Windfarm Wars

[ziggy12345]

Did anybody see Windfarm Wars on BBC2 last night?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/columnis ... -23126219/

[Potemkin Villager]

Oh yes it beats Emmerdale.

The startling self revelations were food for thought.

Now I am waiting for the first Midsomer style windfarm murder.

[rue_d_etropal]

It should be remembered that this whole case started back in 2005, and a lot has happened since, especially in Devon.
Also, the first time they tried to show this program a month or so ago, it was not shown for some reason.
I would like to cut off the power suply to all thoseagainst the wind farm and say they should get real, and realise this is the best option. Also as one person pointed out, they coulsd always remove the wind turbines in the future, if they either proved a problem, or did not work as well as planned. Not like a huge hydro-electric dam, or nuclear power plant. Short sighted dim wits( i really want to say something else but feel that wouyld not be right here!!)

[ujoni08]

'They could always remove the wind turbines in the future, if they either proved a problem, or did not work as well as planned.

Excellent point.

Jon

[mobbsey]

Doesn't matter which side of the fence they are on, this issue is all about defending the material privileges of affluence; it has nothing to do with the real trends driving the human ecological crisis.

[ziggy12345]

Mobbsey

Are you for or against windfarms?

[2 As and a B]

I missed it last week and haven't watched on iPlayer yet. Were the local residents offered anything to get their support? Cheaper electricity, the chance to buy into a share of the profits, or anything else?

[rue_d_etropal]

The lack of community benefit, was something I noticed, and probably more to do with when it was started. A similar project today would have that at the top of the agenda.
We have a wind turbine going up locally, with money going towards local environmental work. Even so we had the Nimby crowd trying to stop it and almost shooting themselves in the foot by making it public that low grade radiative waste had been dumped(officially and well monitored) in old mines under the site. That knowledge probably hit their own property prices more than the proposed wind turbine

[mobbsey]

Are you for or against windfarms?

What's the point? Whether you are for or against wind farms has absolutely nothing to do with our present ecological crisis because wind farms do nothing to address the ecological trends that are driving human ecological overshoot. They're part of the same productivist paradigm, like other forms of green consumerism, that's created the present ecological crisis over the last century.

The bloke living next door to the wind farm site summed up what needs to happen -- if people want to solve the present problems then they need to stop consuming so much. At the moment everyone's fixated by carbon, which is a symptom of our present crisis not a cause. If you look at the whole ecological 'package' a few "cash cows" (much better than real cows because they don't get foot and mouth) erected on farms around the country make no real difference. What's worse, the environmental movement have gone along with this because they too are fixated by the zoetropic illusion of affluence.

In fact, over the last twenty years, professional "environmentalists" have become as much of a problem as the political establishment they claim to oppose....

[2 As and a B]

Eh?

People always have and always will consume. People always have and always will use energy. People always have and always will use energy to consume. I don't see how you can say the means of generating (at least some of that) energy is immaterial.

[mobbsey]

I don't see how you can say the means of generating (at least some of that) energy is immaterial.

You mean, like ensuring the precision accuracy of the arrangement of deck chairs on the Titanic?

Just because something makes electricity doesn't make it a valuable or viable solution if its form an function in no way address the root causes of the problem. The problem is not a shortage of electricity; the problem is not an excess of carbon emissions; the problem is not the human biological/psycho-social need for a certain level of consumption; the problem is the excess of human consumption above the level, across a variety of resources and ecological limits, which can be sustained in perpetuity by the biosphere we inhabit.

[goslow]

mmm, getting philosophical here!

I think civilisation has always exceeded our limits since the start of agriculture, so if you want to argue for that, then the ultimate conclusion is to go back to hunter-gatherer lifestyles, which won't go down too well and is no longer feasible with our high population. As an argument for not doing something to help our problems, like increasing renewables, this seems strange to me.

Actually I think we need to take both approaches: both "tread lightly" and "find technical fixes". Each on its own won't be enough. At least with wind power we are forcing ourselves to depend on the "energy income" rather than "energy capital" of the planet, as well as reducing carbon emissions. AIC may not be keen on that idea but for some of us that has merit.

I was not keen on watching this programme, have experienced enough of that stuff already with our own local "wind farm war". But I will be interested to see how the programme concludes, what messages it ends up with.

[2 As and a B]

I don't see how you can say the means of generating (at least some of that) energy is immaterial.

You mean, like ensuring the precision accuracy of the arrangement of deck chairs on the Titanic?

Just because something makes electricity doesn't make it a valuable or viable solution if its form an function in no way address the root causes of the problem. The problem is not a shortage of electricity; the problem is not an excess of carbon emissions; the problem is not the human biological/psycho-social need for a certain level of consumption; the problem is the excess of human consumption above the level, across a variety of resources and ecological limits, which can be sustained in perpetuity by the biosphere we inhabit.

So, if you are not saying we should all return to prehistoric times, what are you saying?

[clv101]

Are you for or against windfarms?

What's the point? Whether you are for or against wind farms has absolutely nothing to do with our present ecological crisis because wind farms do nothing to address the ecological trends that are driving human ecological overshoot.

I don't think it's as clear as that. As goslow said:

At least with wind power we are forcing ourselves to depend on the "energy income" rather than "energy capital" of the planet...

I'd say a big part of our current troublesome ecological trends is that for a few hundred years we've been exploiting capital rather than living on the energy flows which had supported humans for the previous history of our species. Wind represents a return to energy flows - which whilst obviously not even close to a complete solution to our problems, I don't think it's right to say windfarms have "absolutely nothing to do with our present ecological crisis".

[biffvernon]

zoetropic illusion of affluence.

Had to look that one up to check:

zoetrope (plural zoetropes)
An optical toy, in which figures made to revolve on the inside of a cylinder, and viewed through slits in its circumference, appear like a single figure passing through a series of natural motions as if animated or mechanically moved.

Thanks Paul, your posts are always an education.

Seriously.

But I think Chris is right to imply that the windfarms war represents the battle between capital and flow, and that really is the heart of the matter.