Tweet
| Navigation |
| Home |
| Site map |
| Articles |
| Contact |
| Links |
| Forum |
Why are wind turbines so controversial?What I was left wondering is why are environmentalists all for wind turbines and conservationists dead against them?...So I wrote this article "Wind turbines" one of the most controversial environmental subjects around today on the one hand we have environmentalists saying that we desperately need to build as many wind turbines as possible to make clean energy. On the other hand we have conservationists saying stop ruining the countryside building turbines that won''t solve any of our global warming problems anyway. Are you confused? (I am) I thought that environmentalists and conservationists were basically the same thing. People who want to look after the planet. So why can''t environmentalists and conservationists agree about wind turbines? This is very confusing to me because both groups are supposed to have the same interests at heart. If these two groups continue to argue about wind power it only serves to undermine the efforts of both parties and divert attention away from the real issue which is GLOBAL WARMING and what do we do about it? The environmentalists point of view The wind spins a wind turbine to make electricity instead of burning fossil fuels, great lets have one. I think anyone can see the benefit, How can there be a problem?
The conservationists point of view Hold on a minute, these things look horrible and to make enough electricity we would need to build thousands of them. there has to be another option that won''t permanently scar the countryside.
Ah I think I can see the problem we need wind turbines but they don''t look very nice. Environmentalists think about the whole earth in general terms and how humans can live in a sustainable way on it. Conservationists on the other hand look at nature in detail studying plants, organisms and animal habitats they are in fact so close to nature shoving their heads in the sand is totally natural. My conclusions Everyone will sooner or later have to do something about global warming the fact is that we are not likely to meet our commitment to reducing greenhouse gasses and this means that global warming will happen, natural habitats will be destroyed and the world will become warmer. the time for talking, arguing and debating is past it''s time to DO something. The only solution I can offer is if you don''t want wind turbines stop using electricity if you could get a pressure group together that would make everyone use 20% less electricity then maybe we could build less turbines. |
|
 |
|
| [ comments 30 ] |
| posted by James Love | 18/09/2006 19:32:56 |
|
|
|
| Wind turbines may be a blot on the landscape but, if placed prudently can be great. Also they can produce power for small communities lowering their energy costs. Suddenly they would become far more attractive. Small business's should build them as co-operatives with locals. No smoke, no oil spills and no need for big business to overcharge the customer to keep the shareholders happy. | |
|
|
|
| posted by John Steer | 23/10/2006 02:45:56 |
|
|
|
| Personally I think they look beautiful and you can hardly hear them at a short distance (100 Metres). I remember an article in a book (Fuels paradise or Costing the Earth I think) that said they were more dangerous then nuclear power stations because someone had been killed constructing a small one, the calculation was based on deaths per megawatt! I used to like David Bellamy. | |
|
|
|
| posted by carol | 19/05/2007 00:30:21 |
|
|
|
| The opposition that I have heard doesn't have anything to do with the looks but the ability of the blades to kill of birds. | |
|
|
|
| posted by Admin | 20/05/2007 03:39:14 |
|
|
|
| Another myth Carol, wind turbines do not spin fast enough to become invisible and birds tend to avoid things that move. Coal power stations make acid rian, nuclear power stations make waste that will take thousands of years to break down and we better not use wind turbines because a bird may fly into one? -Give me strength- | |
|
|
|
| posted by wind turbine blade technician | 16/06/2007 15:28:58 |
|
|
|
| i can second that birds do not fly into but around them when will people stop bein so blind DO YOU WANT A NUCLEAR POWERSTATION IN YOUR BACK YARD INSTEAD | |
|
|
|
| posted by Colin | 17/06/2007 22:09:44 |
|
|
|
| I prefer wind turbines to nuclear form an enviroment point of view but to be fair one wind turbine doesn`t equate output of a nuclear power station, so more accurately it should be.. do you want 1600 wind turbines or one nuke in your backyard. I guess it all depends how big your backyard is ;) | |
|
|
|
| posted by admin | 19/06/2007 01:36:01 |
|
|
|
| If everyone in the UK had a micro wind turbine in there back yard that would certainly add up a nuclear power station. I have no problem with generating energy from nuclear fusion as long as we keep our distance...about 93,000,000 miles is fine. | |
|
|
|
