Corruption among Windies!

How the Wind Scam Is Destroying Europe’s Economy….Do We want to be Next?

/ 1957chev / Leave a comment

Europe’s Wind Powered Recipe for Economic Disaster

July 4, 2015 by

spain unemployment

****

Lessons from Europe: Recipe for a high-cost energy system
Communities Digital News
Steve Goreham
26 May 2015

CHICAGO, May 26, 2015 — While President Obama promotes renewable energy and members of Congress argue about energy policy, a renewable energy disaster is unfolding in Europe. Driven by a desire to halt climate change, Europe has created a high-cost energy system where everyone loses. U.S. policy leaders should learn from the debacle occurring overseas.

European energy policy today is dominated by the European Climate Change Program (ECCP), which was established by the European Community in 2000. The program called for the nations of Europe to adopt measures to cut greenhouse gas emissions. The goal was for Europe to collectively meet the targets of the Kyoto Protocol climate treaty signed in 1997.

The ECCP was based on two assumptions. The first was that changes to national energy systems were needed to fight global warming. Second, that coal, gas and oil fuels would become more expensive, allowing renewable energy to compete. But policies to promote renewables resulted in substantially higher electricity prices for Europe.

Europe used subsidies and mandates to promote renewables. Feed-in tariffs were enacted in most nations, providing a payment to homeowners and businesses for electricity fed into the grid from solar or wind facilities. Governments paid a fixed subsidy of four to 10 times the wholesale electricity price, guaranteed for up to 20 years, for generated electricity.

Electricity from renewables is also granted grid priority. Utilities are required to accept wind and solar-generated electricity as a first priority, regardless of market demand. Output from traditional coal, natural gas and nuclear plants is scaled back or shut down when renewable output is high. Wholesale electricity prices, once driven by market demand, are today dominated by the weather. When the wind blows and the sun shines, large amounts of electricity are dumped onto the grid from wind and solar installations, forcing wholesale electricity prices negative.

Other factors added to the growing debacle. In 2011, Germanyannounced a complete phase-out of nuclear power in the wake of the Fukushima disaster in Japan, closing nuclear power plants and straining the electrical system of Europe’s largest economy. In addition, Germany and France banned hydraulic fracturing, ensuring that European natural gas prices will remain high for the next decade.

The results of Europe’s green energy measures have been bizarre. Feed-in tariffs in Germany stimulated more than one million rooftop solar installations. But Germany is not exactly the sun belt. The latitude of central Germany is the same as that of Calgary, Canada. As a result, German solar installations generate electricity at less than 10 percent of rated output. Over a million solar installations provide only 6 percent of Germany’s electricity and 1 percent of the nation’s energy. For this solar miracle, German citizens are obligated to pay over $400 billion in current and future payments to solar providers through higher electricity rates.

Denmark erected over 5,000 wind turbine towers, one for every thousand Danish citizens. Turbines blanket the nation, providing a beautiful view of a 300- to 500-foot tall tower from almost every house, farm, field, forest and beach. But the turbines produce only 1.3 gigawatts each of electricity on average. All could be replaced by a single large conventional power plant. Today, Denmark has the highest electricity prices of the developed nations.

Europe has created an energy system where everyone loses. Consumers, industry, traditional power plants and even renewable energy companies are now losing. Even though wholesale electricity prices are falling, consumer electricity prices have doubled over the last 10 years due to large subsidy payments to renewable companies. Nations with the largest percentage of renewable energy also have the highest electricity prices.

Citizens of Spain pay 23 eurocents per kilowatt-hour, three times the U.S. price, and citizens of Germany and Denmark pay more than 25 eurocents per kilowatt-hour, four times the U.S. price.

European industrial companies are also big losers. French firms pay more than twice the U.S. electricity rate and German firms pay three times the rate. European industrial electricity rates have risen more than 50 percent since 2007, while U.S. industrial rates have been flat. European firms also pay double the U.S. price for natural gas. European chemical firms are now building plants in America to utilize low-cost ethane from shale fracking, a technology not available in Europe.

