wind farms offshore a soft target for the Govt?

[navanal]

Does any body realise what the beaurocrats/ legislators within the DTi are forcing upon us now. See June edition of Sailing Today...
Having met huge resistance from 'nimby's to placing wind farms in beauty spots ashore- they are placing them offshore and out of sight - often in popular cruising areas.
Some are proposed for busy areas such as Thames Estuary and Eastern Irish sea. The DTi is proposing total exclusion zones around them- denying us the right of navigation anywhere near them. In the Thames, for instance, this would mean we wont be able to use those small channels that cut between the banks...-And what if we have a problem?- engine failure in no wind- and tide setting us on? Will we be prosecuted for entering the exclusion zone? Thats not to mention the danger of being cut to ribbons by the rotor blades....

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Boathook]

I read somewhere that the RYA were looking into this

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[navanal]

I think so...there is something on their website about it. Hopefully they are doing something- in the meantime the more people are aware of what's happening and the more media coverage it gets the more likely it is that the bureaucrats will back down.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Mirelle]

Are they really going to be a problem? After all, WW2 left us with AA forts scattered across the Thames Estuary, the Victorians left us pile lighthouses....and presumably these things will be located on banks rather than in channels?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[dickh]

There is one scheduled for the Gunfleet sands off Clacton - see<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.gunfleetsands.co.uk>http://www.gunfleetsands.co.uk</A>
I seem to recall the tip clearance will be 30m at HW springs

<hr width=100% size=1>dickh
I'd rather be sailing... /forums/images/icons/smile.gif<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by dickh on 10/06/2003 13:06 (server time).</FONT></P>

 

[seashaw]

As long as everybody is sensible and they don't put them in silly places, i really can not see a problem with offshore wind farms, in fact i think it is quite a good idea
Mark

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[FlyingSpud]

Personally, a big tower stuck on every sandbank in the Thames estuary sounds quite a good idea as the buggers are so easy to hit otherwise, and I tended to think sandbanks are sort of ‘no go’ arrears anyway.

The thing that always worries me is the Richard Montgomery. You ever wondered why they don’t move it? I was told if the cargo every went up it would take half of Southend and Sheerness with it.


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[NigeCh]

Cobblers !!!!

They will be all marked on the new set of Admiralty WGS84 charts and will act as waypoints plus unless you have an over 100' mast you won't get hit by a blade.

And if you are that cautious then you will hear their gearbox whine from at least 2 miles away.

As for exclusion zones .... Well, just ignore them - My reading is that the 'exclusion zones' only refer to the building process.

It's all good news as it should mean cheaper electricity for us all.

Progress is all about change and our seas are not exclusive to our indivual liesure sailing pleasures - I'm all for windmills at sea especially the Dublin-Arklow Bank and the Dengie Chicken windmills.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Peppermint]

Re: Lessons from Holland

During the many Oil Crisis we endured in the 70/80's the Dutch Government was quick to help it's nursery growers. Thats why they have rather a fine horticultural industry and we have mainly one man and a dog operations.

On of the grants available was for nurseries to install windturbines to generate electric. Soon every nursery sprouted a pylon with a whirling thingy. As soon as the grant was stopped down came all the thingies and they were sold on. The nurserymens headaches went away as soon as the noisy thingies were removed.

These were not on the scale of the turbines we are faced with today and that are a common site in Holland. They try to place them in "Brown Field" locations like Europort and other dockyard locations where they don't cause a nuisance, though I think they've got a programme of offshore pylons in build.

Still it's doing the IOW economy no harm at all. With so many of the blades been manufactured up the Medina.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[NigeCh]

Didn\'t the last survey reveal ...

that it was all sodden now?

Odd isn't it that a WWII USA cargo ship loaded with munitions was never blown up .... And if it ever does blow up and take out the surrounding 5 miles then that area will be just the same.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Mirelle]

Unfair to Kent!

OK it's not the loveliest corner of the Thames Estuary!

