Previous post:

Next post:

Backlash against turbines

by mel starrs on November 9, 2007

in Renewables

 I wrote this back in December last year and for the life of me I can’t remember what else I was going to add to it. It’s mostly all been said now, but the most interesting tidbit (which is why I’m publishing it now, woefully out of date) is the prediction from Arup – I wonder if that still holds true?

The backlash begins in earnest…

 It’s all a bit predictable – two steps forward and one step back again. Public awareness of issues such as carbon footprinting, renewable energy and water conservation are probably at their highest in the past 20 years. And so, the irksome critical naysayer’s start to inch forward their views, knocking back what have generally been positive messages (and as I have said before – there is no point in scaring people into being green).

 I have made my views on the B&Q Windsave turbines clear here – there are very few sites in the UK where they will be effective and the payback is still uneconomical. That said, the tone of this article in the Guardian is uncalled for in my opinion.

Arup are being slightly more bullish in their predictions. In a report undertaken for Zurich, looking at typical housing in 2080, they proclaim :

 ‘Wind energy systems are one of the most cost-effective, home-based, renewable energy systems available. Depending on the location of the home, a small wind energy system can lower an electricity bill by 50 to 90%.’

It follows an article entitled ‘Wind turbines ‘may actually do more harm than good’ in The Daily Mail of all places (::via Treehugger). Whilst analysis of some of their arguments concurs with my own analysis of Windsave, I have a few issues with the article.

::thanks also to Shades of Green