Traditional European electrical power companies are losing as well. The wholesale price of electricity is down 50 percent in the last five years and conventional plants can no longer break even. An example is the Irsching high-efficiency natural gas plant in Germany. Built in 2010, it can operate at 60 percent efficiency. But the plant is not profitable as a backup to renewables. In March, the owners announced a shutdown of the plant.

Last year, E.ON, the largest German utility, suffered its first loss in more than 50 years. Both E.ON and Swedish utility Vattenfall have announced plans to exit their conventional power plant business in Germany in favor of renewables. Magnus Hall, president of Vattenfall, stated last year, “It makes it difficult to see how you could invest in conventional generation under these circumstances.”

Finally, even renewable energy companies are now losing. European governments have realized that they can no longer afford the green energy revolution. Subsidies have recently been cut in Belgium, Germany, Greece, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom. In Germany, solar employment dropped 50 percent and many renewable companies declared bankruptcy. Spain ended its feed-in tariff subsidy and placed a cap on renewable industry profits, resulting in 75,000 lost renewable jobs and a 90 percent reduction in solar installations.

U.S. energy policy makers should learn from Europe’s energy experience and pursue sensible energy economics.

Steve Goreham is executive director of the Climate Science Coalition of America and author of the book The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism: Mankind and Climate Change Mania.
Communities Digital News

economics101

“Ellesworth American” Editorial – Speaks the Truth About the Wind Scam!

/ 1957chev / Leave a comment

Another reason to just say “No”

July 3, 2015 on Editorials, Opinion

Several good reasons exist to oppose the ongoing proliferation of giant windmills on Maine’s ridges and mountains. Recently, the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (DIF&W) added yet another one in its recommendation that the Weaver Wind farm proposed by SunEdison in the towns of Eastbrook and Osborn be rejected. The department cited what it considers unacceptable risks to birds and bats migrating through the Hancock County region where one wind farm already is operating and another has been permitted but not yet constructed.

The Bull Hill Wind farm includes 19 turbines, each 476 feet tall, in Township 16. SunEdison’s Hancock Wind farm in Townships 16 and 22, already permitted, will add 18 more of the three-bladed monsters. Those two projects were enough to cause staff at the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to voice concerns, in a June 15 analysis, about their cumulative effect on the bird and vulnerable bat populations in the area. The Weaver Wind farm would introduce 23 more turbines, each nearly 600 feet tall, into the mix. The DEP analysis made reference to DIF&W concerns “with the risks to migrating birds and bats” posed by the proposed Weaver Wind project. “Avian passage rate, which is an index to mortality risk, was the highest record for any project in northern New England and fatality estimates of birds at the nearby Bull Hill Wind Project also were the highest recorded in the region,” said the fish and wildlife department.

Some may regard the mortality risk to birds and bats posed by the windmill blades as inconsequential. Taken by itself, that risk may seem a small price to pay for wind farm development. But there are other compelling arguments against wind energy projects and the state policy that encourages them.

Much of the scenic beauty for which Maine is so widely known will be despoiled. The stated 2,700-Megawatt goal of Maine’s Wind Energy Act would require as many as 1,500 wind turbines, each hundreds of feet tall, with accompanying access roads and new transmission lines, on up to 300 miles of Maine’s hills and mountains. Those transmission lines, to carry the electricity that could be provided by a single, high-quality conventional generator, will add billions of dollars to New England electric bills.

Maine already is one of the cleanest states in the nation for CO2 emissions and the massive buildup of wind farms will not improve that, since almost 90 percent of our CO2 emissions are from sources other than electricity generation. The myth that wind will “get us off oil” is just that. Oil accounts for just two percent of Maine’s electricity generation.

But there is a major wind generation flaw — one that goes unaddressed by wind power advocates: it is both intermittent and unpredictable. It will not — indeed, it cannot — replace constant capacity generators that meet peak load and base load demands. A 2010 New England Wind Integration Study stated, “Wind’s intermittent nature would require increased reserves, ensuring that there are other generation options when the wind isn’t blowing.”

