Read the forum code of contact
By: 31st October 2012 at 09:26 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-From the MoD website:
Factsheet
MOD Safeguarding
Mission: to safeguard MOD operational interests and assets.
Wind turbine
[Picture: Crown Copyright/MOD 2010]
MOD Safeguarding manages the formal consultation process through which MOD is engaged on development proposals, including those for wind turbines. It ensures operational facilities such as aerodromes, explosive stores, radar facilities and range areas are not compromised by development either on- or offshore.
Wind Energy
Wind turbines can adversely affect a number of MOD operations including radars, seismological recording equipment, communications facilities, naval operations and low flying. These effects are not limited to specific geographical areas.
The Wind Energy team deals exclusively with wind energy developments, and processes planning applications and pre-application consultation requests for on- and offshore wind farm developments.
By: 31st October 2012 at 11:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Lincoln 7 - it's been known about for years; last month there was some discussion on another fourum on the topic in this thread! ;)
By: 31st October 2012 at 12:41 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Thanks for the link Howard, very interesting reading. We often see the Herky Birds and Chinooks flying VERY low in this area, they seem to be just above the electricity pylons.
I saw on thread you gave me the M.O.D. have listed "Ranges" as an area to be avoided, We have RAF Holbeach, bombing range at Gedney Drove End,
Having fired their ordnance, they fly off in the direction of Skegness, where there is a large Windfarm. I , and it's only my opinion, think that they should ALL be built out at Sea, However Trinity House, has stated that they are a hazard to shipping, so if they, the windfarms are a danger to aircraft, and shipping,I can see why they build them inland.
If more and more are to be built, then build them outside areas of natural beauty, they are a blight on any landscape.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: 31st October 2012 at 12:43 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Unless the policy is changed 30,000 plus are needed to meet our Government's promises, so they will be built both on land and at sea.
By: 31st October 2012 at 13:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-I'm hoping that this blind headlong rush to green energy from wind factories (I refuse to call them farms as that implies a nice rural image!) has finally been sussed out as flawed, and that not only will no more be built on land, but all those in the planning stage are abandoned as well.
I have my doubts about the off shore factories also, as all it will do is push up the cost of electricity for an already struggling consumer.
Landowners and consortiums have got rich quick off the back of the ROC and the green lobby telling us how great wind power is (the fact it is only really producing electricity for about 20% of the time seems to elude them!!!).
By: 31st October 2012 at 14:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-I'm hoping that this blind headlong rush to green energy from wind factories (I refuse to call them farms as that implies a nice rural image!) has finally been sussed out as flawed,
If only you were right!! Not a chance!
By: 31st October 2012 at 14:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-There are two at EMA with two others planned, they have a shut down switch in the tower when the wind is from a certain direction as it effects the radar on that heading, apparently the closer it is to the radar, the less the problem, these ones are running 99% of the time..
By: 31st October 2012 at 14:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-You mean 99% of the time when the wind is blowing at the right speed.....
By: 31st October 2012 at 15:21 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Very rare to see them stationary.
By: 31st October 2012 at 15:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-They must be unique in that case. Even by Departmernt of Energy and Climate Change statistics, whose figures are disputed, the average figures are:
"Over a 5 year period the average onshore wind load factors was 26.2% with offshore wind at 28.2%."
Other research groups put the onshore figure as low as 20%.
Bear in mind that blades are often gently freewheeling but disconnected.
By: 31st October 2012 at 15:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-I also understand, that as soon as the windspeed reaches a certain velocity, they are switched off, as if not, the motors burn out. Although I live in a very flat fenland area, where there are a number of turbines, one frequently sees them stationary, even at peak times, seems stupid when peak times are when the most leccy is needed.and a fair wind is blowing.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: 31st October 2012 at 15:44 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Exactly correct.
By: 31st October 2012 at 16:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Very rare to see them stationary.
Not the ones I have happened to be driving past in various parts of the country - and for the record it was on relatively windy days when you'd expect them to be churning away!
By: 31st October 2012 at 17:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Probably too windy!:rolleyes:
By: 31st October 2012 at 22:26 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-So, reading the replies to this Post, are, in your opinions Windfarm, turbines a waste of money, as my half brother who uses a large rib out of Southampton, states the engineers, who he ferries to the windfarms there state the engineers say they cost more to maintain than the turbines generate in profit, and have an estimated lifespan of perhaps 25 yrs.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: 31st October 2012 at 22:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Yes Jim absolute waste of money but great for 'Generating' profits for manufacturers/maintainers and landowners ;)
By: 31st October 2012 at 22:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Forgot to say...also probably contributing to the recent outrageous price hikes by energy suppliers...dont you just lurve 'Green' energy LOL ;)
By: 31st October 2012 at 23:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Forgot to say...also probably contributing to the recent outrageous price hikes by energy suppliers...dont you just lurve 'Green' energy LOL ;)
Baz. It's beyond a joke now, where do this lot in power now, think the elderly, infirm, who have to rely on their State Pension expected to pluck the extra money from to pay for these outrageous price hikes?, I can see where some say, "It's either eat or heat". You can die through hypothermia, by all means, but if you are suffering, God forbid, from a terminal illness, you are not allowed to get assistance to end your own life.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: 31st October 2012 at 23:03 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Looks like the public aren't too bothered.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/oct/23/wind-shale-gas-icm-poll
The problem with opposing any particular form of energy generation is that you need to suggest an alternative and Gideon's "dash for gas" cannot possibly be a good idea. We need to be more self-supporting in terms of energy - not less.
How can gas price increases be attributed to wind farms?
Oh no - the thread's off again.
By: 31st October 2012 at 23:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-It is not 'gas' price ...it is 'energy' price ...get with the program(me) ;)
Hmmmmm the 'energy' companies are making vast profits ;)
Posts: 8,306
By: Lincoln 7 - 31st October 2012 at 09:21
Our local M.P. John Hays, recently made Energy Minister, is dead against Wind Farms, and the siting of any more.
One of his reasons, is that they affect Aircraft Radar :confused:
Is this true?.
Jim.
Lincoln .7