Warning over planned Dorset wind farm (From Thisisdorset)
When news happens send us your pictures, video and views. Text BE to 80360 or contact us by email
Warning over planned Dorset wind farm
9:00am Sunday 19th August 2012 in News By Melanie Vass
WIND farm developer Eneco has been warned to produce the facts about its turbine proposals – or risk having its plans scuppered.
Frustrations bubbled over at a heated meeting, at which Eneco was accused of treating local residents “like children”.
And it ended with a stark threat from Bournemouth West MP Conor Burns, who said he would ask the Secretary of State to intervene if Eneco did not “up their game”.
Local MPs, councillors and tourism representatives have long complained about a lack of meaningful information from Eneco, which wants to build the Navitus Bay wind farm on a 76-square mile site off the Swanage coast.
Eneco has not yet said how many turbines there will be – although Mr Burns said the meeting heard it could be as many as 333 – how high they will be or where they will be located. It has also not produced any images showing the impact from the coast.
Mr Burns said: “How can they tell us how much power the turbines will generate but not how many there will be and what size they will be?
“I told them trust had broken down between them and us and unless that is transformed, I will do everything I can to get the Secretary of State to stop this.”
Local councillors and MPs are only consultees on the wind farm project, as the seabed is owned by the Crown Estate. The Secretary of State is the only person who could scupper Eneco’s plans.
Bournemouth council leader Cllr John Beesley stressed they were open-minded on the scheme but said dealing with Eneco was “immensely frustrating”.
“They tell us no decisions have been made, well quite frankly I don’t believe that and I don’t think anybody else in the room believed it either,” he said.
“I told them some months ago they were treating local people, businesses and the public sector with contempt, treating us with extreme naivety, treating us as though we were children.”
And Mike Francis, of the Bournemouth Tourism Management Board, said: “Basically all they have done is treated us like idiots. We’ve been patient for a year listening to the various speeches they have made but we’re still none the wiser.”
- In a statement, Eneco said: “Members of the Navitus Bay Development Ltd team met with Conor Burns MP and other local elected officials and civic representatives as part of an ongoing and extensive programme of consultation.
“Forthright views were expressed at the meeting that reflects the fact that this is a very important and highly complex proposal and therefore we welcome them.
“In line with this the Navitus Bay team committed to make the consultation process as open and transparent as possible, which would include addressing the specific concerns raised at the meeting.
“A further round of public consultation is scheduled for November and by that stage many of the technical issues, concerns and options raised during previous rounds will have been addressed so that the community can gain a comprehensive, fair and accurate impression of what is being proposed.
“This response will include detailed visualisations and initial findings from the environmental impact assessment, digital imagery and a comprehensive review of the economic implications.”
Comments(32)
Azphreal
says...
10:20am Sun 19 Aug 12
Turtlebay
says...
10:23am Sun 19 Aug 12
http://www.eneco.com
/organisation/Shareh
olders/Pages/Default
.aspx
penhale
says...
10:26am Sun 19 Aug 12
Turtlebay wrote:Probably because our country is owned by the E.U thanks to consecutive governments selling us out.
Why is a Dutch company so interested in placing these generators off OUR coastline?
http://www.eneco.com
/organisation/Shareh
olders/Pages/Default
.aspx
Tony Trent
says...
10:49am Sun 19 Aug 12
Turtlebay wrote:Because WE need the energy, and there are some in the Government (and the previous Government) that have had the sense to realise this. They are not all shareholders in the gas, oil & nuclear industries that stand to gain huge profits if they are the only game left in town. Before getting too excited about subsidies, as many will, it might be worth checking out the huge subsidies that will be needed to (a) clean up old, & (b) build new nuclear power stations. That might be almost as much, or possibly more, than was put in to bail the banks out. One final bit of information to the above poster...
Why is a Dutch company so interested in placing these generators off OUR coastline?
http://www.eneco.com
/organisation/Shareh
olders/Pages/Default
.aspx
Much of out water & sewerage companies, electricity suppliers, public transport & nearly all the oil companies are foreign owned, so what's different about wind generation? Foreign companies are bound to gain a lead over ours if we can't even get minor wind farm projects off the ground, and lose a nearby manufacturer. In some other countries wind turbines are quite commonplace. The NIMBY's are helping us become an even more backward country!
saynomore
says...