It’s unfortunate that such concerns fall largely on deaf ears in the small communities where wind farms are proposed. Former Governor John Baldacci and the Legislature did much to assure a warm welcome for such projects by requiring that developers provide thousands of dollars in ongoing community benefit funds for public purposes in such communities. Added sweeteners are the resulting temporary construction jobs, payments to property owners where the turbines are based and the very few permanent jobs that are created  — all of which benefit a handful of local residents while undermining Maine’s quality of place and imposing unnecessary extra statewide costs on taxpayers and ratepayers.

Notwithstanding the rosy and patently false picture painted by wind farm developers and their supporters, the costs and impacts of hundreds of land-based industrial wind turbines vastly exceed the minimal benefits. And despite all the hype, it remains likely that wind never will be more than a marginal supplier of electricity.

If the Dutch Hate Windmills, They Must Be Useless. Who would know better?

/ 1957chev / Leave a comment

Dutch Quixote: Why the Dutch oppose windmills

Credit:  Wind energy once powered the Netherlands. Not anymore | The Economist | Jul 4th 2015 | www.economist.com ~~

During its 17th-century golden age, the Netherlands was the world’s most enthusiastic exploiter of wind technology. Over 10,000 windmills dotted the landscape; the city walls of Amsterdam were crowned with a row of them. Today many Dutch find the stereotype of their country as the land of windmills irritating—and inaccurate. Wind turbines supplied just 5.2% of the Netherlands’ electricity in 2014, far behind Germany, Spain or Denmark. Renewable sources as a whole make up 4.2% of the country’s energy mix, putting the Netherlands 26th in the European Union, ahead only of Malta and Luxembourg.

That leaves the government in a fix. It has five years to meet an EU-wide mandate to generate 14% of energy from renewable sources. Among other things, it plans to build a lot of new wind turbines. This, however, runs up against the reason why the Netherlands has so few of them: a severe case of not-in-my-backyard syndrome. Almost everywhere new turbines are mooted, locals howl that they will be ugly and noisy. One proposed wind park prompted a group calling itself the Don Quixote Foundation to block a drawbridge on the 32km dike connecting North Holland and Friesland. The far-right Party for Freedom rails against “the sinister green-windmill subsidy complex”.

To minimise local anger, the government has turned to the sea. A national energy accord reached in 2013 calls for new wind parks in the North Sea that could generate 3,450 megawatts, more than triple the country’s current offshore capacity. But these parks are meeting resistance as well. Two of them will be as little as 18km from shore, within sight of beach towns north of The Hague. The town governments say the 200-metre masts will ruin the view and drive away German tourists. They want to push the parks back to an area midway between the Netherlands and Britain. The Dutch government says the more distant site would cost an extra €45m ($50m) per year, in part due to longer cables.

Those costs may be the least of the government’s worries. On June 24th a climate-action group won a suit in a Dutch court arguing that the government’s target for reducing greenhouse gases is not ambitious enough. Current policy would reduce emissions in 2020 to 17% below 1990 levels. But the court ruled that if the world’s governments cut 2020 emissions by anything less than 25%, it will ultimately put Dutch citizens in danger from rising sea levels. Since all governments should meet that 25% reduction, the court reasoned, the Dutch government must do so as well. If the decision is upheld, the government will have to slash emissions even further within five years.

Doing so is not impossible, says Pieter Boot, an economist at the Dutch government’s environmental assessment agency. The agency estimates that if the government fulfills its promises under the 2013 energy accord—which it is not currently on track to do—that could generate half of the necessary reductions. But more renewable energy would also be needed. New wind parks will not be part of the solution, as it would take five years to build them.

Despite the opposition to individual wind parks, polls show that over 70% of Dutch approve of wind energy in principle, a figure similar to Germany. The problem may simply be that the Netherlands is very densely populated; nearly every mast is in someone’s backyard. But other polls show that once turbines are built, local opposition tends to fade. As readers of Don Quixote know, not everyone liked 17th-century windmills either, at first.

Wind-Pushers in Denial, to Avoid Being Held Accountable…Gov’t covers up for them.