| posted by colin | 19/06/2007 08:19:29 |
|
|
|
| Hi Paul, I agree with you, there are downsides to everything, wind and solar included. The problem doesn`t lie with generating the power..it`s the amount we use that has to change, then we wouldn`t have such a huge mountain to climb :) A turbine on the roof wouldn`t be much good unless it`s on a high rise :) | |
|
|
|
| posted by gravitonium | 24/06/2007 14:42:51 |
|
|
|
| wind power - yes! speculations like the birds safety, looks and humm are BS. Fossils control the money - plain and simple. Transporting energy - huge business owned by the ones controlling fossils. Everything is interconnected. I came across the windside turbines - the are beautiful, quiet, efficient (low wind, updrafts, any direction). If ALL we are to place one in our backyard, it will reduce the production cost (thus the retail price) and eventually we'll disconnect our land lines (hell with them), I have calculated that in THREE years of not paying for the deliverred electricity, I'll break even, and shall get the rest of the energy at no charge (with no interruptions), since the swith is is at my fingertips. Control is the big issue here as well. As for the conservationists - they are payed by the oil companies to distract attention. Did you see anything REALLY DONE by them to improve the eco situation? I did not. | |
|
|
|
| posted by Curtiss | 02/07/2007 16:34:30 |
|
|
|
| Admin to your comment on 19/06/2007 it's fission not fusion but there are people working on a fusion reactor right now( fusion is the combining of atoms where as fission is the breaking apart of atoms | |
|
|
|
| posted by Curtiss cont. | 02/07/2007 16:40:15 |
|
|
|
| oh and a fusion reactor is much more safer then having a nuke sitting in your backyard because one of the by produces is a form of water and there are several types of fuel they're trying like one is on the moon | |
|
|
|
| posted by William Bennett, Greece | 09/10/2007 00:24:22 |
|
|
|
| Has anyone heard of HYDROGEN? Hydrogen and Oxygen are both produced from good old CLEAN WATER. If all the bods got together and worked out the problems of storage, we could all use it to power a generator for home use, to power lighting, cooking and heating (maybe with underfloor heating using heat pump technology, water is best, wet ground comes next then air, not as good as the others but much better than the grid or diesel ) plus your car!!! The knowledge is there but are we aloud to use it? | |
|
|
|
| posted by Brian, Michigan | 01/02/2008 22:22:41 |
|
|
|
| Hydrogen is a great clean fuel, but it takes just as much energy to produce it as it gives you. It is simply an energy carrier, but with electrolysers and fuel cells can be produced by other clean technologies like wind and solar. | |
|
|
|
| posted by berny,england | 17/02/2008 12:13:21 |
|
|
|
| why are wind turbines so large ?.if they were smaller it would make them less intrusive | |
|
|
|
| posted by Derek, Michigan | 28/03/2008 23:24:56 |
|
|
|
| I think the real answer is to harness all of the resources at hand effectively, to include: wind, solar, and hydroelectric. With global warming threatening to heighten water levels we should be proactively thinking of ways to use the increase in water to our advantage. By digging canals and creating new rivers and tributaries we can create more hydroelectric plants. If everyone used solar cells and wind turbines on their homes then we could effectively lessen the use of power generated by fossil fuels and nuclear energy plants. In the meantime we all need to conserve and invest in companies that are expanding their uses of alternative (eco) energies. Buy a hybrid vehicle, reduce the miles you drive to only those absolutely necessary. As for the conservationists, I think that the added value of reducing emmisions from powerplants outweighs the superficial appearances problems. Once the Wind Turbines are built they won't prevent nature from beautifying the areas where they are found. | |
|
|
|
| posted by Ben, Holland | 08/04/2008 21:55:43 |
|
|
|
| One little problem we rarely hear about: wind turbines will work in wind of 3 - 8 Bft. Outside that range other sources of power will have to make up for the difference. Which means nothing less than that all investments in wind turbines will have to be REPEATED in other power generating facilities. If anyone would think to avoid building nuclear power stations by building more and more wind turbines: Dream on! | |
|
|
|
| posted by Matt | |
|
|
|
| PAINT THEM GREEN!!! Then they won't stand out against the landscape. The white is fairly unsubtle really. | |
|
|
|
| posted by gemma | |
|
|
|
| THANKS EVER SO MUCH 4 THIS page it really helped me with my science hwk thanks again you have been really helpful gemma | |
|
|
|
| posted by simon | 15/01/2009 21:42:46 |
|
|
|
| I love the Paint Them Green comment. Brilliant!! Isn't it typical that dozens of experts can opine about one thing or another and not get anywhere and then one simple voice changes the game. How obvious! | |