11:11am Sun 19 Aug 12
Redgolfer00
says...
11:26am Sun 19 Aug 12
saynomore wrote:Just because we do not play the ''tune'' that you pair want us to do, why are we ''Nimbys'' !!!.
Well said I agree with everthing you have said,we would all still be living in mud huts if the nimbys are listened to.Never mind "I told them some months ago they were treating local people, businesses and the public sector with contempt, treating us with extreme naivety, treating us as though we were children.” The nimbys are acting like spoilt chidren in my opinion.
Why do the people of Dorset have to have those eyesores on our doorstep, why not produce ALL the facts concerning the site and then let the people of Dorset decide, please do not trust the idiots who produced the Reef, Imax and all the other C-----S to make decisions that effect all of our lives.
penhale
says...
11:49am Sun 19 Aug 12
Tony Trent wrote:We all need new ways of generating energy but the cost to the people of this country is extortionate compared to what we will get back, at least nuclear power doesn't rely on the wind blowing, wind farms, although majestic looking are uneconomical to operate and probably cancel out any co2 saving during the building of them, there are much more effective and constructive ways of harnessing power.
Turtlebay wrote:Because WE need the energy, and there are some in the Government (and the previous Government) that have had the sense to realise this. They are not all shareholders in the gas, oil & nuclear industries that stand to gain huge profits if they are the only game left in town. Before getting too excited about subsidies, as many will, it might be worth checking out the huge subsidies that will be needed to (a) clean up old, & (b) build new nuclear power stations. That might be almost as much, or possibly more, than was put in to bail the banks out. One final bit of information to the above poster...
Why is a Dutch company so interested in placing these generators off OUR coastline?
http://www.eneco.com
/organisation/Shareh
olders/Pages/Default
.aspx
Much of out water & sewerage companies, electricity suppliers, public transport & nearly all the oil companies are foreign owned, so what's different about wind generation? Foreign companies are bound to gain a lead over ours if we can't even get minor wind farm projects off the ground, and lose a nearby manufacturer. In some other countries wind turbines are quite commonplace. The NIMBY's are helping us become an even more backward country!
I believe that all this global warming hogwash has been concocted by a certain few as a scaremongering money making scam.
First the ozone layer was disappearing so we banned cfts in spray cans, then it was car emissions and somebody made millions out of that rubbish, when cars became cleaner they started on about cows ****, how they will clean that up I have no idea.
They must have a department somewhere full of men in suits thinking what they can dream up next to prove global warming of climate change as it was once known, that one died a death as well.
Nuclear is the way to go, at least it has proved itself to work whatever the weather and safety is much better now that 30 years ago.
We don't need hundreds of fans covering the planet which produces very little but fills the pockets of the scaremongers at our expense.
If these things get off the ground we will all be NIMBYs as you put it because we will all have one of these things in our own back yard.
Turtlebay
says...
11:57am Sun 19 Aug 12
penhale
says...
12:08pm Sun 19 Aug 12
Turtlebay wrote:To what do you refer, make yourself a little clearer.
And all because you believe the governmental brain washing tactics.
muscliffman
says...
12:49pm Sun 19 Aug 12
If you research the subject you will discover that the promoters of man-made global warming and it's reversal are almost inevitably those making money and or political power out of it.
How would people feel if senior politicians and their relatives were to be trousering money from this fiction..........do your homework because they are!
Mother nature determines the climate on this planet, not a bunch of clothed primates.
penhale
says...
1:03pm Sun 19 Aug 12
muscliffman wrote:Totally agree.
Funny really, they cannot possibly provide all the facts because it would expose the entire 'green' scam.
If you research the subject you will discover that the promoters of man-made global warming and it's reversal are almost inevitably those making money and or political power out of it.
How would people feel if senior politicians and their relatives were to be trousering money from this fiction..........do your homework because they are!
Mother nature determines the climate on this planet, not a bunch of clothed primates.
a.g.o.g.
says...
1:35pm Sun 19 Aug 12
penhale wrote:More like in our front gardens actually...
