Turbine Towers Win Civic Support

[Got a story you want published? Put Wincanton Window on your list of media to get in touch with – we never run out of space so you can tell the whole story! We’re also renowned for the number and quality of photos we publish with our articles, although unfortunately, we’re unable to reproduce photos with these articles, which first appeared in the Western Gazette.]

Wind turbines on Wincanton's doorstep moved a step closer after the Town Council recommended approval of planning permission for two 34-metre high generators.

On Monday town councillors backed the Keen's Cheddar development at Moorhayes Farm between Wincanton and Charlton Musgrove.

Only Jim Eastaugh, who sits on the town council planning committee, opposed the recommendation to South Somerset District Council.

He said: "Although this is more of an issue for Charlton Musgrove Parish Council I must vote against the plans.

"The turbines are about twice the size of the tallest building at Wincanton Racecourse, so they will be noticeable. However, I don't think they will be unattractive on the landscape.

"The worrying aspect of this proposal is that it could set a precedent for other farmers to start putting up wind turbines and this would blight the countryside.

"In principle they are an excellent idea but I am not sure they are the long-term answer to power problems."

The structures would be six times the height of a double-decker bus and visible from Alfred's Tower, part of the Cranbourne Chase area of outstanding natural beauty. Neighbours also believe they would be detrimental to views from Bratton Seymour.

Planning consultant Marie Jasper of Barton Willmore spoke on behalf of Wincanton Racecourse, which objects to the turbines which would be erected 220 metres from the racetrack.

She said: "Our client considers the wind turbines inappropriate in this location and would have a visual impact on the rural setting of the racecourse and consequently a negative impact on the attractiveness of the racecourse to visitors."

Although plans state the turbines will not operate on race days, concerns were raised over the potential impact of shadow flicker on racehorses, a point that has not been addressed in the application.

Councillor David Norris, who backed the turbines but raised doubt about their effectiveness, said: "These turbines are a solution to the problem of producing power but my only issue is if they will be able to produce the amount of electricity that is required.

"They need wind speeds of five metres per second to work properly and I would like to know more about them before I could say if they were the long-term answer."

Councillor Bernard Pearson, who supported Keens, said: "This is a company that does a huge amount for the flavour of Somerset.

"Windmills are beautiful and can be a very clever solution to the ever-increasing problem of power production and I fully support this."

Charlton Musgrove parish councillors have attended the site on an information-finding visit but council chairman Robin Bastable refused to comment until a full consultation had been completed.

Councillors will gather on Wednesday November 10, to discuss the proposal.

District Council case officer Andrew Collins confirmed more information was required from the applicant before it would be discussed at an Area East Committee meeting.

He ruled out any chance of the plans making it to the agenda for the November meeting.

Applicant Nick Keen refused to comment until after discussions at the Charlton Musgrove parish meeting and Area East are completed.

Article first published by the Western Gazatte

Comments

James Phillips
Posts: 1

Re: Turbine Towers Win Civic Support
Reply #1 on : Wed November 03, 2010, 00:00:58

---

Good to hear it. We cannot get serious about solving the exceptionally serious problems we face until we accept that the solution will a) come from several different areas/methods and b) Not be perfect in every way when it arrives.
This is what makes opposition to wind turbines so silly.

davidsmith
Posts: 2

Relativity
Reply #2 on : Wed November 03, 2010, 11:27:11

---

I tend to agree, but perhaps for different reasons. The optimist in me seems to be of the opinion that in typical fashion, someone somewhere is being paid to conveniently hold back the recently developed Cold Fusion solution just long enough for the current fuel sources to run low and allow producers to squeeze us for everything they can. Then, when all seems lost, some dude will probably stand up and say, "Fear not, here's infinite, clean energy, huzzah!"

Aside from that obvious speculation, however, I also take issue with the designation of wind turbines as 'blights' on the landscape. While it may well be true to some degree, there are some of us who don't think they look so bad. It's a matter of personal taste I suppose so it should go to popular consensus I suppose. The trouble is that only the people who DON'T like them are going to shout about it. Just as vegetarians shout loudest about animal rights.

But look out across the countryside and recall the last time you heard someone mention the 'blight' of those unsightly pylons. Pylons are MUCH uglier than turbines, in my opinion, and the wires they carry surely don't NEED to be over-ground, and yet we now take them for granted with their many arms that suspend miles of cables across the length and breadth of the countryside.

