Wind turbines. Those big white fans in the field, often spotted on motorways, like something out of Willy Wonka’s chocolate factory. Whump whump whump go the blades in their serene whiteness. A little bluebird flutters by, perhaps whistling a happy tune to himself. Whump whump thwack go the blades. Bye bye Mr. Bluebird.
Accidental animal death is one of a number of reasons why there is still so much controversy surrounding wind turbines and wind farms. If you think the bird has it tough, any bat that gets too close to a turbine will find its lungs ruptured by the pressure changes caused by the blades. Unfortunate. There are counter-arguments to this complaint however. Take, for instance, Al Gore’s infamous CGI polar bear, floating on an ever decreasing circle of ice as the devilish hand of global warming closes around it.
Another problem with wind turbines is their location. Their design necessitates that their locale be wide open spaces, far from intrusive high-rise structures and in areas where a prevailing wind is going to keep them running 75-85% of the time. Most of these criteria are only fulfilled in rural expanses, where wind turbines are, to some, seen as an eye sore. A recent UK survey showed that around 70% of people were indifferent, or in favour of, the aesthetic impact of wind turbines and wind farms on rural areas, though it would be a safe bet to suggest that the survey was not primarily conducted on those who have to live in the midst of the wind farms.
Indeed, some have even claimed that living near wind turbines has adversely affected their health.
Even Middle Earth has wind turbines now
Take the case of Nikki Horton who lives only half a kilometre from her closest wind turbine. She claims that since living in close proximity to said device, she has begun to experience problems including ‘not sleeping, whooshing in the ears, and vibrations that go right through the body’. She goes on to say, ‘It is hard to explain, but I swear you can feel the vibrations in your bones’. Others have complained of low-frequency sounds causing disturbances. As well as this, the strobing light patterns caused by the moving blades has been blamed for causing discomfort and disquiet. Of course, these maladies could be caused by any one of a number of things, and it is perhaps no coincidence that, without calling anyone a liar, these wind turbines also happen to be blocking the beautiful countryside views the residences of the aforementioned homeowners once possessed. Views, it must be added, that contribute in no small way to the overall value of a property. If there is one thing estate agents do not take to during valuations, it is large white rotating blades generating electricity for the grid not half a mile down the road.
The syndrome causes you to pout strangely
Perhaps that in itself is enough reason to abandon wind turbines. The unfortunate, but often necessary intrusion upon rural homes can be compared to the difficulties and controversy surrounding the installation of mobile phone masts in urban areas, where contentious issues such as concentrated microwave radiation can lead to (often successful) lobbying against the installation of such structures. The argument is a curious one. One could say that mobile phones are not crucial to the ongoing comfort and existence of humankind, while wind turbines are replacing fossil fuel sources which pollute the atmosphere and cannot be replenished. However, one could then argue (to oneself if you feel like it) that electricity is no more of a necessity than mobile communication, and the best way to combat fossil fuels is to have no need for electricity in the first place. You may be called a Luddite, but your principle would stand strong.
It is an intriguing debate. Almost everyone is in agreement that wind turbines are a viable, good idea, yet no one is really sure how best to implement them. Offshore wind farms are now being proposed to combat the opposition by local parties against onshore wind farms, but the problem of impact on local wildlife still remains. Those campaigning for wind turbines as a viable widespread source of renewable energy point to the fact that things such as air travel cause more deaths and damage to wildlife than any number of wind turbines might do. Which brings us full circle back to square one.
Is off shore the answer?
As of 2007, only 1.65% of the UK’s energy was being supplied by wind turbines. Anyone who lives or has been to the UK will know that, if you go to the right place, you will find all the wind you need. In fact, in certain parts of the north, a full day’s blast might be good for powering London well into the next millennium. Contrast this with Germany, where a relatively impressive 10% of all energy is provided by wind power. It seems clear, then, that a change of attitude is possible.
The Germans seem happier
It is also important to factor in the consideration that wind turbines offset their energy costs within the first few months of operation. Basically, this means that the energy and carbon dioxide expended in the construction of a turbine is equalled out in terms of the amount of clean, renewable energy generated within less than a year of operation. This is far more sustainable and efficient than, say, solar energy, where at the moment a cheaply manufactured solar panel may go an entire lifetime without offsetting its initial energy cost.
Ultimately, the decision is going to lie with public perception and opinion. The more opposition the wind turbine gets, the less likely the government is to back it as a viable alternative to fossil fuels. Yes, it may cause inconvenience for those in rural areas, yes, it may kill a small number of animals accidentally, but take one look at Sellafield and decide which one you want on your doorstep for the next few generations.
The alternative?
|
|
[...] Why Are Wind Turbines So Controversial? | Recycle Blog http://www.recycle.co.uk/blog/why-are-wind-turbines-so-controversial – view page – cached Wind turbines. Those big white fans in the field, often spotted on motorways, like something out of Willy Wonka’s chocolate factory. Whump whump whump go the — From the page [...]
There’s currently no realistic alternative to wind power (except wave). Controversy surround Wind turbines also stems from the uneducated, who believe that the Carbon footprint associated with their manufacture will not be repaid during their lifetime.
I am Tom Stacy of Save Western Ohio (www.savewesternOH.org) Fear of nuclear energy from seemingly intelligent people here seems odd. And while the rhetoric here is well written, fairly intellectual, the understanding of wind energy is very low. I recommend going through the slides at http://www.energypresentation.info when you have an hour or so to devote to learning. By the way, the photo you have posted with the words ‘Wind Turbine Syndrome” on it came from my web site, and that is how I found you. Cheerio!