Tony Trent wrote:We all need new ways of generating energy but the cost to the people of this country is extortionate compared to what we will get back, at least nuclear power doesn't rely on the wind blowing, wind farms, although majestic looking are uneconomical to operate and probably cancel out any co2 saving during the building of them, there are much more effective and constructive ways of harnessing power. I believe that all this global warming hogwash has been concocted by a certain few as a scaremongering money making scam. First the ozone layer was disappearing so we banned cfts in spray cans, then it was car emissions and somebody made millions out of that rubbish, when cars became cleaner they started on about cows ****, how they will clean that up I have no idea. They must have a department somewhere full of men in suits thinking what they can dream up next to prove global warming of climate change as it was once known, that one died a death as well. Nuclear is the way to go, at least it has proved itself to work whatever the weather and safety is much better now that 30 years ago. We don't need hundreds of fans covering the planet which produces very little but fills the pockets of the scaremongers at our expense. If these things get off the ground we will all be NIMBYs as you put it because we will all have one of these things in our own back yard.Turtlebay wrote: Why is a Dutch company so interested in placing these generators off OUR coastline? http://www.eneco.com /organisation/Shareh olders/Pages/Default .aspxBecause WE need the energy, and there are some in the Government (and the previous Government) that have had the sense to realise this. They are not all shareholders in the gas, oil & nuclear industries that stand to gain huge profits if they are the only game left in town. Before getting too excited about subsidies, as many will, it might be worth checking out the huge subsidies that will be needed to (a) clean up old, & (b) build new nuclear power stations. That might be almost as much, or possibly more, than was put in to bail the banks out. One final bit of information to the above poster... Much of out water & sewerage companies, electricity suppliers, public transport & nearly all the oil companies are foreign owned, so what's different about wind generation? Foreign companies are bound to gain a lead over ours if we can't even get minor wind farm projects off the ground, and lose a nearby manufacturer. In some other countries wind turbines are quite commonplace. The NIMBY's are helping us become an even more backward country!
The UK may have committed itself to making an offering to carbon reduction by use of solar,wind collection methods but that doesn`t mean we should have an enormous wind power plant plonked in such a premier position when it could equally and likely more benificailly be sited away from highly populated, visitted yet still scenic conurbations such as ours.
Unfortunately the more technical downsides of collecting wind energy
in such a busy shipping as well as residential region of our Southern coastline seem to be beyond the grasp of they speaking on our behalf.
Sunny days in our Region with a nice mild South Westerly breeze might well become as rare as hen`s teeth if they dio not.
Nickolai
says...
4:19pm Sun 19 Aug 12
Red Grouse
says...
4:34pm Sun 19 Aug 12
Turtlebay wrote:The answer is the huge production subsidies that we are offering.
Why is a Dutch company so interested in placing these generators off OUR coastline?
http://www.eneco.com
/organisation/Shareh
olders/Pages/Default
.aspx
Government-commissio
ned research shows that UK industry is paying twice as much as our competitors in Green taxes and subsidies.
See: ‘An International Comparison of Energy and Climate Change Policies Impacting Energy Intensive Industries in Selected Countries’ (11 July 2012), ICF International for the Department of Business Innovation & Skills, BIS.
Downloadable from the BIS website: http://www.bis.gov.u
k/policies/business-
sectors/energy-inten
sive-industries/docu
mentation
Similarly, UK domestic consumers are being driven into fuel poverty by this lunacy. We have over 6.5 million households in fuel poverty, in some areas over 50% of households. These levies, taxes and subsidies are the most highly regressive form of taxation - they hit the poorest hardest.
Check the figures for yourself.
a.g.o.g.
says...
4:57pm Sun 19 Aug 12
a.g.o.g. wrote:....do not get a grip(intended ending).