The victimised minority will always shout loudest against change, even if it's not so bad and appeals to the greater good (albeit perhaps temporarily). Wind turbines don't just represent a change in technology, but also a change of mind-set. If we get to a place where we can accept dependence on different sources of energy, not all of which are conveniently hidden away or confined to limited acreage as with nuclear fission, it'll increase the rate at which we develop improvements in the future where at present we're dipping our toes in tentatively.

Often I hear the argument that turbines will rarely reach peak efficiency, at least in this country, and so they aren't worth bothering with. But in the same discussion people rarely consider whether peak efficiency is actually necessary. If you consider the cost of turbines against their product, they may well not justify themselves as well as some would have us believe, but as I've mentioned above there are several hidden benefits.

I'd also like to know why we haven't yet harnessed the power of gymnasiums. With the exception of treadmills, which are *absolutely ridiculous* (they provide no resistance and thus approximate nothing more than hopping on the spot while waggling your legs about - not remotely like actual running) and actually REQUIRE POWER to operate, everything else in the modern gym could be hooked up to the grid relatively easily. I was shocked to hear someone suggest harnessing the power of people stepping off trains before that of the human 'hamster wheel'.

Last Edit: November 03, 2010, 11:29:06 by davidsmith  

chrisjwatts
Posts: 1

Re Relativity
Reply #3 on : Wed November 03, 2010, 13:45:52

---

I too support the building of wind turbines. They make a useful contribution to the overall need for power. There is a limit to the proportion of our power they can produce, because of their intermittent nature (unless we build more power storage), but we would have to build three times the generating capacity from wind we currently have before getting close to that limit.
I think the objections to wind turbines mainly come from people worrying about the value of their houses being reduced. They don't seem to realise this is a self fulfilling prophesy.
On cold fusion: Even if someone where to crack the problem, it would not be a clean as you think. There is an experimental fusion reactor at Culham. When I last visited a few years ago the longest reaction run they had done was 45 seconds. After which they had to wait 3 weeks for the radioactivity in the reactor hall to fall to levels where it was safe for people to enter. Although this a very hot fusion reaction, the same applies to cold fusion, should anyone crack it. Although there is no high level radioactive waste as with fision, there will be low level radioactive wast from any containment vessel and nearby equipment, which becomes radioactive due to the neutron flux produced in fusion reaction.
And finally the human hamster wheel: At many festivals they now have pedal powered mobile phone charging. Charging you phone that way is a lot of hard work, and that is just to fill one small battery.

Last Edit: November 03, 2010, 13:51:38 by chrisjwatts  

davidsmith
Posts: 2

Fusion and hamsters
Reply #4 on : Wed November 03, 2010, 14:14:48

---

But fusion, when mastered, is still cleaner than fission, right? Considerably so, I'm lead to believe.

I agree that you need to pedal quite a lot to power one small battery. But that's for the average 'Joe' on the street, lamenting the arduous toil on market day. I’m referring to the many thousands of fake-bikers up and down the country who pedal/row harder and often MUCH longer, on a daily basis, voluntarily and without the promise of an extension to the vitality of their mobile devices.

I can’t imagine it would be particularly difficult to hook all that up to the grid, and with shear volume and consistency it would surely match a significant portion of the power produced by wind farms today while also being significantly cheaper to install. I also can’t help wondering if we could increase the conversion efficiency if we really tried…

johnsmith
Posts: 1

Human Hamster Wheels
Reply #5 on : Thu November 04, 2010, 11:40:09

---

There is a very strong and valid point here. Already some people erect mini wind turbines on their roofs and are linked into the grid so that they sell the power to the grid. As has been inferred above this is pitifully small compared to the massive amounts of power needed in this nation.

But if everyone does a little a lot can be accomplished. Samm can be good. Every year we sit back and enjoy special events like "Children in Need" or "Comic Relief". Yes many large companies do great things and hand over big cheques. But remember that all those big cheques were built on millions of little donations. Those big companies get the credit and the advertising cudos courtessy of all the amzing generous ordinary every day people who contribute their pennies to a good cause.

We winge about the massive profits of some of our major business brands. We accuse them of making crazy profits. But if we divide those profits by the number of branches, and also the numerous other businesses that this global name owns worldwide, we come to a more realistic figure that shows that the profit per branch is usually not that spectacular. The end figures are distorted and we get the wrong end of the stick altogether.