/ 1957chev / 1 Comment

Wind farm impact ‘under-assessed’

2 July 2015 by Press Association

The impact of wind farm noise and appearance on residents living nearby is sometimes under-assessed by developers, a report said
The impact of wind farm noise and appearance on residents living nearby is sometimes under-assessed by developers, a report said

Developers are sometimes under-assessing the impact of wind farm noise and appearance on residents living nearby, according to new research.

The two-year study looked at how the visual, shadow flicker and noise impacts predicted by developers at the planning stage of ten wind farms across Scotland compared to the reality once operational.

The test sites included wind farms at Dalswinton in Dumfries and Galloway, Achany in the Highlands, Drone Hill in the Borders, Hadyard Hill in South Ayrshire, Little Raith in Fife and West Knock Farm in Aberdeenshire.

In some cases what was set out in planning applications did not match the actual impact, the research by climate change body ClimateXChange concluded.

It also found that efforts to engage with the public had not always adequately prepared residents for the visual, shadow flicker and noise impacts of a development.

The information was gathered through a combination of residents’ surveys and assessments by professional consultants.

The report said: “T here was a reasonable correspondence between the predicted impacts at application stage and the study team’s assessment of the as-built impacts.

“However, there were some instances in respect of each of the topics where impacts were under-assessed.

“This divergence between objective measurement and experience of impacts was evident from the residents’ survey which captured a range of responses.

“In respect of all three types of impacts considered by the study there were instances where no or limited impacts were predicted by the expert team, but residents reported experiencing adverse impacts.

“This finding points to the difficulties of predicting or assessing experiential responses.

“It is therefore important that the assessment process and subsequent consideration of applications by relevant authorities takes account of this.”

Researchers said this could be achieved through good project siting and design, rigorous impact assessments and improved public engagement.

Project manager Ragne Low said: “As the study has focused on issues relating to the planning process, we are confident that the findings will feed into improved practice in measuring the predicted impacts of proposed wind farms and in communicating this to decision-makers and those likely to be affected.

“The findings point to several possible improvements in planning guidance and good practice.

“Some have been implemented in the time between the case study wind farms being planned and built, and the present. The study will contribute to building on these improvements.”

Linda Holt, spokeswoman for the campaign group S cotland Against Spin, welcomed the findings.

She said: “For too long, people who have complained about wind farms have been dismissed as nimbies and we applaud the energy minister Fergus Ewing for commissioning this work.

“The recommendations show that the planning system is ill-equipped to address potentially adverse impacts on wind farm neighbours and we urge the Scottish Government to lose no time in implementing them.

“For too long, decision-makers on wind farms have been asked to determine applications while blind-folded about the true impacts of placing enormous industrial machines near people’s homes.”

A spokesman for Scottish Renewables said: “This study highlights the high standards of guidance available for those planning an onshore wind farm in Scotland, and we were pleased to see the sector has been putting these into practice.

“The industry has long worked with government and its agencies to put these high standards in place and this report demonstrates how much we have continuously improved, while identifying areas for further improvements for future schemes.”

A Scottish Government spokeswoman said: ” We welcome the publication of the wind farm impacts study report which is the first of its kind in the world and presents the findings of a two-year study involving a wide-range of interest groups.

“The report shows improvements have already been made in our planning system, which is rigorous and ensures appropriate siting of wind farms, and studies like this will make sure this improvement continues, and we look forward to considering the recommendations carefully.

“Our policy on wind farm applications strikes a careful balance between maximizing Scotland’s huge green energy potential and protecting environmental interests and residential amenity.”

Those Wonderful Aussies are at it again!~ Love them! Fighting the Wind Scam!

/ 1957chev / Leave a comment

Senator Bob Day Aims the Blowtorch at the Great Wind Power Fraud

July 1, 2015 by 4 Comments

blow-torch_01

****

Bob Day is the Family First Senator for South Australia. He’s one of the good Senators sitting on the Senate’s Inquiry into the great wind power fraud; and he gets it.

Here’s a recent press release from Bob which requires no further introduction or comment from us.

WIND TURBINES NOW FACE OVERDUE SCRUTINY
Wednesday 24 June 2015

Family First Senator for South Australia Bob Day marked the end of the contentious Renewable Energy Target (RET) debate by welcoming new government commitments on wind turbines: “For a long time Family First has been receiving complaints about wind turbines.

