Driving along the west, you see a fair number of windfarms. You can see them from rather far off. I am not a “green” enthusiasts, but I think they’re neat. Local residents disagree:
Throughout the UK — indeed, all over the world — fights against large-scale wind-energy projects are raging. The European Platform against Windfarms lists 518 signatory organizations from 23 countries. The UK alone now has about 285 anti-wind groups. Last May, some 1,500 protesters descended on the Welsh assembly, the Senedd, demanding that a massive wind project planned for central Wales be stopped.
Although environmental groups like Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council and Greenpeace claim that wind energy is the answer when it comes to slowing the rate of growth in carbon dioxide emissions, policymakers from Ontario to Australia are responding to angry landowners who don’t want 100-meter-high wind turbines built near their homes.
On seeing the headline, I figured that the opposition was Kennedy-esque: aesthetically unpleasing and such. I am relatively unsympathetic to that argument because, well, I think they look awesome. The picture of the wind turbines visible from that guy’s backyard? Awesome.
My views on this matter are atypical, I suppose. Near my house, they built a condo skyscraper several years ago. It’s conspicuously visible from our backyard. The neighborhood hates it. They were opposing the building of more before the real estate collapse killed all future projects (the builders of the condo in question are taking a bath - I wouldn’t be surprised if they just cut their losses and tore it down soon).
Anyhow, whether you like the sight of a skyscraper or wind turbine is a matter of taste and - in my view - a relatively superificial concern. Their complaints about the noise and lights, on the other hand, are a bigger deal. This is especially true in areas where the lack of light pollution and noise pollution are one of the few things that they have going for them. There are a lot of downsides to living in ruralia, but even someone like myself who puts Works of Men in front of Works of God, I can appreciate seeing the stars and night. And everybody appreciates some peace and quiet.
Whether they should take it in the chin for The Greater Good is for people in greater positions of authority than me to decide. People have a high tolerance for unpleasantness when it is perceived to be good for the economy. Louisiana objected vociferously when offshore drilling was quashed. Wyoming’s air quality may be worse than Los Angeles’s, and fracking may be contaminating their water supply, but it’s the outsiders who are raising the alarm bells and Wyomingans (except the Dairy Towners from California) who want to keep moving forward.
So why not with Windfarms? Maybe it’s not profitable enough for them to get their cut? If you paid them off, would it still be economically feasible?
I clicked the link solely to see whether the headline was “Tilting at Windmills.” I was not disappointed.
Comment by Brandon Berg — February 7, 2012 @ 2:22 pm
I almost titled it that myself, until I went back and saw that the original used that title.
Too easy.
Comment by trumwill — February 7, 2012 @ 11:46 pm
*Very* glad to see such an uproar about windmills these days, before it’s too late and every square inch of wildnerness has got one. Too bad it’s taken so long, but I suppose people never get upset enough until things have gone way too far. Windmills are one of my favourite topics; in fact I’m politically involved at a local level in fighting them.
I am relatively unsympathetic to that argument because, well, I think they look awesome. The picture of the wind turbines visible from that guy’s backyard? Awesome.
No, Will, not “awesome”. They are HIDEOUS, UNGODLY HIDEOUS blights on the landscape. HIDEOUS. Did you ask the guy who owns the backyard whether he thinks it’s “awesome”?
HIDEOUS.
HIDEOUS.
HIDEOUS.
HIDEOUS.
HIDEOUS.
HIDEOUS.
HIDEOUS.
HIDEOUS.
HIDEOUS.
HIDEOUS.
Anyhow, whether you like the sight of a skyscraper or wind turbine is a matter of taste and - in my view - a relatively superificial concern.
Strictly speaking, it might be a matter of “taste”. Practically speaking, almost nobody “likes” these things, Will. It’s not superficial. How would you feel if your backyard - where you had dwelt in peace your whole life - were suddenly utterly devastated by the erection of some giant flashing monolith?
This is especially true in areas where the lack of light pollution and noise pollution are one of the few things that they have going for them.
*snort*… how generous and magnanimous of you, jackass.
In the part of Canada where I grew up - the most beautiful part, IMHO - significant portions of the gorgeous scenery are being irrevocably marred by these windmills. The same is true in other parts of the country, and in parts of the USA that I’ve seen.
People have a high tolerance for unpleasantness when it is perceived to be good for the economy.
You mean: people have a “high tolerance” for being taken advantage of when they have few other options. And that’s how these windmills invariably go up: the wind companies very deliberately target poor, rural areas. They go in and say, “Hey, I know you’re hard up right now. You let me rent your land, so I can put a windmill on it.” This is often a deal too good to resist for out-of-work rural folks. It’s also how the countryisde is being destroyed, and neighbours are being turned against each other.
I haven’t even touched on the health effects of these things, minimized by the wind companies and the enviro-lobby. People’s lives are being ruined by these things.
Comment by Samson J. — February 7, 2012 @ 11:58 pm
How would you feel if your backyard - where you had dwelt in peace your whole life - were suddenly utterly devastated by the erection of some giant flashing monolith?
You’re just baiting me.
Comment by Brandon Berg — February 8, 2012 @ 4:05 am
“I haven’t even touched on the health effects of these things, minimized by the wind companies and the enviro-lobby. People’s lives are being ruined by these things.”
Health effects? I know they’re bad for birds. Also I’m aware that the heavy metals for the generators are mined in China in probably unsafe and unclean ways, but I don’t know of any way they affect people locally.
That said, I’m also under the impression they can’t survive without massive subsidies. Mostly because of that, I’m pro-offshore drilling but against windmills.