penhale wrote:More like in our front gardens actually... The UK may have committed itself to making an offering to carbon reduction by use of solar,wind collection methods but that doesn`t mean we should have an enormous wind power plant plonked in such a premier position when it could equally and likely more benificailly be sited away from highly populated, visitted yet still scenic conurbations such as ours. Unfortunately the more technical downsides of collecting wind energy in such a busy shipping as well as residential region of our Southern coastline seem to be beyond the grasp of they speaking on our behalf. Sunny days in our Region with a nice mild South Westerly breeze might well become as rare as hen`s teeth if they dio not.Tony Trent wrote:We all need new ways of generating energy but the cost to the people of this country is extortionate compared to what we will get back, at least nuclear power doesn't rely on the wind blowing, wind farms, although majestic looking are uneconomical to operate and probably cancel out any co2 saving during the building of them, there are much more effective and constructive ways of harnessing power. I believe that all this global warming hogwash has been concocted by a certain few as a scaremongering money making scam. First the ozone layer was disappearing so we banned cfts in spray cans, then it was car emissions and somebody made millions out of that rubbish, when cars became cleaner they started on about cows ****, how they will clean that up I have no idea. They must have a department somewhere full of men in suits thinking what they can dream up next to prove global warming of climate change as it was once known, that one died a death as well. Nuclear is the way to go, at least it has proved itself to work whatever the weather and safety is much better now that 30 years ago. We don't need hundreds of fans covering the planet which produces very little but fills the pockets of the scaremongers at our expense. If these things get off the ground we will all be NIMBYs as you put it because we will all have one of these things in our own back yard.Turtlebay wrote: Why is a Dutch company so interested in placing these generators off OUR coastline? http://www.eneco.com /organisation/Shareh olders/Pages/Default .aspxBecause WE need the energy, and there are some in the Government (and the previous Government) that have had the sense to realise this. They are not all shareholders in the gas, oil & nuclear industries that stand to gain huge profits if they are the only game left in town. Before getting too excited about subsidies, as many will, it might be worth checking out the huge subsidies that will be needed to (a) clean up old, & (b) build new nuclear power stations. That might be almost as much, or possibly more, than was put in to bail the banks out. One final bit of information to the above poster... Much of out water & sewerage companies, electricity suppliers, public transport & nearly all the oil companies are foreign owned, so what's different about wind generation? Foreign companies are bound to gain a lead over ours if we can't even get minor wind farm projects off the ground, and lose a nearby manufacturer. In some other countries wind turbines are quite commonplace. The NIMBY's are helping us become an even more backward country!
Second Red Grouse input above........
is anybody out there listening tho`?
The Liberal
says...
6:12pm Sun 19 Aug 12
muscliffman wrote:In that case, pollution must be a scam too. So no matter how much toxic waste we dump into rivers, it has no effect. Yeah right. Better make sure you've got enough tin foil on your hat, mate.
Funny really, they cannot possibly provide all the facts because it would expose the entire 'green' scam.
If you research the subject you will discover that the promoters of man-made global warming and it's reversal are almost inevitably those making money and or political power out of it.
How would people feel if senior politicians and their relatives were to be trousering money from this fiction..........do your homework because they are!
Mother nature determines the climate on this planet, not a bunch of clothed primates.
a.g.o.g.
says...
6:52pm Sun 19 Aug 12
The Liberal wrote:No connection whatsoever....
muscliffman wrote: Funny really, they cannot possibly provide all the facts because it would expose the entire 'green' scam. If you research the subject you will discover that the promoters of man-made global warming and it's reversal are almost inevitably those making money and or political power out of it. How would people feel if senior politicians and their relatives were to be trousering money from this fiction..........do your homework because they are! Mother nature determines the climate on this planet, not a bunch of clothed primates.In that case, pollution must be a scam too. So no matter how much toxic waste we dump into rivers, it has no effect. Yeah right. Better make sure you've got enough tin foil on your hat, mate.
muscliffman
says...
8:21pm Sun 19 Aug 12
a.g.o.g. wrote:Exactly what I thought.
The Liberal wrote:No connection whatsoever....
muscliffman wrote: Funny really, they cannot possibly provide all the facts because it would expose the entire 'green' scam. If you research the subject you will discover that the promoters of man-made global warming and it's reversal are almost inevitably those making money and or political power out of it. How would people feel if senior politicians and their relatives were to be trousering money from this fiction..........do your homework because they are! Mother nature determines the climate on this planet, not a bunch of clothed primates.In that case, pollution must be a scam too. So no matter how much toxic waste we dump into rivers, it has no effect. Yeah right. Better make sure you've got enough tin foil on your hat, mate.
Illogical responses tend to happen when 'greens' are caught in a corner by patent reason.
E.G. If it's hot, if it's cold, if it rains. if it snows, if there is a drought, if there are floods, etc,etc, - manmade global warming is the cause every time!
