Wind turbines..

[imamartian]

There's just been a news story on our local news where wind turbines have been approved for a particular site in our region. But locals are campaining against them due to 'potential health risks'!!!!!

What sort of health risks could wind turbines pose....... unless of course you're really really tall!!

 

[Lincsbodger]

There's just been a news story on our local news where wind turbines have been approved for a particular site in our region. But locals are campaining against them due to 'potential health risks'!!!!!

What sort of health risks could wind turbines pose....... unless of course you're really really tall!!

Not to us, but big birds like swans an eagles (in the US) have a habit of failing to notice the massive great 36 Metre blades whirling round and plough into them with fairly conclusive results.

 

[imamartian]

Yeah that youtube vid of an eagle or a condor(?) was post on here the other week..

But these people are campaining against health risks to the local (human) population!!

 

[Gasman28]

Not to us, but big birds like swans an eagles (in the US) have a habit of failing to notice the massive great 36 Metre blades whirling round and plough into them with fairly conclusive results.

Not concerned what happens in the US, but we should have more inland wind turbines. That way, if birds do fly into the blades, hopefully, it will be Ducks etc - dinner

 

[ColJack]

what about noise polution?

potential for catastrophic failure ( did they ever find that 3rd blade from the one that was supposedly "hit by a ufo"? )

 

[Shutpa]

See here!

http://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...identifies-wind-turbine-syndrome-1766254.html

 

[imamartian]

what about noise polution?

potential for catastrophic failure

noise polution isn't a health risk is it? well not when is a wind turbine half a mile away.... surely the wind is louder?

and as for catastrophic falure, surely that can happen to anything? for example bridges... but people don't campaign against bridges do they?

 

[ColJack]

ah so they blame infrasound for it?

how about people who live on or near a main road? or in an area where the motorway or trains run? they've never had problems..
people living under powerlines? they hum all day and night..

these things should be miles from anywhere populated , maybe on top of mountains etc where no right minded person would put a house..

 

[imamartian]

See here!

http://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...es-wind-turbine-syndrome-1766254.html[/QUOTE]

Well i'll be.......!!!

 

[Lincsbodger]

what about noise polution?

potential for catastrophic failure

noise polution isn't a health risk is it? well not when is a wind turbine half a mile away.... surely the wind is louder?

and as for catastrophic falure, surely that can happen to anything? for example bridges... but people don't campaign against bridges do they?

ah you mean the Tacoma Narrows Collapse

Caused by the bridge deck being too thin, and when the wind blew it vibrated like a clarinet reed. After this, they started testing bridge models in a wind tunnel. The actual phenomena is called aeroelastic flutter.

or did you mean the Tay Bridge Disaster:

Which collapsed during a storm one night in December 1879, because they forgot to take into account wind laod and shear, taking a train carrying 75 people with it, killing them all.

 

[imamartian]

Linc, i didn't any of those specifically. Just that those sorts of things do happen, but people don't ever campaign against bridges being built!

 

[Lincsbodger]

Linc, i didn't any of those specifically. Just that those sorts of things do happen, but people don't ever campaign against bridges being built!

I was just providing helpful backup data

Those two are my favorites cos they both caused the methods of design or testing of bridges to change radically.

Never underestimate the wind............

 

[joe-90]

Never underestimate the wind............

Aye, it warms the bed on a frosty night.

 

[joinerjohn]

Wind farms are not a viable alternative power source anyway. The Danish Govt spent millions investing in offshore wind farms. A few years ago after extensive studies, they abandoned the investment. They reckoned even if they covered every square mile of their coastline with wind turbines, there would still be a power deficit to be met with nuclear or conventional power generating techniques. As for the costs involved, they reckoned they would never recoup the investment.
Labour Govt in this country were almost fanatical in their insistence that we move over to wind power. As it is this country is heavily dependant upon electricity from France and the continent, and probably will be until we build the next generation of nuclear power stations.

 

[Norcon]

Wind farms are not a viable alternative power source anyway. The Danish Govt spent millions investing in offshore wind farms. A few years ago after extensive studies, they abandoned the investment. They reckoned even if they covered every square mile of their coastline with wind turbines, there would still be a power deficit to be met with nuclear or conventional power generating techniques. As for the costs involved, they reckoned they would never recoup the investment.
Labour Govt in this country were almost fanatical in their insistence that we move over to wind power. As it is this country is heavily dependant upon electricity from France and the continent, and probably will be until we build the next generation of nuclear power stations.

Absolutely right. A complete waste of time, money and resources.