As for wind turbines I am undecided. I read an article in the Mail about the inneficiency of them. I agree that the best place for better wind efficiency would either be at the top of our highest mountains, or on our windy coastline. Maybe we should use existing oil platform construction to build off-shore wind farms.
When I travel to Scotland to visit family I see multiple wind farms on the way. If they are so good why is it that some of them work and some are stationary? Surely they should all work naturally if there is a breath of wind. I'm sure there must be a sensible answer.

Wind is a natural UK resource. So is water. What about Hydro Electric. Beef up hydro electric in Scotland and The Lake District.

I agree that if every fitness centre had all thier mobile equipment hooked up to produce power, at the very least they would greatly reduce their bills. That has to be good. I remember cycling in my youth using a dynamo to power the front light.

I am probably becoming more synical as I get older, but I suspect that when oil genuinely becomes too difficult to retrieve (by that I mean unprofitable) those same companies will suddenly come up with an amazing miracle solution to all our problems. It simply doesn't suit them to produce the solutions whilst they can still make profit from oil. Sad, but I suspect true.

Nick Colbert
Posts: 2

Do wind turbines work?
Reply #6 on : Sun November 14, 2010, 12:25:24

---

I tend to agree with David Norris when he states: "These turbines are a solution to the problem of producing power but my only issue is if they will be able to produce the amount of electricity that is required.

"They need wind speeds of five metres per second to work properly and I would like to know more about them before I could say if they were the long-term answer."

I understand they not only fail to produce electricity when there is insufficient wind but that they also have to be switched off when wind speeds exceed 45 mph or the turbines would be damaged. In Germany where they erected thousands of them they have been so poor that two coal fired power stations have had to be commissioned to make up the shortfall. Many respected scientists, including respected names like world-famous conservationist Professor David Bellamy are against them on the basis that they are inefficient and damage large numbers of birdlife. He asks:

Why are the so-called greens backing a cartel of multinational companies which are hell bent on covering some of the best of our countryside with so-called wind farms, which can neither provide us with a sustainable source of future energy nor have any measurable effect reducing the amount of carbon dioxide pouring into the atmosphere?

If anyone can disprove the latter - which is the mathematical truth - I will fall into line over global warming, even if, like Galileo, I have to say “but it moved”.
David Bellamy
The Conservation Foundation

I am not against wind farms unless they do not work, if private enterprise spends its own money on investing in them that is fine, but my concern is if public money is invested in a system that is inefficient because of the ill informed opinion of some politicans or political lobbying.

For example Miriam Gonzalez Durantez (Ms Clegg wife of LIB/DEM leader) has been appointed independent adviser to Acciona on a reported £500,000 a year despite her lack of knowledge of wind farms, it apears her main lever in lobbying for wind farms is her marriage to the Lib/Dem partys leader who's party wants 15,000 more large wind turbines built in Britain, the Spanish company would like to build them.
The Cleggs say there is “No conflict of interest”

I think there needs to be a lot more research done before 'public' money is invested in uncertain technolegy.

I agree with John, hydro electric power is proven controllable and continuous, and we have to find some use for Wales and Scotland.

davidsmith
Posts: 1

Re: Turbine Towers Win Civic Support
Reply #7 on : Tue November 16, 2010, 17:17:40

---

Well it seems to me that it boils down to one simple fact: some people believe they're worth while and others simply don't. Everyone runs their own numbers and draws their own conclusions, but it seems none of them are bothering to compare notes.

Instead, we get a load of under-educated politicians using it like religion to control other aspects of our lives, and the truth of the matter gets swamped by the details.

So has nobody produced or sanctioned an independent study? My experience is that the only people who talk genuine sense about wind farms are those people who don't have financial or emotional interests. They make claims about their inefficiency and expense while the 'tree huggers' simply try to convince us all, often irrationally it seems, that we can't afford NOT to use them.

At the risk of sounding biased, as if I don't already, it seems to me that the intellectual discussion is rather one-sided, and most definitely NOT in favour.

Nick Colbert
Posts: 2

Re: Turbine Towers Win Civic Support
Reply #8 on : Thu November 18, 2010, 17:01:40

---

David is right, the government should commission our universities research departments to compare the cost and efficiency of all different forms of power generation on an genuinly independent basis before rushing into spending large sums of public money.I suppose Professor David Bellamy would be classed as an intellectual tree hugger.

Login to comment!