Proposed Wind Farm near Glaslyn

[darbeze]

I don’t know how many of you have heard but there’s a proposal for a wind farm on a section of land about 3km southeast of the track between Glaslyn and Bugeilyn.

I know wind farms are a controversial topic but this proposal is suggesting 26 (yes - 26) turbines, each at 220m (no I haven’t got that height wrong either). Add that to the elevation of the section (455 metres and up) and it’s clear this will have a significant impact on what we all know to be an exceptionally peaceful dark and wild area.

The plans are currently at initial consultation stage, village meetings have just happened. Currently the only submitted planning application is for a single temporary (3 years) turbine to assess the wind levels approx grid SN 84979 91828.

If you would like to object (and I understand not everyone will feel the same) please:

1. Object formally to the planning application for the initial turbine (you’ll be able to see where on the plans). https://pa.powys.gov.uk/online-applicat ... uNmYhDJZbY
2. Email Bute Energy esgairgaled@bute.energy and object to the Esgair Galed Energy Park

As well as your own objections, you might also like to mention:

• Nearby Osprey nesting
  The Lon Las Cymru cycle route
  Route 8 on the National Cycle Network
  The Glaslyn Nature Reserve
  Glyndwr’s Way - one of only three National Trails in Wales
  The Cambrian Way - not a National Trail but just as important
  The area’s unique network of BOATs and bridleways
  The importance of most of the above to the local economy
  Perhaps the history of Welsh countryside being ravaged to send water to England

If you feel so compelled, please let Bute Energy and the Local Authority know your feelings.

Let us keep the Cambrians as special as they can be...

Si

[Bearbonesnorm]

If you're struggling to imagine 220m, this should help give you an idea of scale. Yes, that's Blackpool Tower on the left.

[fatbikephil]

One of (many) things that annoys me about wind farm developments is the way they go about developments - put in for a large number of large turbines and if you get planning it's a bonus, otherwise at some point you agree to reduce the size and number, everyone heaves a sigh of relief and you get planning.... If they came at the beginning with an optimum size and array for a particular location, sh*t or bust, you'd have a degree more respect for them.

I was told that high level, remote arrays are now seen as a PIA as servicing is so costly given the need to drive for miles to get to them and affect by snow in the winter when they are needed the most.

[whitestone]

I have to admit to being somewhat ambivalent, on the fence, about wind farms.

On the one hand they certainly aren't aesthetic in any way and by their nature have to be in areas with (reasonably) reliable wind which does mean our more upland areas or a reasonable distance out to sea.

However, just where is the energy we all need going to come from if no-one wants the production facilities (of whatever nature) on their doorstep? The community where my sister-in-law and her husband live campaigned against a small (4 masts) wind farm. They then approved a floodlit football pitch! You really couldn't make it up.

All means of energy production have some down sides or side effects we (society we) just have to decide what costs we are prepared to accept for that energy.

[Bearbonesnorm]

However, just where is the energy we all need going to come from if no-one wants the production facilities (of whatever nature) on their doorstep? The community where my sister-in-law and her husband live campaigned against a small (4 masts) wind farm. They then approved a floodlit football pitch! You really couldn't make it up.

It's not always a case of nimbyism Bob, after all, it's not like we haven't got plenty already

[Lazarus]

exceptionally peaceful dark and wild area.

Well it won't stop it being peaceful or dark or wild and if it's windy it won't be that peaceful with or without them. They have to go somewhere and the M25 is not that windy.

If only CO2 and pollution ( or micron plastics
etc) were as visible as some turbines we might just save the planet

I don't find them particularly aesthetic or particularly ugly personally.and whilst I would prefer an untarnished view I also quite like a functioning planet.

Edit doing a Bivvy and what I can see is a 350m mast on top of a 440 m hill... You get used to it ( never seen it without all the masts)

[whitestone]

However, just where is the energy we all need going to come from if no-one wants the production facilities (of whatever nature) on their doorstep? The community where my sister-in-law and her husband live campaigned against a small (4 masts) wind farm. They then approved a floodlit football pitch! You really couldn't make it up.

It's not always a case of nimbyism Bob, after all, it's not like we haven't got plenty already

That's true Stu. I was, rather cack-handedly, trying to highlight the disconnect people have between production and consumption. It's the same with food - many have this idealised vision of farm maids wandering through an orchard feeding chickens and then collecting their eggs in a trugg* The reality of feeding several tens of millions of people suggests otherwise. I don't know how many GW of energy I use per year, more than some, less than others but it's likely more than the planet can afford. I recall a documentary (it was about the search for nuclear fusion) and they worked out how much of each "renewable" energy source was needed to replace oil within 25 years - it was something like a new nuclear power station every two weeks AND several hectares of solar panels every week AND some hundreds of wind turbines every week FOR 25 YEARS!