When I was elected to the Senate in 2013 it became apparent that something needed to be done about this, so together with a number of Senate crossbenchers, I moved to establish a Senate inquiry. I have been deputy chair of this inquiry which has held hearings all over Australia,” he said.

“In at least fifteen (15) countries around the world, people from all walks of life have come forward complaining about the health impacts of wind turbines – nausea, blurred vision, vertigo, tachycardia, high blood pressure, ear pressure, tinnitus, headache, exacerbated migraine disorders, sleep deprivation, motion sensitivity and inner ear damage.

Many of these people initially welcomed turbines into their area. It has been found that the principal cause of these symptoms is ‘infrasound’ or low frequency noise which is emitted by wind turbines.

People living up to 10 kilometres from turbines have been affected. Acoustics experts, biologists, engineers, farmers, doctors, nurses, sleep experts, pharmacists and others have all come forward from throughout Australia and the world testifying about the impact that wind turbines have had on people’s lives.

Only now are non-English speaking countries finding voice about the impact of turbines in their backyards. Yet the wind turbine industry and its environmental supporters all claim this is either a conspiracy driven by anti-wind activists or it’s all psychological and have at times treated these victims in an offensive, dismissive and uncompassionate fashion.

To add insult to injury, wind turbines have had negative impacts on property values, have driven up power prices, compromised local shire councils and divided what were once friendly & harmonious communities.”

“After receiving evidence from well over 500 people all over the nation so far, the inquiry tabled an interim report which made several recommendations. Key among these were to:

  1. Improve scientific knowledge about the health impacts of wind turbines;
  1. Appoint a wind farm commissioner to provide independent assistance with complaints about wind turbines; and
  1. Ensure the government finance corporation responsible for funding renewable energy will stick to its charter of supporting new technologies rather than established technology like wind.

These measures put the brakes on the out-of-control wind turbine juggernaut so, at last, some oversight, scrutiny and accountability can be imposed on this damaging mass-scale energy experiment.”

“South Australians have been asking for these reforms on wind turbines. I have endeavoured to secure them.”

Senator Bob Day
24 June 2015

Senator Bob Day: determined to bring an end to the madness.

****

Now, while STT feels no need to add to Bob’s solid presentation of plain, old common sense, we’re moved to allow STT Champion, Annie Gardner to respond in terms that can only turn up the heat. As soon as it hit the network, Annie forwarded Bob’s Press Statement to all and sundry among our political betters and journos, along with this pointed missive.

Dear All,

I am forwarding to you all, Senator Bob Day’s recent Press Release, which outlines what the Senators have learnt since the Senate Inquiry into wind farms began hearings on 30th March 2015, in Portland.

To date, I am aware at least seven hearings have been held, with another in Sydney next week, with no doubt more disturbing revelations which have till now been denied, and swept under the carpet.

We thank Senator Day and his Senate Inquiry colleagues very much, for listening to so many rural Australians impacted by acoustic emissions from wind turbines, and for issuing, to begin with, the Interim Report from the Senate Inquiry, and for this Press Release, which really tells the TRUTH about what’s happening to thousands of innocent, hard-working rural Australians, the backbone of this country.

No matter what the outcome of the Senate Inquiry, whether it is acted upon, or deliberately ignored due to close association or direct pressure from the wind industry, the evidence is “out there” that there definitely are health impacts caused by the acoustic emissions from wind turbines.

We seize on Senator Day’s description of wind power as an energy “experiment”.  We have heard wind power described in this manner on several occasions previously, and the impacted families here at Macarthur align this description as an “experiment,” side by side with the Nuremberg code.

We are of the opinion we have been the “guinea pigs” with the “experiment” of AGL’s Macarthur wind energy facility, as have so many other rural Australians been used, in similar situations. Seehttp://waubrafoundation.org.au/resources/video-health-windfarms-experimentation-people/

Googling the Nuremberg Code Section 1, I read as follows –

“The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent, should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit …..”

