Scout Moor wind farm: Do the wind turbines spoil or enhance the Pennine landscape?

[mostonminer]

to be honest they are not pretty things windfarms,but the wildlife dont mind them and they produce power with no polution,its a sad fact that electric is getting more expensive than gas atm,so the more the better.
a bit off topic but is bardsley a smokeless zone as im ripping out my 1970s gas back boiler/fire and putting a multy fuel stove/w backboiler in to save gas bills.

[mr angry]

Cant get overly worked up about them one way or the other. I suppose a few here and there are OK but if the numbers on the Scout Moor one were increased it would then become a blot.

I actually dont think pylons and power lines are a blot on the landscape so I suppose I can accept wind farms.

Can I now be controversial? I dont actually accept all this "green" stuff. I think the whole thing is an enormous conspiracy theory, I accept that climate change happens but it has happened before. In the late middle ages the climate here was warmer than it is now, then in the 18th and early 19th centuries, it became much colder and the River Thames used to freeze up in winter. The point is that climate change is a cyclical, natural phenomenon, caused by increased solar activity and there is nothing we can do about it

This green obsession is simply being exploited by politicians as another means of controlling thought, there's something in it for everyone:

1, Politicians can use it as an excuse to impose increased taxes and oppressive legislation, fits in with the surveillance society

2, Capitalist big business can use it as an excuse to sell supposedly environmentally friendly products we dont need

3, The professional protestors have got something new to go on about now that nuclear weapons are no longer a live issue

The one thing about environmentalism which I agree with is waste. However, this would derail the throw away consumer society, ie if domestic appliances for example were designed and built to last 50 years the market for new ones would dry up so that wont happen and instead local authorities fiddle around with the edges of the problem by making you put paper and tins in different boxes

Part of my problem stems from the continuous propaganda on the subject which business and politicians bombard us with and anything which the political and business establishments tell me I am automatically suspicious of

Rant over!!!

[fen beagle]

although, viewed in isolation, they are not unatractive? Viewed on mass, they are clearly industrial, and therefore have no place in the rural landscape. As they continue to be built, across the British landscape, payed for by British Taxepayers subsidies, they will be effectively trashing our country heritage. In addition to which they have noise issues, which are intolerable to people living in homes that they are building too close too. In some case forcing people to have to leave their homes. There are also other health issues associated with them. They drop house values, in some cases alarmingly. And produce very little energy. They are not the way forward for clean energy, which would be much better served in very many other ways (goverment subsidies would be much better spent on householder solar panels, for instance, that have no noise issues, and do not spoil the countryside). As to whether they actualy improve the landscape, would any of constables paintings look better, with a row of turbines painted over them?...if so, which ones?

[aidanorourke]

Since I posted the initial question there have been some very interesting views expressed, both for and against.

I can see both sides of the argument.

However as far as the appearance of the wind turbines is concerned and their impact on the landscape... well, let me explain where i'm coming from.

On some of my photos of Manchester taken from Salford Quays, it's possible to see the Pennines very clearly - the hills above Stalybridge and Mossley, and as far as Kinder Scout.

For me, one of the amazing things about this landscape is that is is virtually unchanged for thousands of years. You are looking at a landscape that is almost as unspoilt as when the ancient Britons were roaming on it.

The contrast with the industrial city below is remarkable, and it's a major advantage of Manchester over London that you can see this untouched landscape.

Now, that landscape has been industrialised. The wind turbines have appeared on part of it, and I have to say, I find them a blot on the landscape.

But how can I say that I like Winter Hill transmitter mast, whilst I dislike the wind turbines. Well, there is only one mast but there are 26 wind turbines, they are thicker and more noticeable. They move. I can see them from Stockport Wellington Rd South, from Yew Tree Road Fallowfield, from Heywood, the Barton motorway bridge...

From everywhere in the Manchester conurbation where there is a view of the hills.

I've seen the wind turbines in Kerry and I'm not keen on them either, for the same reason.

I supported the campaign to prevent the construction of a wind farm next to the Lake District near Tebay.

