Not good news for those intent on running a business on the back of the government's declared intention to invest heavily in offshore wind farms.
At the end of last week Shell announced it had pulled out of plans to build the world's biggest offshore wind farm, the London Array. What likelihood now of achieving the government's targets for the equivalent of 33 such arrays by 2010? What with the recent decision to prevent an onshore development on the Isle of Lewis, maybe Lord Turner was right about targeting small-medium scale projects rather than just super projects.
Comments (4)
Though they aren't turning back to coal either, judging by this story.
Posted by Will | May 6, 2008 12:32 PM
Posted on May 6, 2008 12:32
While I can understand the interest from people in the construction industry in carrying out the work to build Windfarms, or more correctly Wind Power Stations, I cannot understand the obsession in wanting to build the damned things in the first place.
Where I live at Bradwell-on-Sea in Essex, nPower want to build TEN turbines 400ft high,with an installed capacity of Twenty megawatts, two megawatts per turbine, on approx. 350 acres of flat,open farmland. They will be visible for at least twenty-five miles on a clear day. Even the most optimistic estimates would expect only 20% of installed capacity generation, or four megawatts actual generation in this locality. The likelihood is nearer 10%. Big deal!!.
There is also a propsal by Britsh Energy to build a new Nuclear Powerstation at Bradwell with an installed capacty of up to 1600 megawatts. According to British Energy this new station would generate at around 95% of installed capacity or around 1520 megawatts.
Is it any surprise there is such huge public opposition to Windfarms, especially around the proposed sites.
Posted by Richard Dewick | May 11, 2008 10:11 AM
Posted on May 11, 2008 10:11
Posted by Paul | May 16, 2008 4:11 PM
Posted on May 16, 2008 16:11
Richard - Thanks for your comment, and sorry for the delay in responding. You might be right about the inefficiency of the wind farm proposed near you, and the visual intrusion of such behemoths as those you describe shouldn’t be overlooked. However, there is surely some role for wind power in trying to wean us off finite, carbon-based sources of energy. If the production that fuels our consumption becomes overt, as it does with wind farms, rather than hidden away, as it is with all power stations, maybe we’d all be a bit more careful about how much energy we use? Also, I don’t think all wind farms are ugly. There’s quite a big one on the moors near Haworth (think Wuthering Heights and all that) that I find quite attractive. Maybe they’re only 100 feet rather than 400 feet though. Scale is obviously an issue. Lord Turner suggested putting small scale wind farm/turbines in areas with existing visual disturbance, such as alongside motorways. Acceptable? Scale is often determined by how these things are financed, though, and as long as we’re reliant on an economic system that favours giant companies and giant schemes we’re likely to end up doing nothing – and that surely isn’t an option.
Posted by Paul | May 23, 2008 1:42 PM
Posted on May 23, 2008 13:42