Section 4 reads –

“The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.”

However, we DID NOT GIVE OUR INFORMED CONSENT to this energy “experiment” at the Macarthur Wind Factory. We had NO CHOICE in the matter.

We request that this experiment ceases IMMEDIATELY and that in particular, as we have requested of AGL hundreds of times to no avail, the wind turbines are TURNED OFF AT NIGHT, so we can sleep, just as Justice Muse ordered in the Falmouth Court case in the USA:

http://waubrafoundation.org.au/resources/falmouth-mass-judge-muse-decision-shut-down-wind-turbines-causing-irreparable-harm/

The Amended Renewable Energy Target passed in the Senate last week will ensure possibly double the amount of wind turbines constructed during the next four years, in order to reach this new target. As a result of this, thousands more rural Australians will be sentenced to a life of pain and suffering (without their consent) particularly as these new turbines will be considerably higher than the monsters here at Macarthur, and have far greater generating capacity, emitting far greater infrasound.

Those persons impacted as a result of this “energy experiment” will suffer ongoing sleep deprivation, as our families suffer constantly. Our sleep deprivation is most likely to increase with the most probable construction (thanks to the new RET deal) of yet another enormous wind farm to the north and east of our properties (Penshurst), literally surrounding our homes and farming properties with 365 monster turbines of at least 3, and possibly 4 megawatts (4 mw turbines never having been used in Australia before).

Sleep deprivation is recognised as TORTURE, by the UN Committee against Torture.

“The Committee against Torture (CAT) has noted that sleep deprivation used for prolonged periods constitutes a breach of the CAT, and is primarily used to break down the will of the detainee. Sleep deprivation can cause impaired memory and cognitive functioning, decreased short term memory, speech impairment, hallucinations, psychosis, lowered immunity, headaches, high blood pressure, cardiovascular disease, stress, anxiety and depression.”

The truth is emerging ….. countries such as the United Kingdom and Germany realise this and are taking action, whilst Australia is foolishly forging ahead with the very damaging Amended Renewable Energy Target, despite being warned ….. the consequences will be disastrous, both physically and financially, opening the door for what would appear to be, inevitable litigation.

Ann Gardner

Annie Gardner

Institute for Energy Research Tells the Truth About Renewables…

/ 1957chev / 2 Comments

One more time–fossil fuel based (coal fired) energy is the most affordable/efficient and it is clean

Posted on June 30, 2015 by  

You say could evil coal be clean enough–well it is.

And there is no air pollution risk that justifies the economic and human welfare damage that attaches to stupid renewables.

Nuke, Hydro, gas fired, coal in rank for emissions.

For affordable the ranks are hydro, coal, gas fired coal, gas, then the silly renewables like biomass, wind, with solar a dead last.

http://instituteforenergyresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/ier_lcoe_2015.pdf

The Beginning of the End….For the Corrupt Wind Industry!!

/ 1957chev / Leave a comment

Scots Go on the Offensive: Wind Power Outfits to be Sued & Wind Farms Shut Down Using Independent Noise Data

June 29, 2015 by

brave_shield3

****

As we pointed out in this recent post, the Scots are a tenacious bunch of lads and lassies:

Subsidies Scrapped: Scots Rejoice at Wind Industry’s Demise – Time for a Wee Highland Fling

Delighted with David Cameron’s win – which heralds the demise of the wind industry in the UK – Highlanders have turned their claymores on the calamity presently existing.

Thousands of bat-chomping, bird slicing, blade-chucking, pyrotechnic,sonic-torture devices have been speared across Scotland – destroying the ability of Scots to live in, use and otherwise enjoy their humble homes. Now, Scots are all set to turn the tables on their wind weasel tormentors – their weapon of choice: noise numbers.

Here’s a wee report from The Press and Journal on the Scots’ latest, and final, offensive.

Noise data new weapon in war on windfarms
The Press and Journal
Iain Ramage
22 June 2015

Protesters in the north are warning windfarm operators that some schemes could be shut down for breaching noise limits.

Highland activists are preparing to follow the lead of counterparts in England and Ireland who have collated extensive data they say proves that planning conditions have been flouted at a number of windfarms.

