80% of the public support on-shore wind farms apparently
Survey source: a windfarm business
France is the world's largest net exporter of electricity due to its very low cost of generation, and gains over €3 billion per year from this.
France's huge level of nuclear energy generation allows it to earn enough from exports to pay for a new reactor to be built every 2 years. That's not what they spend it on, but if they did, it only once, their export earnings would be a huge revenue stream.
If you have 6 sources of power generation, with nuclear being 70% of the total, Arguing that power in a wire being exported comes from the smallest source is inexplicable in its weirdness.
If you make a stew for four guests, your domestic consumption, and a fifth turns up, but you are able to ladle out a generous helping for them also, you'd have to be thick to argue that It's only the garlic, and parsley in the pot being served to them, when what's ending on their plate is stew indistinguishable from everyone else's.
I love how you call nuclear 'baseload only' as if that were a derogatory term. To make unreliable renewables behave as baseload is a massively costly, complex and stupid exercise. It's not been managed by any country, but it's what the ESB has been forced to attempt by Ireland' stupid prohibition on nuclear. Baseload is the holy grail for national grids and their operators.
Interconnectors, particularly the one planned to France, are a waste of money - €1.63b for something that doesn't generate anything. It's only 700 MW in capacity so it's not going to save the day if there's a two week long dunkelflaute causing high sitting over all of Europe's wind turbines, which has happened and the ESB have to plan for. Not only is the capacity too little to be of any real use, Europe is running a net power deficit at those times and no one has any to spare. The French of course just laugh at Germany and Denmark and Ireland and the UK who all have to start burning huge amounts of gas because they are overly dependent on fickle renewables. If that €1.6 billion were instead put towards a NPP, it would be better spent as that would contribute to self-sufficiency.
I didn't say the opposite (i.e. there is no need for windmills) was true. I said I didn't see the need for windmills (i.e. failing being given a good reason to need them, I can't see a need for them).
It's an agnostic rather than atheist position.
Just came past Arklow/Gorey on the train, thought the few turbines on the hill facing inland looked majestic. And yet again, before its said, I do have turbines near my house, no real noise until your within 200m, cattle grazing underneath, nice walks made around them. Like I said, I'd prefer Nuclear but until that day comes, I have no issue with turbines.
is there any low frequency noises from the turbines at night, i have recognized the noises at close range but....?
do you not feel entitled to free energy for having to live near necessary infrastructure?
"necessary infrastructure"?
So we have to save the environment by plastering it with giant, oil filled steel structures? Makes sense 👍️
we have to do it to generate energy and not be dependent on imports, as we don't produce enough fossil fuels of our own
Because that's all pie in the sky, they know that it's a big experiment,a project that will be rife with breakdowns and catastrophic failures.
OP starts poll, poll results tally with the report linked, OP isnt happy.
Moral of the story is, a large majority support wind farms.
I take it this is a wind up. No intelligent person could seriously think, believe & write something this stupid.
That can't be true. If a cow got near an evil turbine they would get epilepsy/mad cow disease/TB/deafness and many other things within minutes.
Don't you know wind turbines are the worst invention ever. Let's burn more things to make power instead.
You can take it for whatever you want.
Between wind turbines and 5g antennas it a wonder we are all not dead!!
Not at all, some people always want something for nothing but never crossed my mind. I'd understand the mentality if for people who were there before it was built and if there was a measurable affect on their physical health. Such a thing would not get built though for obvious reasons.
Once the construction adheres to planning regulations then it will not reduce the value.
Can you prove that and post a link? I have never seen a study that includes houses that cannot be sold, except for a loss that not everyone can afford. Some studies even group together houses dominated by windfarms with houses 10 km away, or even farther. And obviously, a restored farmhouse, a holiday development, or an "idyllic retreat" has more to lose. All I am saying is that there should be "zones" where someone who wants to develop a place like that can do so with confidence. Maybe there shouldn't be such places, in your book. But I think the country is big enough.
As for city houses, they always have "location" as a selling point, and will usually sell at market value, given time.
Can you post a link to show the price value decreases? you made the statement first
Plenty of villages/towns etc that are zoned for houses. You can be very sure if you build in a village/town/city the chances of a wind turbine are very very slim
Birdnuts, nobody loves pylons, motorways, wind farms or portaloos.
But we all love using them. I guarantee you, you'll use electricity to reply to this post.
Sold a derelict house that is 550m from the nearest 'monster'. Market price, new family in the area delighted with their build.
Well, the question is phrased would I support wind farms in my area. So the answer is no.
I would also argue that if someone has the residential area zoning or has recevied planning permission to build a house somewhere, we should not allow corporates to slap a wind farm on their ass. I think they can afford to buy out a few farmers if they're pressed to have the space.
