call terrorism.
Still, in 1965, families living in Capel Celyn were evicted. Bodies were exhumed from the cemetery, which was then concreted over. Twelve houses and farms were drowned, along with the post office, the school and the chapel.
Even today, Liverpool does not use all the water stored in the Tryweryn Reservoir created by the flooding of Capel Celyn.
The Welsh-speaking people of Capel Celyn could not have been described as 'NIMBYs'. Partly because the word (or acronym) didn't exist. It was invented in the 1980s - the 'me' decade. Even so, those families who had lived in Capel Celyn all their lives were not campaigning against the reservoir on the grounds of 'Not In My Back Yard'. They were campaigning for their homes, their village, their family property to be saved.
The threat which faced the people of Capel Celyn was a very real one.
NIMBY groups form to confront a threat that isn't real.
Let's take a fairly recent, and utterly disgraceful, nimby campaign.
When, in 2007, the Ministry of Defence opened a new 30-bed annexe at the Defence Medical Rehabilitation Centre in Surrey, the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Association (SSAFA) decided to convert a local house into a temporary home-from-home for families visiting seriously wounded service personnel. The place they chose was in Gray's Lane, Ashtead.
83 letters of objection were lodged by local residents. The objectors cited 'increased traffic noise', 'additional pollution' and the slim chance that the area would become a 'soft target' for 'these awful terrorists'.
One local resident kept demanding, 'would you be happy with the relatives of a bunch of soldiers on your lawn?'
It goes without saying that most of the Ashtead residents were only too happy to see British service personnel going overseas to protect British interests. But when some came back with hideous wounds and injuries, those same local residents were not prepared to allow the families of the wounded to stay nearby.
Unlike the people of the lost village of Capel Celyn, the Ashtead residents were categorically not fighting to protect their homes. Rather, they seem to have had a mental image of their well-heeled area which did not include any kind of temporary home for the families of wounded soldiers. They were not opposing a direct threat - for all that laughable nonsense about becoming a terrorist target. They were fighting an imaginary one.
It's easy to spot a NIMBY campaign. The language tends to be hysterical (like, the turbines of Lenchwick Windfarm will "kill the Vale countryside" - a monstrous suggestion if ever there was one). The 'facts' turn out to be merely opinions. Crazy rumours spread like wildfire.
The threat confronted by nimbies is a perceived threat - it is not a real threat. Although dramatic claims are made about the impact on house prices, the evidence fails to support the claims. Imaginary threats (such as 'noise') are blown out of all proportion. A deliberate campaign of misrepresentation, often supported by strong-arm tactics, is engineered to scare or force other residents into supporting the nimby cause.
In Capel Celyn, a community existed and struggled, unsuccessfully, to defend itself. In stark contrast, nimby campaigns tend to be illustrative of a community breakdown. A sense of community is manufactured by creating an illusory threat against which locals are obliged to combine. But a real community would not object to a home for families visiting badly wounded soldiers. The very existence of that shameful campaign was proof that all community spirit in the area had vanished.
The perceived threats conjured up by those opposed to a windfarm in their local area are illusory threats. This blog came into existence largely as a result of the barrage of propaganda being unleashed by VVASP. The protesters claimed to be 'informing' the community. In reality, they have been misinforming, misleading and terrifying their nieghbours with unfounded scare stories. Had they really been interested in 'informing' the community, there would have been a bit of balance, not to mention reliable science, in the information they provide.
No one is obliged to like the idea of a windfarm nearby. But spreading unsubstantiated rumours about windfarms with the sole purpose of whipping up opposition to the proposals is deeply immoral. VVASP have planted a psychological timebomb. There will, unfortunately, be those who believe the misquoted reports, the misrepresented studies, the misleading myths. When Lenchwick Windfarm becomes operational, these poor people will expect problems. They will blame anything and everything on the windfarm.
The reality is that the windfarm poses a negligible threat. It is all in the mind. Unlike Capel Celyn, the village, the community, does not face the genuine threat of extermination.
By pretending that it does, and by mounting vociferous opposition to what is essentially a much-needed and beneficial development, VVASP have proved that they are NIMBYs, products of the 'me' generation, with little or no concern for anything but themselves.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)