Campaigners in the north believe similar gauging of the industry in Scotland could open the floodgates for legal action against offending operators.

Sound estimates are usually carried out by developers as part of the groundwork for planning applications to give an indication of anticipated noise levels.

But there is currently no obligation to carry out monitoring once a scheme is built — at which stage councils merely respond to individual complaints about noise.

Residents living near a turbine development in Cambridgeshire have compiled what is thought to be the most comprehensive sound history of any UK windfarm.

Monitoring has taken place over two-and-a-half years, using industry-standard recording equipment to reveal what they claim have been regular breaches at the Cottonfarm scheme at Gravely.

Highland campaigners have seen the equipment operate and now plan to instal similar devices in the north. Bev Gray, 71, who worked in renewable energy before retiring, stopped holidaying in Scotland due to the spread of windfarms.

As an adviser to a residents’ group, he claims his local wind scheme – Cotton farm – is “one of the noisiest in the world”, based on data he gleaned by installing a £16,000 machine to measure the decibel output.

Residents there now want the equipment installed at every windfarm, at the owners’ expense, as part of planning conditions.

Mr Gray said: “Developer data is never tested because it’s always taken as being accurate.

“From a month’s worth of monitoring they take a minute’s worth of the lowest noise level to produce a figure.

“It’s part of the smoke and mirrors of an illusion that allows them to build windfarms close to homes.”

The Cotton farm scheme was taken over by a City of London investment group.

Spokesman Tom Rayner said: “Greencoat UK Wind has worked with the local environmental health officer to monitor noise levels and will continue to do so as required.”

Mr Gray said his data had been taken on board by the local authorities in south Cambridgeshire and would allow people to use “accurate information” as a basis for legal action.

“We’re gradually bringing the wind industry to account,” he said.

“At the moment they can do what the hell they like. Nobody can prove them wrong because the authorities aren’t monitoring things.”

Prominent Highland anti-windfarm campaigner Lyndsey Ward, from Beauly near Inverness, has visited Cambridge and Ireland to witness communities’ monitoring of various schemes. She said the move was prompted by plans tabled by ABO Wind for a turbine scheme at Allt Carach, south-west of Beauly.

She said: “The potential devastation on our lives from ABO Wind’s proposed 25-turbine development has forced us to research the noise issue in more depth.

“Our home would have the prevailing wind in direct line from the turbines. This is not just for us, but for others across Scotland.

“Sleep deprivation can lead to more serious illnesses. Why there’s no legislation to compel developers to constantly monitor their operations beggars belief.”

Tom Harrison, project manager with Inverness-based ABO Wind UK, said: “Allt Carach is still under investigation, therefore its planning submission is uncertain. We would always comply with any noise legislation or planning condition set by the relevant planning authority.

“Should a community have concerns over noise, after consultation with that relevant community, a decision as to whether noise monitoring equipment is required would be considered.”

On the plus side: Complaints ‘will be investigated’ and projects get ‘rigorous’ checks

Highland Council said last night it would investigate any complaints about noise levels at turbine developments.

An industry body insisted all projects were subjected to “rigorous” examination at the planning stage. A spokesman for the local authority said: “We seek to ensure that noise levels at a particular house nearby any turbine does not exceed minimum levels.

“Where there is a complaint this is investigated and, if necessary, a resolution sought to any breach of planning condition.”

Joss Blamire, of trade body Scottish Renewables, said: “All wind energy projects in Scotland go through a rigorous planning process that assesses the noise impacts of developments. Only those with acceptable impacts will be consented.”

Huntingdon District Council in Cambridgeshire plans to measure noise levels at Cottonfarm Windfarm after receiving a flood of complaints from residents in surrounding villages. The decision was prompted by evidence recorded by equipment installed by residents.

Locals argue the 413ft tall turbines were built too close to homes.

The sound of the turbines has been likened to that of an aircraft or helicopter in flight.
The Press and Journal

Before we turn to the tenacity and temerity of our Scottish brothers and sisters, we can’t help but notice the drivel pitched up by wind weasel advocate, Joss Blamire, where he blurbs about wind farm operations satisfying “rigourous planning processes”.