Of course I do not favour man-made pollution, including sticking tons of expensive, unsightly and pointless rusting metal wind turbines in the sea off the coast (or anywhere else for that matter).
But bring on the next volcanic eruption, I think you will find Mother Nature runs the pollution show better than us as well.
fuzzy wuzzie
says...
9:27pm Sun 19 Aug 12
muscliffman wrote:Um muscliffeman chap have you ever heard of global dimming? I was like you until I read up about it. Do some research then you will understand the massive sting in the tail that we face over co2 and manmade pollutant reduction and the reversal of global dimming which has caused a 4% rise in light getting through the atmosphere over tha past decade. This is proven and once you get your head around global dimming which has been known about since the 1950ies the scam which you think it is will be blown away. I think your one of the older generation who has wasted all the fossil fuels and wants to wash his hands of any responsibility to pay for it.
a.g.o.g. wrote:Exactly what I thought.
The Liberal wrote:No connection whatsoever....
muscliffman wrote: Funny really, they cannot possibly provide all the facts because it would expose the entire 'green' scam. If you research the subject you will discover that the promoters of man-made global warming and it's reversal are almost inevitably those making money and or political power out of it. How would people feel if senior politicians and their relatives were to be trousering money from this fiction..........do your homework because they are! Mother nature determines the climate on this planet, not a bunch of clothed primates.In that case, pollution must be a scam too. So no matter how much toxic waste we dump into rivers, it has no effect. Yeah right. Better make sure you've got enough tin foil on your hat, mate.
Illogical responses tend to happen when 'greens' are caught in a corner by patent reason.
E.G. If it's hot, if it's cold, if it rains. if it snows, if there is a drought, if there are floods, etc,etc, - manmade global warming is the cause every time!
Of course I do not favour man-made pollution, including sticking tons of expensive, unsightly and pointless rusting metal wind turbines in the sea off the coast (or anywhere else for that matter).
But bring on the next volcanic eruption, I think you will find Mother Nature runs the pollution show better than us as well.
penhale
says...
9:38pm Sun 19 Aug 12
These are excuses for the more brain dead of modern society to get on their soap boxes and complain about something and also excuses to hike up taxes associated with fighting a non existent global warming ideology.
We have only been custodians of this planet for a very short time, this planet on the other hand has been around for millions of years and over that time it has heated and cooled a number of times, the only difference back then was that there were no self righteous hippies getting their tackle in a tangle over it.
muscliffman
says...
10:50pm Sun 19 Aug 12
fuzzy wuzzie wrote:I am aware of this 'dimming' aspect of the man-made global warming theory (and repeat I do not defend man-made pollution).
muscliffman wrote:Um muscliffeman chap have you ever heard of global dimming? I was like you until I read up about it. Do some research then you will understand the massive sting in the tail that we face over co2 and manmade pollutant reduction and the reversal of global dimming which has caused a 4% rise in light getting through the atmosphere over tha past decade. This is proven and once you get your head around global dimming which has been known about since the 1950ies the scam which you think it is will be blown away. I think your one of the older generation who has wasted all the fossil fuels and wants to wash his hands of any responsibility to pay for it.
a.g.o.g. wrote:Exactly what I thought.
The Liberal wrote:No connection whatsoever....
muscliffman wrote: Funny really, they cannot possibly provide all the facts because it would expose the entire 'green' scam. If you research the subject you will discover that the promoters of man-made global warming and it's reversal are almost inevitably those making money and or political power out of it. How would people feel if senior politicians and their relatives were to be trousering money from this fiction..........do your homework because they are! Mother nature determines the climate on this planet, not a bunch of clothed primates.In that case, pollution must be a scam too. So no matter how much toxic waste we dump into rivers, it has no effect. Yeah right. Better make sure you've got enough tin foil on your hat, mate.
Illogical responses tend to happen when 'greens' are caught in a corner by patent reason.
E.G. If it's hot, if it's cold, if it rains. if it snows, if there is a drought, if there are floods, etc,etc, - manmade global warming is the cause every time!
Of course I do not favour man-made pollution, including sticking tons of expensive, unsightly and pointless rusting metal wind turbines in the sea off the coast (or anywhere else for that matter).
But bring on the next volcanic eruption, I think you will find Mother Nature runs the pollution show better than us as well.
