Wind Turbines for Thee, but Not for Me

NIMBY, NIMBY, NIMBY – this example from New York of all wonderfully liberal places:

Naples, N.Y. — The Town Board Monday unanimously rejected a proposed wind-turbine project in the town, determining the gigantic power-generating machines would have a negative effect on the environment. The board also agreed it wants to impose a six-month moratorium on wind turbines, though that decision requires a public hearing and final board vote.


“Most people did not want wind turbines,” Town Supervisor Margaret Dunn said Tuesday.

Come, come now people.  The Messiah has decreed that you will have electricity if the wind blows or the sun shines.  Why in the world would good New Yorkers not want wind turbines?

Last month, hundreds of residents in this Yates County town of 1,000, bordering Naples, turned out largely to voice their opposition to turbines in an emotionally charged gathering. Most of the 116 residents who spoke at the meeting were against the machines, said Dunn.

When the board convened Monday, it determined the 17 proposed turbines would have a negative impact due to noise, light flicker and positioning on steep slopes. Dunn said the board was particularly disturbed because the original proposal stated the turbines would not be sited on slopes exceeding 15 percent, yet the environmental study showed some were slated to be built on such slopes.

Resident Vince Johnson, who lives on Italy Hill Turnpike near a targeted turbine site, said he was worried about storm-water runoff from turbines — as well as noise and possible effect on spring-fed wells

Water runoff?  Slopes?  Noise?  Wells?  Hey – who wouldn’t want to have 20 story turbines booming away.  But they are very very very very green!

So should local cities be able to throw roadblocks in the way of energy independence and Algore worship?

Europe’s Experience With Wind Power

The bottom line is that the renewables debate, and investment in it, is as much about ideology and political belief as it is about economics and environmental issues. When the real cost of turbine power as a major player toward our future power needs is assessed, the answer just ain’t “blowing in the wind”.
clipped from www.tcsdaily.com
Despite public subsidies to the UK wind industry of over $500 million the government has so far only seen that such a massive investment provided less than half of one percent of the UK’s electricity needs.
Even in Europe’s windiest country, the winds are just “too variable”, with most turbines consistently under-performing. Having analysed figures submitted to the UK electricity watchdog Ofgem on every farm’s load factor, Engineering Consultant Jim Oswald explained to the BBC, “It’s the power swings that worry us. Over a 20-hour period you can go from almost 100 percent wind output to 20 percent.”
the regularly repeated claim that Denmark generates 20 percent of its electricity demand from wind sources is highly misleading. That 20 percent of Denmark’s electricity is not supplied continuously from wind power. Such is the variability of supply that it relies heavily on the proximity of near neighbors Norway and Sweden to take their excess capacity.
  blog it

UK Government Plans 2 Wind Turbines for Every Mile of Shorline

Its hidden down at the end, but the ugly little fact about wind power is down there. You must have some backup power plant (like coal or natural gas or nuclear {GASP!}) because you can’t have 100% reliance on wind power. At least if you want electricity all the time.

clipped from news.bbc.co.uk
There could be more than two offshore wind turbines per mile of UK coastline under plans being set out by ministers.

Wind farm

Business Secretary John Hutton says he wants to open up British seas to allow enough new turbines – up to 7,000 – to power all UK homes by the year 2020.
He acknowledged “it is going to change our coastline”, but said the issue of climate change was “not going away”.
“It is going to change our coastline, yes for sure. There is no way of making that shift to a low carbon technology without there being change and without that change being visible and evident to people.
The other choice was, he said, whether it was “easier to have these developments offshore rather than onshore”.
Asked what would happen if there was no wind for a few days, Mr Hutton said that was why there had to be a mix of energy sources – including nuclear power – to cover for calmer weather periods.
Wind turbines have proved to be controversial onshore and offshore.

  blog it