what you have not been told is that within a few years the government
will be announcing plans to build 10s if not hundreds of new pump
storage schemes BECAUSE of this needless obsession with wind energy. The
simple truth is that wind power is highly intermittent, and the more
wind we have, the less funding goes to that mainstay of electricity
supply (coal & gas) so that we are rapidly approaching a point where all
the baseload generating capacity is old and expected to be
decommissioned with no prospect of replacement by new baseload either
from coal/gas or nuclear.
And to pre-empt any silly comments about Hydrogen ... that is all they
are, silly comments about an untried, untested, pie-in-the-sky plan
which will be thrown out (like the government) the year when we start
getting regular power cuts because the power generators have to close
one of the last remaining power plants other than wind.
As for the impact of Hydrocarbons. Research has not shown any increase
in severe weather
global temperatures have not risen <http://wattsupwiththat.com/widget/>
since the 2001 IPCC report told us they would rise between 1.4-5.8C by
the end of the century, the sea is not rising due to CO2
and the scientific process in climate "science" is completely biased
In short, Global Warming is to real science what: "/Long barrows/, long
/skulls/; /round/ barrows, /round skulls"/, Piltdown man and Stonehenge
sacrificing Celtic Druids are to archaeology.
On 21/04/2011 12:25, hanna steyne wrote:
> whilst extracting and burning hydrocarbons or daming river valleys for hydroelectric power has no impact on the natural or cultural environment at all ...
>> Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 12:20:30 +0100
>> From: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [BRITARCH] wind turbines
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> A flower may be a flower but it is still a weed in the middle of a
>> garden. Likewise a windmill may be a wondrous engineering sculpture in
>> some industrial wasteland, but it is a bird-mincer,
>> archaeological-destroying wart in the wilds of Scotland.
>> On 21/04/2011 12:11, David Walland wrote:
>>> What visual blight? Some of us find them beautiful. Perhaps you might
>>> accept that there are other views than yours.
>>> David Walland
>>> On 21 April 2011 09:55, keighley mark<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>> Morning all
>>>> A post in my local paper yesterday, the Press and Journal, illustrated just
>>>> how cavalier some council planning committees are with the placing of these
>>>> contentious objects in relation to scheduled monuments and archaeological
>>>> sites in general. In this case it involves Easter Aquhorthies recumbent
>>>> stone circle, close to Inverurie, Aberdeenshire.
>>>> The site is well known to anyone with a knowledge of the archaeology of the
>>>> North-east of Scotland as a fine example of its type and is well visited by
>>>> both locals and visitors to the area as it also offers fine views of the
>>>> adjacent Bennachie hill, topped by Mither Tap hill fort.
>>>> But... the Garioch area planning committee have just agreed, against
>>>> planning department advice, to allow placement of a 150 ft turbine less than
>>>> 2000 ft from the site. Two quotes in the article illustrated the lack of
>>>> understanding displayed by some councillors in relation to the value of
>>>> archaeological heritage, both in its own right, and as a recreational and
>>>> tourist facility. One councillor, Martin Ford (Green Party candidate in the
>>>> forthcoming Scottish Parliament elections in May) is quoted as saying "he
>>>> thought it unlikely that shadow flicker would be an issue at this site".
>>>> Chair of the committee, Martin Kitts-Hayes, moved to approve the application
>>>> and said (per the P& J) "Having visited the site I do not consider that
>>>> this (the turbine) will have a detrimental impact on an area of landscape
>>>> Be assured, it will most certainly have an impact of this site! Let us hope
>>>> that when it is passed to the directorate of the built environment they
>>>> recommend it is called in by ministers rather than being passed back to
>>>> Aberdeenshire Council. It is worth noting though that the current
>>>> administration in Scotland does seem hell bent on covering the entire
>>>> country in turbines, come what may so even that course of action probably
>>>> won't save the site from the visual blight of the turbine.
>>>> Not a nice early post for you but lets hope this site is somehow rescued
>>>> from the visual impact of this monstrosity..
>>>> Mark Keighley