|
|
|
| posted by nuclear power lover | 10/04/2009 03:21:01 |
|
|
|
| which would you rather have, one nuclear power plant that pays you way better than any local job and supplies power for your entire community and all other surrounding ones, or a huge windfarm that takes up your farmland and is always there to look at everywhere you go. nuclear power plants make waste just like how wind turbines are eye sores. one of the things you have to deal with. | |
|
|
|
| posted by Mikey | 20/05/2009 15:31:10 |
|
|
|
| Curtis, the guy who was talking about nuclear fusion was talking about the sun. | |
|
|
|
| posted by R | 23/05/2009 03:52:33 |
|
|
|
| This is what i have gathered from all the different things i have read on wind energy. All the major players don't want the average Joe building anything that will remove from them the possibility of harnessing something they can make and force us to BUY from them. So what they are doing is creating a atmosphear of confussion to the extent of making anyone who tries to do it on their own won't because they will not know where to turn for the correct information. The average Joe really doesn't have the time to do all the reaserch to find the best avenues for his or her's specfic situation. So manny just put it on the back shelf and waites till someone else does it and then tires to convert it to meet their circumstanses. My belief is wind energy will work and it will work verry well but it needs to be on the individule home scale and not on the comunity scale. It is a lot easier to hide small wind generators than 400 ft. ones. I have been looking at it for two years and I am just now comming up with a working model to build and test for my home needs. It is going to be costly and that is what makes it scary. I don't want it to not work because i'm not rich and my family needs all i can give them. This is what drives me to take the chance to stop paying the ever increasing fuel bills to someone who i never see and who is continueously raising the costs to exist. I don't think it will ever end if We the average Joe don't do it on our own. We do everything else on our own why not this? Just my thoughts. Have a great day R. | |
|
|
|
| posted by peter | 20/08/2009 19:01:32 |
|
|
|
| One of the main problems is that wind like solar is unreliable and we have no efficient way of storing the energy for when they are not producing or there is an increase in demand. The reason for there being large windmills is that the larger the blades the more efficient and less costly they are. When people look at nuclear fission for the solution one of the main problems as well as the waste is that the power stations only last for 50 years or so and then need to be rebuilt and the old ones are filled with concrete and most sites for new ones are in the countryside. I for one would much prefer a windmill there rather than a nuclear power plant. I agree that more needs to be done at the individual home scale the technology is there so we can all produce and store all the power we need but some of it is being held back to stop us eg: NI-MH batteries witch only one company can build at large scale (car battery size or bigger) because they bought the rights then they stopped production! | |
|
|
|
| posted by L, Scotland | 13/10/2009 22:43:57 |
|
|
|
| I think the white turbines blend in better against the skyline. I have stood under a wind turbine with my hand on it - there was virtually no sound and no vibration - nothing! I live in a beautiful part of Scotland and you don't even notice then on the skyline any more. The press only has bad things to say about them - usual story. | |
|
|
|
| posted by iain (emu) | 11/12/2009 11:50:18 |
|
|
|
| these wind turbines have a carbon cost to build and stand on huge concrete foundations. Given their finite lifespan do they really save more carbon than they use? | |
|
|
|
| posted by Alice | 14/04/2010 01:12:39 |
|
|
|
| Conservationists are waiting for actual data to show the wind turbines do anything other than kill birds and destroy habitat. So far, no numbers, no coal plants closed, nothing. Also, the idea that we destroy the earth to save it is kind bizarre. Pave over paradise to save the planet...... | |
|
|
|
| posted by wind technician | 14/07/2010 02:03:52 |
|
|
|
| 1. birds are not blind 2. wind power big wigs work directly with the epa to avoid habitat destruction 3. this is a relativly new industry for this country...at least on the large scale...of course there are problems 4. farmers plant their crops around the bases of turbines all over Europe Do any of you actually know anything about this industry? Have you ever heard of the book Diffusion of Innovation? It was written about this very phenomenon...the violent and ignorant suspicion that new ideas are met with. | |
|
|
|
comments will be accessed through the forum in the new site design (coming soon)
8559
Copyright © 2007- 2014 geo-dome.co.uk. All Rights Reserved.