Darwen residents in call to suspend wind turbine applications (From Lancashire Telegraph)

Correct description, desecration of the landscape, thats exactly what it is and all for the greed of one individual. Ban this madness. I notice the applicant doesn't want it right outside her front door but instead outside someone elses.

I don't understand the problem. They're not noisy and I think they look quite nice. More importantly, I bet these people will be complaining in 10 years when electricity costs double what it does now because of people like them.

I'm sure all the people who object to these turbines and quite happy to use their tv's and mobile phones. The nimby's want to use the power and breath clean air yet they don't realise that solar and wind power are whats allowing them this. It's not the greed of the landowner but the greed of the power hungery gadget generation.

Harwood Biker and dude1971,

The arguments you have put forward only apply if you live in a mud hut, cycle to work, never holiday and live off the land. The gadget generation is something to which we all belong.

You are however missing the point of the objection or need our position explaining correctly.

I fully except that there is a requirement for renewable energy sources. However, it seems that these are being proposed without restriction and due regard to local residents or our landscape. Power creation at the expense of the people who have to live close to them is not acceptable. This does not just apply to the Cranberry Turbine but also the others which are being proposed elsewhere around the Borough. Get your local councillor to email you a copy of the technically preferred area's for wind turbines and you may be surprised!

We have beautiful landscape and to quote Blackburn with Darwen council "it's the greatest asset of the area". All we are asking that a set of up to date guidelines to protect residents and zoning to protect the landscape are implemented. We feel BwDBC policy ENV9 is ambiguous and we would like to see more clearly define rules on distance from residential property and zones where visual impact will be minimal.

If you are going to label us nimby's may i respectfully request that you do some research first. We all ready have farms very close by that have wind turbines. Turbines comensurate with the size and activities of their farm. These make a noise and are very visible, but have not had any complaints. Commercial wind turbines are an entirely different proposal and have no benefit to the residents of the town. If the applicant was saying "all excess power will be used to power local schools, the health centre" then that would be different.

Also to say we are the greedy ones without knowing what environmentally friendly devices residents have on their homes is a very cheap and very easy shot. One which is most certainly incorrect.

Kind Regards

Martin Vizzard
www.againstcranberry
turbine.com

Course they have benifits in that they are using a renewable source and the more we use renewable sources within commercial areas the less businesses will be hit by rocketing electric costs. We have to accept in modern times that we have to change and if its a choice between a Electric pylon or a Wind Turbine, I will have the turbine outside everytime.

Twicki1 wrote:
Course they have benifits in that they are using a renewable source and the more we use renewable sources within commercial areas the less businesses will be hit by rocketing electric costs. We have to accept in modern times that we have to change and if its a choice between a Electric pylon or a Wind Turbine, I will have the turbine outside everytime.

I think you are confused my friend, Pylons don't generate electricity and wind turbines dont distribute it. So there is a difference between ditribution and generation, Unless of course you have patented a new wind turbine pylon.
As stated above, this is of no benefit to any resident in Darwen except one, so it is done for greed and not to protect the enviroment. All it will achieve is to ruin someone elses life and the whole skyline of Darwen

If turbines were locally controlled and the generation went directly to the residents of the area would there be less opposition?

It has been argued that wind turbines are not the answer to the impending energy crisis. Too expensive, too inefficient, too much of an eyesore. How do residents of Darwen feel about a new fleet of nuclear power stations in the UK to bridge the impending energy gap?

escapefromdarwen13

Personally i havn't looked into the pro's and con's of nuclear power so cannot really comment. One thing we do have locally (and this is very topical), Jacks Key runs into the river Darwen all day (every day recently). Does anyone want to have a guess as to where this is going??

Get it built! I think these things are actually very beautiful and a great example of human engineering.
I wouldnt mind having one in my back garden at all.

Also, if it is a large turbine, the chances are that it will not only benefit the individual, but also reduce energy costs in the surrounding area since the turbine would generate more electricity than could be used by one home/business. Surplus energy is given back to the grid!

Any renewable energy is better than none!

Did all the residents of hollins grove area of darwen kick off when the power station was built at goosehouse? has it been a good thing or bad thing generating power over the years for foreign companies?
Your argument last time was the height of the turbine and i posed a question 'well what height will you accept if 88.5 mtrs is to tall for you'?
We all know now, not at any height.

I answered your question last time!

Did you read the part of my previous post where it said we can currently see and hear a turbine but have not complained or have you just chosen to ignore it to add weight to your own argument?

I am not about to disclose on a public forum what height would be acceptable to ALL local residents. That is for the developers to approach us, the council, Natural England to open the discussions.
Given that WE CURRENTLY HAVE a wind turbine close by which meets the needs of the farmer why would you come to the conclusion that we do not want a turbine of any height? Please talk me through your logic! Rather than issuing unsubstantiated accusations, maybe a little research. Not doing your homework means that it will be very easy to dismiss your point of view which is something i would not want to do. Everyone should do their homework then we can all discuss it as adults.