I believe that the technology will be made obsolete within a few years, but these constructions with their concrete bases dug deep into the hillside will be around for much longer.

I have no problem with them when they are built in an appropriate location.

We wouldn't want to put Fiddlers Ferry power station - another landmark I am very keen on - on Kinder Scout, would we?

[John]

Originally Posted by aidanorourke

We wouldn't want to put Fiddlers Ferry power station - another landmark I am very keen on - on Kinder Scout, would we?

But nuclear power stations tend to get sited in some rather pleasant places. At least sheep may safely graze amongst wind turbines.

I do tend to agree with the feelings against wind farms sited in the hills. OK techonology, wrong place to put it.

[aidanorourke]

Giant wind turbine next to A2
Autobahn Gütersloh N Germany
Photo Aidan O'Rourke

That's a good point. Sellafield, former Windscale is in a scenic area (never visited). I don't mind wind turbines selectively placed on the coastline or out to sea. They can be OK on the landscape - in flat northern Germany they are everywhere to be seen.

But on our precious Pennines, a virgin landscape, untouched since the dawn of history - and in full view of the Manchester conurbation - they are an eyesore. And I know others who have the same reaction.

Maybe I might have had the same reaction when they were building Winter Hill transmitter (I think) in the 1950s, but for me, a transmitter mast, with its red lights at night, is different.

It's one of the amazing things about Manchester that you can drive 15 miles east, north east or north, and enter a wilderness, with its stark, windswept beauty, still within sight of the city. You can't do that in Birmingham or London or Oxford.

It's such a shame to spoil it.

[John]

And you don't even have to drive fifteen miles to see hills either.
When I returned to Manchester after a long absense, I was a little unsure if I had made the right choice or not.
travelling into Stockport on the top deck of the 23 bus, the sight of the snow capped hills in the distance took my breath away and put an end to any doubts that I had about coming home.

[fen beagle]

Yorkshire Drax Power station cooling towers & pylons
Photo by Aidan O'Rourke

One difference between the 'look' of, say, Sizewell B, and windfarms, in a direct comparison, is that Sizewell B generated 1,196mw of consistant power last year. One typical industrial wind Turbine, is rated at 2mw per year, but is expected to achieve only 25% of that (some time as little as 7%). At best then half a mw per year, of inconsistant power (some days you get no power at all....although the wind farms themselves use electricity all the time, for free, directly from tha grid....no figures available. At best then , you would need 2,392 wind turbines, on your hill , if you want to compare it with Sizewell B fairly......Oh, and you would still need to keep sizewell B running as well, because you can't have days with no power being produced at all.

Drax solid power fuel power station in Yorkshire (coal, and renewable willow) produced 4,000 mw of power last year....that's 8,000 wind turbines worth.

[fen beagle]

As the photograph shows, Drax, though highly effecient and claiming to be the cleanest power station of its type, is clearly not an attractive prospect. Although the prospect of 8000 wind turbines larger than Big Ben, which produce no power at all some days, are hardly the answer. In the case of solid fuel burning. Technologies are now becoming available, that dispense with the cooling towers alltogether (see 'Wales Online' for the latest propossal for a clean power solid fueled power station).

[John]

Originally Posted by fen beagle

(some days you get no power at all....although the wind farms themselves use electricity all the time, for free, directly from tha grid....no figures available. At best then , you would need 2,392 wind turbines, on your hill , if you want to compare it with Sizewell B fairly......Oh, and you would still need to keep sizewell B running as well, because you can't have days with no power being produced at all.

Drax solid power fuel power station in Yorkshire (coal, and renewable willow) produced 4,000 mw of power last year....that's 8,000 wind turbines worth.

Really the discussion was about the appearance rather than anything else. One advantage of wind turbines that gets overlooked is exactly that they don't generate on calm days, which also tend to coincide with troughs in demand as calm days are often warm days.

You don't have that flexibility with solid fuel or nuclear power.

Any opinion on power generation tends to polarise to one form of generation.
People don't seem to consider a mixture of wind, tide and fossel fuel generation to be an option.