Comment by Kirk — February 8, 2012 @ 10:42 am
No, Will, not “awesome”. They are HIDEOUS, UNGODLY HIDEOUS blights on the landscape. HIDEOUS. Did you ask the guy who owns the backyard whether he thinks it’s “awesome”?
I’m guessing he thinks they are not awesome. Setting aside noise and lights (I was referring to the structure itself), he’s wrong. Awesome.
Practically speaking, almost nobody “likes” these things, Will. It’s not superficial. How would you feel if your backyard - where you had dwelt in peace your whole life - were suddenly utterly devastated by the erection of some giant flashing monolith?
I was referring to visuals. I agreed that light and noise were potentially a problem.
*snort*… how generous and magnanimous of you, jackass.
Haha, okay, that did come out wrong. My point was that rural folk but up with a lot of inconveniences. One of the big payoffs are supposed to be the comparative lack of noise. Another big plus is being able to see the night’s sky. That the windmills cause noise and (if there’s enough light) obstruct the view of the stars… I can see why this is a problem.
The city, for reasons we do not understand, but a city light “#10″ in our back yard. Like, in the middle of our back yard. We’re legally prohibited from disabling it. It doesn’t bother me as much as it does my wife, but I can see it as a problem. So I could see lights affixed to the windmills being a problem as well.
You mean: people have a “high tolerance” for being taken advantage of when they have few other options. And that’s how these windmills invariably go up: the wind companies very deliberately target poor, rural areas.
Well… yes. These people don’t suddenly get more options, though, if you remove land exploitation. In the case of Wyoming, mineral exploration is a godsend. At least, judging by the attitudes out there. Ditto for Louisiana and off-shore drilling.
I haven’t even touched on the health effects of these things, minimized by the wind companies and the enviro-lobby. People’s lives are being ruined by these things.
I’m open to hearing about the health effects and taking them into account, for sure. At the same time, though, for it to really hold weight, it would need to have worse health effects than the alternatives (coal mining, fracking, oil drilling, nuclear).
Comment by trumwill — February 8, 2012 @ 11:04 am
My understanding is the the low pitched sound from the blades, and flashing lights (from blades blocking the light when the sun is low) can be quite annoying. I’ve taken relatives up to see the ones near us, and they were very surprised at the noise. It seems like sufficient setback could solve that problem.
I have mixed feelings on the aesthetics. When I first saw them in the deserts of California near Palm Springs, I thought they were pretty cool. I’ve come across some in the northeast after four miles of walking in the woods, and been astounded at the beauty. As they build more, locally, they appeal is beginning to wane. Plus, they are accompanied by powerlines which snake their way to the south. I suppose everyone has different definitions of “art.”
If we compare the blight on the landscape to a coal powered plant, be sure to note that windfarms have to be *massive*. A string of windmills along every ridgeline for miles is much more visible than a coal mine or a power plant tucked in a valley.
One of the tradeoffs for siting energy sources is that you exchange jobs for environmental degredation to some degree. Coal mines aren’t pretty*, but they provide jobs for the community. The windmills, as far as I can tell, do not. They generate some lease revenues to landowners, but they seem to generate few jobs locally.
I fear that when the subsidies run out, they will just be left idle, like the first big buildout in California.
A4, who is also near where the hydrofracking debate rages. People get actually angry when I tell them I do not have an opinion.
*They can be striking, actually.
Comment by A 4 — February 8, 2012 @ 1:00 pm
I fear that when the subsidies run out, they will just be left idle, like the first big buildout in California.
Eh? Even taking the construction and installation as sunk costs, they still can’t generate operating profits?
Comment by Brandon Berg — February 8, 2012 @ 3:27 pm
Eh? Even taking the construction and installation as sunk costs, they still can’t generate operating profits?
This was back in the early 90s, so imagine an era of cheap energy. Don’t take this as gospel, but I recall California had a tax rebate for building windmills, and there was a requirement for the utilities to buy wind generated energy at a premium. So that encouraged development of wind energy like the windfarm at Altamont. There was no subsidy for maintenance, though, and the time came for individual windmills when they became too expensive to fix.
My recollection was that this was 10 or 15 years into the life of the windmills, so this was the generation built in the early 1980s. I also assume the windmill tecnology is better now.
Back then there was literally one guy who was trying to draw attention to the effects on raptors, but I think since nobody was building any more, nobody paid attention.
A4
Comment by A 4 — February 9, 2012 @ 8:36 am
A4, I have little to add to your comment, except to express my appreciation for your thoughts.
I don’t think I have ever been close enough to one to hear the noise.
I am, and always have been skeptical of renewables as a large-scale solution, in part because of what you’re talking about. In fact (not having heard the noise or been bothered by the lights) the one thing that does irritate me about windfarms is that they represent a False Solution. Something that allows environmentalists to be against everything else because the sun+wind will save us. Like hydroelectric, I see it as being potentially a part of the solution, but not something we can rely on.
By “effect on raptors” I assume you mean avian wildlife?
Comment by trumwill — February 9, 2012 @ 11:36 am
I don’t think I have ever been close enough to one to hear the noise.
If you get a chance, you should try to get up close to one. It is amazing, if there is some wind. They are truly massive, which is disguised when you seem the from an adjacent ridgeline. I’ve seen them in transport on the highway, with one blade on a double tractor trailer. They can be quite loud, but in a periodic “wooshing” kind of way, as the tips of the blades swing by. They look like they are turning lazily, but the tips of the blade are going really fast. If you are near a turbine that is close to the ground it gets your attention.
The “effect on raptors” is the birds would be hunting for rodents in the grass of the windfarms and be surprised by the blades. That may have been more local to California than other places.
There are other ways to get wind powered beauty:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWIhkvgg6MQ
A4
Comment by A 4 — February 9, 2012 @ 2:45 pm