Using less might just be a lot easier

*other equally facetious pre-industrial farming stereotypes available on request

[RIP]

Going a bit OT... from the aesthetic/intrusion point of view it does seem very subjective and personal and sometimes people have hilarious double-standards....

Some folks round our way objected to one wind turbine because it spoiled their "view of beautiful countryside". The beautiful countryside was mainly a giant sterile prairie farm field and a chicken farm. Righto.

Another example was people insisting on tunnels for HS2 under the Chilterns. Well they didn't object when the six lane M40 carved its way through the very same location.

As Laz points out, there's also the myriad harmful things that people don't moan about because they can't see them.

I like Bob's excellent point about "disconnect". People are disconnected from the production of virtually everything now - power, food, clothing, minerals and much more. ALL of them have financial/environmental costs.

These sorts of discussions can keep us amused for hours .

[PaulB2]

220m seems colossal - the carno ones are about 80m to put that into perspective. Wouldn’t it make more sense to update the older Carno turbines with more modern designs? A quick wiki check says the first 56 were 600kw and the second set of 12 were 1300kw in the same footprint so you get at an extra 39mw with little environmental impact since you’d just be reusing existing sites

[fatbikephil]

this idealised vision of farm maids wandering through an orchard feeding chickens and then collecting their eggs in a trugg*

I thought that was your job, Bob

The issue with windfarms is that they don't generate much electricity for a very large environmental impact - the access roads, the footings and the energy needed to build and maintain them, not least all the impacts on flora and fauna. Calling it green energy is a complete misnomer - so is nuclear - you dig a rock out of the ground and lo and behold it provides free heat Whilst the negatives of nuclear get a lot of publicity, they at least generate a large amount of electricity reliably. The negatives of wind farms generally get glossed over, apart from the nimby stuff and the aesthetics (they are also bloody noisy)

Windfarms rely on gas power stations to take up slack in the grid demand and whilst a couple of pump storage schemes are being developed to do this, they are mega expensive and need specific topography to work.

Didn't we talk about this quite recently, I've just had a feeling of deja vu???

Straight forward hydro electricity is a reasonable bet as it can generate a lot of power for a small footprint. Micro schemes would be ideal if you could have local supplies rather than the grid. Getting rid of the grid would also be a good thing as then the southerners would have to generate their own electricity instead of it having to be transported from T' north down there, which is hugely inefficient.

[macinblack]

I like the look of wind farms and certainly prefer them to our old vista of a colliery and coal refining plant (with it's rotten eggs smell.) We have a small wind farm in view and I would be happy to have more of them around here. I don't find them particularly noisy and their installation didn't take long or cause any undue problems. Their existence hasn't resulted in any inconvienience from a servicing perspective.
That said, I do think they should site them in less sensitive areas before considering locations where there impact is greater. The trouble is, it seems wherever they are proposed, they are opposed. Same with solar farms.
I would say that some of the objections on that list garner less sympathy from me than others.

[whitestone]

I've seen talk of reinstating the site once the masts/turbines reach the end of their life but as Paul notes, surely once the base infrastructure is in place then the topside stuff can all be replaced/upgraded?

There was discussion on Countryfile about wind farms - turns out that so far "they" haven't figured out how to recycle the blades which are typically fibreglass or carbon fibre.

Micro-hydro schemes certainly have their place. A lot of disturbance during the installation but nature does hide things quite well given time. It'd be interesting to see the current state of the ground around the scheme being installed in 2017 above Loch Claire in Torridon. There's a micro scheme at Inverlael near Ullapool that has blended back into its surrounds very well.

[Lazarus]

Didn't we talk about this quite recently, I've just had a feeling of deja vu???

We did I raised pumping water from turbines ( as "batteries" and you explained how impractical it was. Forget which thread it was though

[Dean]

Micro-hydro schemes certainly have their place. A lot of disturbance during the installation but nature does hide things quite well given time. It'd be interesting to see the current state of the ground around the scheme being installed in 2017 above Loch Claire in Torridon. There's a micro scheme at Inverlael near Ullapool that has blended back into its surrounds very well.

I know the one, I went there to climb Beinn Dearg shortly after it was installed (2010?) and could already see how little visual impact it would have after the vegetation regrew (and the kilometres of pipes which are buried under the forestry roads). However massive wind turbine farms are about making money for shareholders and sending electric to big cities, it unfortunately is not in the same picture as a rural community coming together to become more energy sufficient. You would need a thousand micro schemes to potentially cover the energy creation of one turbine farm.

If people wanted to save energy they would switch from gas-to-the-house to pure electric as it is more energy efficient to burn gas in a power station and send the electric in a wire than to send the gas to your door and burn it in your kitchen. But bills would rise as gas is cheap and lots of people would need to rebuy kitchen appliances.