I fancy that, when she first stranded, the intention was to recover the cargo, but she broke her back and that became impractical and what with D day and all that other priorities took over so she just sat there.

Personally I think she is a wonderfully scary object to sail past, adds no end of local colour!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[AJW]

Recently went to North East Germany (NordostFriesland, Riddle of the Sands country) where there are hundreds of turbines dotted around the countryside. (Seems every man and his dog can build one in his small holding and then sell electricity to the National Grid. Couldnt decide whether they look good or not but did come to the conclusion that they are strangely hypnotic to watch and quite beautiful in a way.

I think if they are positioned with some thought they should give the Yachtsman no bother - they will be on sandbanks and do have quite a clearance. 'Course depending on the powers that be to site them correctly is another matter........

As far as the Richard Montgomery is concerned I suspect shes no more threat to the surrounding area than any bulk gas carrier steaming up the solent, thames etc and no-one worries about them!


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Twister_Ken]

Re: wind farms offshore a soft target for the Govt

>I read somewhere that the RYA were looking into this <

Oh, that's alright then.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>

 

[vyv_cox]

Re: Didn\'t the last survey reveal ...

If there's any likelihood of an explosion after this length of time, munitions makers must know a lot more about waterproofing than flares manufacturers do!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Twister_Ken]

\'scuse I

>And what if we have a problem?- engine failure in no wind- and tide setting us on? Will we be prosecuted for entering the exclusion zone? Thats not to mention the danger of being cut to ribbons by the rotor blades<

Eerr, no wind, no whirling blades, surely?

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>

 

[jimi]

Get real get more .. have wind will travel

There is of course , potential real synergies here. In Hydroelectric when there is a surplus of generated power, water is pumped up into the dam by the turbine. Similarly the wind turbines could be rotated when there is no wind thus creating wind for the yachtsman. In fact if there was a constant RPM of the turbines agreed it could automatically cut over when the wind fails to give enough power to sustain the RPM. The benefits would be a ample supply of constant wind speed. We therefore should be aiming for more wind tubines rather than less.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[pugwash]

Cobblers is right

Cheaper electricity my foot. Windfarms are a tremendous con. They generate power on average for less than one day in three which means conventional back-up systems have to be on hot standby (causing more CO2 pollution) The wind industry survives only because of massive subsidies. Denmark, which has the highest input of wind energy, also has the highest electricity prices. Despite the immense proliferation of windmills in some countries such as Germany, not a single power station has been shut down. The simple problem that Green-minded people simply cannot answer is this: what do you do when the wind drops?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[ParaHandy]

Re: Get real get more .. have wind will travel

oohhh .... can we demand an air-wick air freshener dangling of each and ..... !!

not only is this a truly astoundingly good idea, but with some co-ordination from Wind HQ local weather conditions can be changed eg if blowing a gale the turbine can whiz around in the opposite direction thus slowing the wind speed ....

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[graham]

Re: Cobblers is right

There is a tidal turbine recently constructed off Foreland point in the Bristol Channel. Im not sure if it is just experimental or if it will actually provide power.

With the tidal stream being accurately predictable you would think that this would be a better option than wind generators.

There is also a windfarm planned for one of the sandbanks off Porthcawl near Swansea ,causing much local nimby activity at the moment.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[FlyingSpud]

Re: Didn\'t the last survey reveal ...

I talked to a guy who was involved in the last survey and he said they still felt it was too dangerous to move.

Good point about the explosion improving the place

Frankly I’ve always had my doubts about the official story. How many boats were sunk in the estuary during the war? They were all dealt with ASAP, but not the Montgomery. If this was a film on conspiracy theories, I might suspect that there may be something a bit nastier than high explosive down there.

But that way lays madness, and anyway, if it were true, the next thing to happen is that MI6 whisks me off.

Hang on - there’s some guys just kicking down the door. I Agghhh……


<hr width=100% size=1>