But, the investigation on this subject has only been carried out since the mid-fifties, less than a milli-milli second in the planets lifetime of climate evolution.
And this work is presumably undertaken by scientists dependant on governments for their funding (jobs). So finding nothing amiss really is not a good career move.
A classic 'green' research problem.
a.g.o.g.
says...
11:45pm Sun 19 Aug 12
Oddly tho` the chorus change from AGW to CC due to lack of supporting evidence rather coincided with the claimed 4% improvement in atmospheric light transmission.
Was it then that pollutants were causing the claimed GW and not the Co2?
Otherwise, you put anyone on a well paid mission to find signs of extra terrestrial visitation to Earth you can be sure..........
a.g.o.g.
says...
11:46pm Sun 19 Aug 12
Oddly tho` the chorus change from AGW to CC due to lack of supporting evidence rather coincided with the claimed 4% improvement in atmospheric light transmission.
Was it then that pollutants were causing the claimed GW and not the Co2?
Otherwise, you put anyone on a well paid mission to find signs of extra terrestrial visitation to Earth you can be sure..........
Stop Press
says...
12:14am Mon 20 Aug 12
CynicalSteve
says...
9:35am Mon 20 Aug 12
Redgolfer00 wrote:"why are we NIMBYs !!!. Why do the people of Dorset have to have these eyesores on our doorstep"
saynomore wrote:Just because we do not play the ''tune'' that you pair want us to do, why are we ''Nimbys'' !!!.
Well said I agree with everthing you have said,we would all still be living in mud huts if the nimbys are listened to.Never mind "I told them some months ago they were treating local people, businesses and the public sector with contempt, treating us with extreme naivety, treating us as though we were children.” The nimbys are acting like spoilt chidren in my opinion.
Why do the people of Dorset have to have those eyesores on our doorstep, why not produce ALL the facts concerning the site and then let the people of Dorset decide, please do not trust the idiots who produced the Reef, Imax and all the other C-----S to make decisions that effect all of our lives.
Classic. I think you might've just answered your own question there.
This article is about people not being given the facts, which is slightly ironic, because reading through the majority of these comments, there are an awful lot of people that don't know very much about this subject at all but still feel the need to try and influence the opinions of others.
Renewable energy is the harvesting of natural resources to create the energy that we need in our daily lives at a very small envirnmental cost. Yes you could have slightly cheaper energy if you relied solely on gas, although there would be both environmental and supply security implications were we as a country to go down that road, which is why the policy makers have rather sensibly not taken that course.
I'm completely fed up of hearing from selfish people that want to turn their lights and their computer on a daily basis, but aren't prepared to live with the consequences of doing so. How do you think the residents of the Goole valley feel being surrounded by coal power stations (which incidentally make wind turbines look small by comparison). The age of cheap energy is over, and it's about time we started making sensible decisions for the future rather than short sighted ones that will give us cheap energy this year or next year but will have serious implicaions for future generations.
There is absolutely no technical reason why this country could not operate on 100% renewable energy, it just takes the right attitude and willingness to look further than 5 years into the future.
geoffrey
says...
12:31pm Mon 20 Aug 12
a.g.o.g.
says...
1:29pm Mon 20 Aug 12
Yankee1
says...
11:05pm Mon 20 Aug 12
This is a boondoggle. A red herring. I would sooner see tidal generators at the mouths of Poole and Christchurch Harbours. At least that power will be consistent,. except at slack tides.
a.g.o.g.
says...
11:09pm Mon 20 Aug 12
Yankee1 wrote:And consistently low when not unfortunatlely.
The have no 'facts' - only projections which, like statistics, can be measured in any way to suit the party involved. This is a boondoggle. A red herring. I would sooner see tidal generators at the mouths of Poole and Christchurch Harbours. At least that power will be consistent,. except at slack tides.
Finbarr Finkelstein
says...
12:16pm Tue 21 Aug 12
a.g.o.g.
says...
1:12pm Tue 21 Aug 12
Finbarr Finkelstein wrote:you pay, they play. I beleive......
I had a cold call the other day from some company trying to sell me "carbon credits" as an investment. I could not even pretend to understand how that works
Hobie18007 says...
9:57am Sun 19 Aug 12