woodieallen
Established Member
Now that Ed 'Call me Adolf' Moribund is flexing his muscles while ignoring all scientific advice , has anyone seen a list of likely sites ?
Potential sites for new mega-solar farms
- Thread starter woodieallen
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
I think nowhere will be off limits, again they are not looking at the better solutions because rather than generate power for the grid they would initially be better targeting the new houses to reduce there demand for energy and use solar tiles on the roof which would reduce the demand or need for the large solar farms. Don't forget they are also going to put wind turbines everywhere because although a lot less efficient they are much cheaper than offshore so taking the easy way forward but must take into account the noise pollution on people living within about a mile.
Adam W.
A Major Clanger
I live within walking distance of at least 12 large wind turbines and any noise that they might possibly make is drowned out by the constant stream of rural traffic.
woodieallen
Established Member
Surely that's an oxymoron ?
We are rural and you can't hear any traffic. Guess there's 'rural' and 'rural' !!Ollie78
Established Member
There is already loads near me, from up on a hill they look like lakes. must be hectares of them.
For me the point of solar (and battery) would be to remove myself as much as possible from any reliance on the main power grid at all. making the grid solar seems like the opposite in a way.
For me the point of solar (and battery) would be to remove myself as much as possible from any reliance on the main power grid at all. making the grid solar seems like the opposite in a way.
woodieallen
Established Member
Whereabouts in Wiltshire are they, Ollie ? And are you 'off-grid' ?
Ollie78
Established Member
I am not off grid, but considering getting solar and battery to get maybe 90% independance.
I am in Swindon and there are tons of them here, though not all in wiltshire.
There is a couple in Wroughton and bassett down, a massive one at the old wroughon airfield / science museum, one at Stanton Fitzwarren on the road to highworth., one by the m4 near Wootton Bassett, another one at bradenstoke by lynham, one at south marston, one at roves farm near sevenhampton.
One at Castle Eaton, and at Purton, Melksham has some. I keep seeing them everywhere.
Last edited:
woodieallen
Established Member
Lot to be said for that. I'd possibly consider getting also an off-peak electricity supply to top the battery up for when the sun isn't shining much (167 days so far this year and counting)
SammyQ
Established Member
Whoa! Whoa! Whoa!
1. "targeting the new houses to reduce there (their?) demand for energy"
Yes, it would. But if it puts the prices up, and YOU as a twenty or thirty-something struggling to get a mortgage, would YOU financially herniate yourself to go solar tiles?
2. "Don't forget they are also going to put wind turbines everywhere because although a lot less efficient"
Than????
3. "they are much cheaper than offshore"
probably correct.
4. "but must take into account the noise pollution"
What noise pollution? Given their (usually) rural or semi-rural locations, where are the populace who will be directly affected by this exhorted problem? As said above, roads make more noise (depending on traffic, I know) but even the smallest one has ongoing CO, NO2, diesel fumes, PM 10's....
Spectric, please go down the road a mite to Seascale (or whatever they are calling it these days) and ask if they have successfully emptied those ponds full of radioactive material yet, instead of sounding off like a NIMBY in full soapbox mode.
Pretty please.
Last edited:
Terry - Somerset
Established Member
Replacing electricity generated using fossil fuels with green energy sources seems entirely sensible.
The cost of so doing will be huge - particularly as demand grows with decarbonisation of transport and bans on domestic gas boilers..
There are impacts arising from all forms of green generation - wind, solar, nuclear (?), onshore, offshore, tidal etc etc. Given time we could debate all options extensively and still fail to find a generally acceptable strategy.
As speed of transition is a high priority, the solution likely rests with that which delivers the maximum output at the lowest unit cost, subject to only a very limited number of constraints.
That some don't like the impact on their view, are worried about sheep failing to reproduce, concerned for birdlife, etc - tough. The defacto ban on onshore wind has latest 9 years - a completely futile delay which needs to be avoided in the future.
The cost of so doing will be huge - particularly as demand grows with decarbonisation of transport and bans on domestic gas boilers..
There are impacts arising from all forms of green generation - wind, solar, nuclear (?), onshore, offshore, tidal etc etc. Given time we could debate all options extensively and still fail to find a generally acceptable strategy.
As speed of transition is a high priority, the solution likely rests with that which delivers the maximum output at the lowest unit cost, subject to only a very limited number of constraints.
That some don't like the impact on their view, are worried about sheep failing to reproduce, concerned for birdlife, etc - tough. The defacto ban on onshore wind has latest 9 years - a completely futile delay which needs to be avoided in the future.
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
What scientific advice do you think he is ignoring?
I know one thing. It won't be in his backyard.
Ollie78
Established Member
I saw a report that said to stop birds hitting the turbines they just need to paint them a different colour or a pattern or something. Yet they are still always white.
woodieallen
Established Member
A good question but you already know the answer.
Jacob
New Luddism. Awake and resist!
er, no? Can you expand on this - there may be others too who don't know the answer.
Last edited:
John Brown
Freeloading Social media influenza
Maybe Jacob does, but I don't think I do. Could you spill the beans, please?
This part is important
With a properly insulated house it only requires minimal energy to keep warm and so as a thirty something the amount saved every month could be used to pay a little extra off the mortgage and reduce the term or put extra money in your pocket for the odd day out. Solar fitted during build is a lot cheaper than a retrofit and really it is a win all round.
They are less efficient on land than at sea, firstly at sea they are bigger and also they are apparently more efficient as they are not hindered by the landscape or buildings so get better airflow.
You are jumping the gun, they are in no rush to clean up the place because it employs everyone in the area and pays extravagant wages for minimal skill.
I have nothing against windturbines but you need to maximise the energy produced, we are surrounded by the sea where you can build large windfarms and produce vast amounts of energy, in comparison you could not build them so large on land and they would cover vast swathes of land to even get close to the offshore windfarms. Take Dodger bank in the north sea, 277 turbines powering six million homes with more on the way in the next phases. This is an interesting project as they are using HVDC for the connection to the grid. The blades on these are over 350ft, and 500ft tall to hub centre so where could you use such turbines on land . The noise is a low frequency resonance, a large blade cutting through the air cannot be quiet if it is consuming energy and the noise is more noticable in quiter areas because the road traffic noise is not hidding it.
woodieallen
Established Member
Google it ! Isn't that what you tell us to do ?
Last edited:
Blackswanwood
Still Learning
I’ve tried Googling it and cannot find an answer. What scientific advice is it that you feel he is ignoring please?Google it ! Isn't that what you tell us to do ?