While it’s possible to refer to any “planning process” as “rigourous”, STT thinks that, in the general, we’re dealing in matters of degree, rather than absolutes. But when the benchmarks have been written by the applicant’s own team, the concept of “rigour” disappears, absolutely.

The wind industry has known about the debilitating impacts of incessant turbine generated low-frequency noise and infrasound for 30 years – getting its own to write noise ‘standards’ that deliberately excluded low-frequency noise and infrasound – allowing it to spear turbines within a stone’s throw of homes, and to run them around-the-clock:

Three Decades of Wind Industry Deception: A Chronology of a Global Conspiracy of Silence and Subterfuge

And, in that time, the wind industry has spent $millions pumping up pet acoustic consultants to lie, deceive and otherwise obfuscate the obvious – incessant night-time industrial noise kills a neighbour’s ability to sleep, which is itself an adverse health effect:

SA Farmers Paid $1 Million to Host 19 Turbines Tell Senate they “Would Never Do it Again” due to “Unbearable” Sleep-Destroying Noise

Sleep Deprivation the Most Common Adverse Health Effect Caused by Wind Turbine Noise

Wind Turbine Noise Deprives Farmers and Truckers of Essential Sleep & Creates Unnecessary Danger for All

Much easier to jump the hurdle, when you get to set the height of the bar.

Now to the Highlanders’ offensive.

With the rollout of more giant fans at an end, the Scots can now concentrate their forces on crushing their enemy where it stands. So much easier to destroy your adversary when the size of its force can no longer grow; its ‘supply’ lines have been cut; and it can no longer be reinforced.

In this battle, the good and righteous have always been outgunned: done in by political patsies, greased up by the beneficiaries of an endless stream of subsidies doled out by them. Now, however, the political tide has turned; the subsidies have been pulled to a halt; and the leeches have lost their subsidy-succour.

In their weakened state, wind power outfits will make easy prey for a group of dedicated, clever and rightly angry people.

When the malign and callous are called to account, their victims hold the choice between outright vengeance and mercy. The balance exercised depends on just how merciless were their antagonists when they held the whip hand.

In this case, it will only be the grace and inherent goodness of those whose lives have been wantonly destroyed that favours any kind of mercy.

Litigation is inevitable; compensation too. Injunctions will be granted and enforced – turbines will be shut down or removed.

Highlanders – like hard-pressed rural communities around the globe – have well and truly had enough.

Defence has turned to attack; outright victory is within reach. Wherever you are, no matter how dark the horizon seems, follow the Scots’ lead – keep fighting for what is rightfully yours. Never surrender.

Robert Browning pitched it right in Prospice: “For sudden the worst turns the best to the brave,”

winston-churchill-quotes

Bill Gates Admits that Wind & Solar are Not Suitable As An Energy Source… Spend $ On R&D!

/ 1957chev / Leave a comment

Switch green subsidies into R&D

It is interesting that there is no US media coverage of this perspective from Bill Gates.  This article comes from the UK.  The UK doesn’t utilize direct taxpayer subsidies like the USA, but instead has forced a “Feed-in Tariff” on the grid, forcing electricity costs to skyrocket.  This, in turn, has led to poor and working class people to endure what has been termed “energy poverty” such that they must sacrifice heavily on other things to try to keep the lights on.

Excerpts from the article:

“Retired software kingpin and richest man in the world Bill Gates has given his opinion that today’s renewable-energy technologies aren’t a viable solution for reducing CO2 levels, and governments should divert their green subsidies into R&D aimed at better answers.”

Gates refers to the cost of meeting electricity needs on renewables as “beyond astronomical”

“In Bill Gates’ view, the answer is for governments to divert the massive sums of money which are currently funneled to renewables owners to R&D instead. This would offer a chance of developing low-carbon technologies which actually can keep the lights on in the real world.”

Bill Gates scorns those ideologues who want to end all fossil fuels and run the world on wind & solar power in this interesting article.  Here is the link:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/06/26/gates_renewable_energy_cant…