[Lazarus]

massive wind turbine farms are about making money for shareholders and sending electric to big cities

Welcome to capitalism but it is also about producing less CO2 than the alternatives.
Its more energy efficient to not use gas for electricity and to use renewable despite some local objections to powering cities. Perhaps anyone who can see a wind farm could get free or cheap electricity as part of the settlement?

[Bearbonesnorm]

Perhaps anyone who can see a wind farm could get free or cheap electricity as part of the settlement?

If only John. I think one of the things that probably irritates those who do live with them, is that there's generally absolutely no benefit to the local community.

In this specific case given that these would be the largest turbines ever erected on UK land, I'm struggling to see quite how they could be brought to site without causing massive (as in straightening roads, building bridges etc) disruption? On the subject of location, I do find it slightly odd and even a touch ironic that places like the Peak District which fairly heavily populated and in places quite industrialised and also fairly windy, won't get them as it has the protection of NP status, yet we're quite happy to tear the mountains up

Wouldn’t it make more sense to update the older Carno turbines with more modern designs? A quick wiki check says the first 56 were 600kw and the second set of 12 were 1300kw in the same footprint so you get at an extra 39mw with little environmental impact since you’d just be reusing existing sites

Quite possibly Paul but this is likely a different energy company and they all want a piece of the action. I don't know if it still stands but previously money was paid to 'erect turbines' and not to generate electricity, which is the reason many locally weren't connected to anything for years.

[Lazarus]

there's generally absolutely no benefit to the local community.

And this is the greatest issue with capitalism, selfishness and me first( Thatcher really changed peoples mindset from collective to self) . People think how do I benefit not does the country / planet/ society benefit. We base our decision on whether we personally benefit, hence my suggestion and they had a reason( we know there are reasons) to support them.
Same with cars or flights etc we all know we need to use them less/ not at all but there is no personal benefit to choosing this ( personal fitness aside) option its just personal inconvenience for the greater good. Almost no one chooses this as its not in their best interest.

I am not meaning to have a personal dig at anyone on the thread. I am not immune from this either. It's not like I would embrace a nuclear power station, where I live, for the greater good.

[Bearbonesnorm]

And this is the greatest issue with capitalism, selfishness and me first( Thatcher really changed peoples mindset from collective to self) . People think how do I benefit not does the country / planet/ society benefit. We base our decision on whether we personally benefit, hence my suggestion and they had a reason( we know there are reasons) to support them.
Same with cars or flights etc we all know we need to use them less/ not at all but there is no personal benefit to choosing this ( personal fitness aside) option its just personal inconvenience for the greater good. Almost no one chooses this as its not in their best interest.

I am not meaning to have a personal dig at anyone on the thread, I doubt I am immune from this either. It's not like I would embrace a nuclear power station, where I live, for the greater good.

I get that but you first need to prove that it is for the greater good and not simply a money making and / or box ticking exercise. As I said yesterday, it's not like we haven't got any already (some may argue, more than our fair share) but this is about location in a more specific and localised way and not simply about turbines yes or no. If as a whole, we were truly concerned about the greater good, then Kinder would have 50 or more on top.

[Alexpalacefan]

That's it, I'm done with this place, no better than STW.
What a load of selfish, ill-informed cobblers.
A

[Bearbonesnorm]

If hoping to preserve a wild (relatively speaking) upland area makes me selfish, then I will wear that cap. Obviously, trying to generate ever increasing amounts of power so people can continue to enjoy their dishwashers, TV in every room and a shower twice a day rather than aiming to reduce consumption isn't selfish at all.

[RIP]

"No better" than The Other Place. Ow, that stung .

Ah well. Hey-ho.

[fatbikephil]

I thought it was pretty constructive discussion with an acceptable modicum of personal opinions...
Oh well back to riding bikes with bags on folks....

[Lazarus]

[SARCASM] WELL YOU ARE WRONG AREN'T YOU [/SARCASM]
Problem is we can preserve(save) a planet or that view
Energy reduction is also part of the issue but the townies won't do that as no one wants the changes we need to do to save the planet not you not the dishwasher using twomy with an 8 ft TV.
Two wrongs don't make a right

[Bearbonesnorm]

To be fair, I didn't mention 'townies' as plenty of folk regardless of where they live, could do a lot more (or at least something) to reduce their energy consumption. I'm also not saying that we don't need or shouldn't have turbines, WHAT I'M SAYING AGAIN is that we should perhaps consider their location a little more carefully at times as not all proposed locations are ideal just because it happens to be windy. ... and yes, I noted the sarcasm.

[sean_iow]

As has been said, getting people to change if it is an inconvenience is the issue. Several of my friends have electric cars... they are all 2.5 tonnes + and 500bhp+. If they were tiny and slow would they be so keen, I doubt it. On a lighter note