It's not the poll I'm unhappy with, it's the nauseating sentiments of those posting in the thread - the majority of whom being city dwellers who have zero prospects of having their homes beside a windfarm, all vehemently in favour of installing more on-shore windfarms to appease their climate overlords. All at the expense of rural dwellers, wildlife and the very environmental wellbeing they are so desperate to defend. If only you could see the damage the local windfarm has done to my area...
Follows the same trend as those who drive electric cars thinking they are doing their bit for the environment, completely ignoring the heavy environmental impact battery manufacture has on other countries, but screw them, I have my own carbon credits/human shame to offload!
Interesting that you think everyone who disagrees with you is a city dweller, would love to know how you came to that conclusion
On a side note, the same poll on reddit that I posted a while back has 437 vote now, 391 for, 46 against, so an 89% support level.
Between that, and your poll which shows 77% support, the only conclusion one can draw is the original poll from WEI is pretty dang accurate in terms of support for wind turbines.
You don't like them, fair enough, seems like you are vastly outnumbered though
I live in the countryside. I purchased a house that was already built FYI.
I also grew up in the countryside and in an area which had Wind Turbines installed many many years ago. One of the first rollouts in Ireland. Apart from a tv reception issue at the start which was resolved the turbines had no issues and I know the farmers are glad of the extra cash in their pockets.
The biggest issue in that area and still is today is the amount of stupid sized houses that are built, with one person trying to outdo the last person in terms of size or just plain stupidity designs. Houses that in a few years time if they try to sell up the next person will have to do a massive overhaul because they are disgusting. Plus incredibly hard to heat etc
So far on this thread you have made zero valid arguments to counter wind turbines. Neither has anyone else, the main reason Ireland countryside is getting ruined is by one off housing. Stop that and then come back to me about wind turbines and what location they should be installed in
Also not sure why you are discussing electric cars but you also seem to not understand that technology either.
Mostly conjecture on your part, given you are against EVs whats your solution continue with diesel?
I didn't say everyone, I said the majority. If I made another poll and asked "Do you live beside a windfarm" and the same cohort answered, I guarantee it would be a 95% NO
I disagree on the 80% being an accurate representation, similar to you having to go to the environmental forums to rally support in this poll - the likelihood of someone making themselves available for an "environmentally concious" poll are likely those who are knee-deep in climate alarmism similar to yourself.
You can thank the banks for those stupidly large houses. They scaremongered people into thinking they'd never sell a bungalow just to lend way more than was necessary
EVs are absolutely not the solution. Unless they find a way of manufactring the batteries without plundering fresh water reserves of south america. Petrol is the way to go along with autonomous vehicles. Ireland is too far passed having a reliable rail network.
Mazda are doing great work to strive towards emissionless ICE (not that current ICE isn't clean enough already). Their only setback being that the brainwashed market compelled them to enter EV production to prevent themselves from going out of business, not for the want of delivering cleaner transport options...
The Banks are not architects and I own a bungalow. The banks had no issues with me buying it etc.
Do you have anything to back up that statement about the banks?
You are gone off on a tangent now about cars, best to discuss on an actual thread about the differences in cars etc
I disagree on the 80% being an accurate representation
Yet your own poll shows 77% and another posted elsewhere (89%) both come to nearly the same result. Its almost like the original 80% was pretty damn accurate
Also, calling the infrastructure forum an environmental forum is utter nonsense. I posted a link to your poll on a thread which discusses Energy Infrastructure in the country, if that isn't a relevant audience, I don't know what is
Besides, you posting in the conspiracy theorist riddled green policy thread would have more than balanced out and to be honest would have garnered more support for your view than if I'd posted it in that thread
You posted a poll and are angry with the result as it doesn't give you what you wanted, oh well
Either way, doesn't make much difference, the rollout of wind turbines will continue
Do you have any problem with the general public ruining unspoilt scenic landscapes with houses?
As already confirmed, the farmers/owners on this land gets paid. Still uncertain why someone else would be expected to get paid?
I'm not unhappy with the poll, I'm unhappy with how brainwashed people are by those with special interests, mainly, financial.
You should be more unhappy with the results given your apocalyptic view of the world - Why are almost 1 in 4 against something that is saving the planet?
It would be interesting to run a poll within a poll to see whether the view on windfarms tracks across other issues like the war in Ukraine and Covid. The mainstream media is big on climate change / vaccines & masks / pro-Ukraine.
Could this be simply Mainstrean Media Munchers vs Conspiracy Theorists (to use the pejorative term for both groups)
Me: am agnostic on climate change but suspect a scam / didn't vax thank God / hope Russia beats Nato in Ukraine.
So everyone who disagrees with you is brainwashed....
I think the comments already on the thread would suggest why people would not like them, majority down to ruining the countryside. Which I would 100% agree with if the countryside wasn't been ruined by unGodly one off housing
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/62877c35768f143f69acd7bb6cd43f3c.svg)