Anti wind power forum opens in Westminster

dmorm · Post by **dmorm** » 19 Apr 2012, 14:24

Long term thinking apparently not required anymore ..... Rolling Eyes

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... NTCMP=SRCH

http://www.nowind.org.uk/

The government kill the solar industry by cutting the FiT and now it looks like they are supporting this lot who want to stop wind power. Greenest government ever?

However ...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2 ... NTCMP=SRCH

mobbsey · Post by **mobbsey** » 19 Apr 2012, 18:19

But wind isn't going to solve the problem, so isn't polarising the debate for or against industrial wind a bit of a waste of time?, when we should instead be looking to a more radical solution?

Wind suits the energy companies because its subsided; and in my view giving those subsidies suits many governments because it gives the impression of a "solution" being available whilst also supporting national industries against foreign competition. Whilst gullible "environmentalists" go along with this charade, assisted by the reactionary right-wing who oppose it and thus give the debate substance, we'll never address the driving problems behind our present predicament.

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 19 Apr 2012, 18:34

RenewableCandy · Post by **RenewableCandy** » 19 Apr 2012, 20:32

But those are NOT the grounds on which they are opposing it. They don't like it, basically, because it Doesn't Look NiceTM. None of their 6 points addresses the issue of needing to use less energy, or of needing to cope without economic growth. They're basically just a bunch of disgruntled landowners.

"Wind suits the energy companies because it is subsidised", yes, but so is every other type of electricity generation. And, even in a no-growth or -ve growth scenario, we'll still need some electricity.

emordnilap · Post by **emordnilap** » 20 Apr 2012, 10:00

RenewableCandy wrote:"Wind suits the energy companies because it is subsidised", yes, but so is every other type of electricity generation.

Indeed, every other type of fuel is subsidised - and some of the worst fuels way, way more subsidised than wind energy. And not just in money!

dmorm · Post by **dmorm** » 20 Apr 2012, 16:02

"But wind isn't going to solve the problem"

No, it isn't. But it sure as hell might help alleviate the energy problems that you know we are going to be facing. The energy hungry majority are going to be held to ransom by the 1% .

Why concentrate a load of effort on destroying a key renewable technology that might just be what you need in 10 years from now? Other posters have identified why of course (vested interests in land ownership).

I am getting more and more hacked off with the attitude of this government. I didn't expect much from the coalition, but this lot really do need sacking at the next election. "Greenest Government ever?" What a load of bollocks.

Another example from George Monbiot today
http://www.monbiot.com/2012/04/20/the-k ... lood-bank/

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 20 Apr 2012, 17:42

dmorm wrote:"But wind isn't going to solve the problem"

No, it isn't. But it sure as hell might help alleviate the energy problems that you know we are going to be facing.

Since the total amount of wind power will be a small percentage of the total, and there will be a 90% conventional backup to cope with the unreliability, how will it alleviate the energy problems?

RenewableCandy · Post by **RenewableCandy** » 20 Apr 2012, 20:36

By causing the UK to use less coal and gas. The capacity (as in, lots of power stations) is already there, so doesn't cost anything to build.

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 20 Apr 2012, 22:25

But the demand for electricity is going to increase. From 2016, the building regulations will prevent gas and oil heating from being used in new build houses. It will have to be all "renewables". I suspect that may mean the capacity won't be there.

RenewableCandy · Post by **RenewableCandy** » 21 Apr 2012, 17:49

The whole point of the 2016 regs is to reduce the use of all energy, not just to transpose consumption of gas/oil into consumption of mains electricity!

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 21 Apr 2012, 18:00

There is a move to replace gas and oil boilers, now, with heat pumps. I don't see that and an increasing population using less electricity.

mobbsey · Post by **mobbsey** » 21 Apr 2012, 18:57

RenewableCandy wrote:The whole point of the 2016 regs is to reduce the use of all energy, not just to transpose consumption of gas/oil into consumption of mains electricity!

They were watered down a lot -- e.g. allowing off-site renewable provision. Given the Government's anti-green stance I think that by 2014, when the housebuilders brick it because they're not ready, the Government will quickly drop the whole idea for some cheaper greenwashed alternative.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 22 Apr 2012, 05:10

The national builders will put in a load of applications before the 2016 deadline using the pre 2016 Regulations. They will then have until 2019 before they have to start building to the 2016 Regs. So no panic folks! After 2019 they will offset the emissions from the badly designed/built houses that they throw up, as Mobbsey says, with offsite renewable provision.

It's not land owners who are opposed to windfarms, it's people who don't like all this "global warming nonsense" because it's not good for growth! They just hate the whole "Green" agenda and wind mills, as they so quaintly call them, are the worst manifestation of the phenomenon and so attract a disproportionate amount of venom. Elderly growth addicts are the real problem.

As NOW are opposed to subsidies for energy generation I presume that they are against nuclear power as well.

(This is my 6200th post! I missed the 6000th anniversary!!)

JohnB · Post by **JohnB** » 22 Apr 2012, 10:23

kenneal - lagger wrote:(This is my 6200th post! I missed the 6000th anniversary!!)

I nearly overtook you a while ago. I must be slipping!

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 22 Apr 2012, 11:33

JohnB wrote:
kenneal - lagger wrote:(This is my 6200th post! I missed the 6000th anniversary!!)
I nearly overtook you a while ago. I must be slipping!