Half of planned (UK) wind farms blown away by force of local protests

[OKIsItJustMe]

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/half-of-planned-wind-farms-blown-away-by-force-of-local-protests-2311645.html

Half of planned wind farms blown away by force of local protests

By Lewis Smith and David Prosser

Monday, 11 July 2011

Almost half of the wind farms planned for the UK countryside are rejected before they can get off the drawing board, new figures show.

The failure of developers to win support for wind projects is blamed on a hardening of attitudes within local authorities towards them, and the increasing influence of "nimbies" and anti-wind campaigners.

Figures obtained from the Department of Energy and Climate Change under freedom of information legislation reveal that in just five years the rejection rate for wind farm planning applications has risen from 29 per cent in 2005 to 48 per cent in 2010 in England and Wales. For other major developments, such as roads and supermarkets, 70 per cent are approved.

…

Jacqueline Harris, of the legal firm McGrigors, which obtained the latest figures, said there were growing concerns that developers were being denied a fair hearing, with issues such as the visual impact of wind turbines being given special precedence even when only a few houses are in sight of them. "There is little willingness to consider the benefits of renewable energy generation in context – the national interest is being overridden by local concerns," she said.

…

The rise in planning rejections comes despite a government survey showing that from 2006 to 2009 the proportion of people saying they would be unhappy living within three miles of a wind farm had fallen from 24 to 21 per cent.

…

[MADem]

1. I think the turbines are a pleasing sight. The first time I ever saw them

was in hippie dippie California in the eighties--there were a whole bunch of 'em arrayed along a hillside in farm country. I thought they looked wonderful.

[WhiteTara]

3. I think they're great too, but if you are too close

to the blades, they give off a strobe like effect which is devastating because you can't escape it.

[MADem]

4. They might need to work on siting, I suppose, or design.

I think wind power, wave power, and solar power are the way to go--it's shit that happens anyway, might as well harness it!

[OKIsItJustMe]

6. “Shadow flicker” is not everything it is made out to be

http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/pdfs/workshops/2011/webinar_shadow_flicker_priestley.pdf

[OKIsItJustMe]

2. I’ve taken dozens of pictures of them

I just love them.

[txlibdem]

5. An example of wrong-headed thinking, people stuck in the status quo

Some people are opposed to change of any kind. What they need to understand is that global climate change will hit them one day and they will suffer the consequences.

Personally, I love to see row after row of wind turbines. What bothers me is when some of them are not turning. This is due to lack of demand and having no energy storage at the wind farm. It is wasted energy that we'll never get back. There are also a large percentage of wind turbines that use a gear system to power the generator. Gears wear out, they need oil and an oil change every 3 months. The new gearless wind turbines are a bit more expensive but well worth it, IMO, and they produce far more power than the old models.

[kristopher]

7. "anti-wind campaigners" = nuclear industry paid operatives.

The rate of local rejection was less tha 1/3 ten years ago when the government decided it wanted to push nuclear. There is no market for nuclear if renewables and efficiency are pursued. In order to divert future funds to nuclear, it is necessary to slow down or stop the progress other, better, alternatives.

Nuclear power is the reason for the new energy regulations
The government's energy market revamp is for one reason only – to build more nuclear power plants
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/mar/11/nuclear-power-reason-energy-regulations?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

And see page 15-18 of this investment report for nuclear:
https://www.citigroupgeo.com/pdf/SEU20085.pdf