The first turbine which go's up will set a precedent for the area. It needs to be the correct decision.

Thanks

Martin Vizzard
www.againstcranberry
turbine.com

alexbuckland wrote:
Get it built! I think these things are actually very beautiful and a great example of human engineering.
I wouldnt mind having one in my back garden at all.

Also, if it is a large turbine, the chances are that it will not only benefit the individual, but also reduce energy costs in the surrounding area since the turbine would generate more electricity than could be used by one home/business. Surplus energy is given back to the grid!

Any renewable energy is better than none!

I'm all for wind turbines, but, they don't *give* electricity back to the grid.
The electricity is sold to the energy providers at a higher cost than they would normally produce it.
This leaves the energy provider out of pocket and will result in the rest of us paying more.
So that needs looking at.

escapefromdarwen13 wrote:
If turbines were locally controlled and the generation went directly to the residents of the area would there be less opposition?

It has been argued that wind turbines are not the answer to the impending energy crisis. Too expensive, too inefficient, too much of an eyesore. How do residents of Darwen feel about a new fleet of nuclear power stations in the UK to bridge the impending energy gap?

I'd sooner have nuclear all day long.

Mart8 wrote:
I answered your question last time!

Did you read the part of my previous post where it said we can currently see and hear a turbine but have not complained or have you just chosen to ignore it to add weight to your own argument?

I am not about to disclose on a public forum what height would be acceptable to ALL local residents. That is for the developers to approach us, the council, Natural England to open the discussions.
Given that WE CURRENTLY HAVE a wind turbine close by which meets the needs of the farmer why would you come to the conclusion that we do not want a turbine of any height? Please talk me through your logic! Rather than issuing unsubstantiated accusations, maybe a little research. Not doing your homework means that it will be very easy to dismiss your point of view which is something i would not want to do. Everyone should do their homework then we can all discuss it as adults.

The first turbine which go's up will set a precedent for the area. It needs to be the correct decision.

Thanks

Martin Vizzard
www.againstcranberry

turbine.com

Firstly may i congratulate you on your openess with your conviction and the use of your own name along with the meeting at whitehall country club which is a credit and serves as an inspiration to others who would like to make a change or question any system they think is unfair.....well done sir!
I do however find your response to me a little abrasive in the least, i did prime you knowing that because mrs gott had not her monster turbine she would be back with an application for a smaller one, and why shouldn't she?
We are all told that renewable energy has to be the way forward and we should embrace it, however it would appear that you believe otherwise when it's close by to where one lives.
I refuse to insult you by using cheap jibes about nimbys but i am struggling to understand the exact reasons for your refusal to accept the new proposal in light of it will be much smaller, therefore generating less, but is it not the case that every little helps regardless of who's house it actually feeds?
I, along with everyone else on here would like to know what substantiating evidence you have to indecate that it would set a precedent for the area with more being built?
I'll leave the adult bits out as in your post.

Mart8 wrote:
Harwood Biker and dude1971,

The arguments you have put forward only apply if you live in a mud hut, cycle to work, never holiday and live off the land. The gadget generation is something to which we all belong.

You are however missing the point of the objection or need our position explaining correctly.

I fully except that there is a requirement for renewable energy sources. However, it seems that these are being proposed without restriction and due regard to local residents or our landscape. Power creation at the expense of the people who have to live close to them is not acceptable. This does not just apply to the Cranberry Turbine but also the others which are being proposed elsewhere around the Borough. Get your local councillor to email you a copy of the technically preferred area's for wind turbines and you may be surprised!

We have beautiful landscape and to quote Blackburn with Darwen council "it's the greatest asset of the area". All we are asking that a set of up to date guidelines to protect residents and zoning to protect the landscape are implemented. We feel BwDBC policy ENV9 is ambiguous and we would like to see more clearly define rules on distance from residential property and zones where visual impact will be minimal.

If you are going to label us nimby's may i respectfully request that you do some research first. We all ready have farms very close by that have wind turbines. Turbines comensurate with the size and activities of their farm. These make a noise and are very visible, but have not had any complaints. Commercial wind turbines are an entirely different proposal and have no benefit to the residents of the town. If the applicant was saying "all excess power will be used to power local schools, the health centre" then that would be different.

Also to say we are the greedy ones without knowing what environmentally friendly devices residents have on their homes is a very cheap and very easy shot. One which is most certainly incorrect.

Kind Regards

Martin Vizzard
www.againstcranberry

turbine.com

Hi Martin,

Perhaps I was a little forthright with my comment before, however, I must still raise my objection with this:

"Commercial wind turbines are an entirely different proposal and have no benefit to the residents of the town. If the applicant was saying "all excess power will be used to power local schools, the health centre" then that would be different. "

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but don't these turbines all feed into the national grid?

Therefore everyone will benefit from these turbines.

The excess power cannot simply be reserved for individual uses, because the grid is used like a battery - it absorbs energy produced by the turbines whatever time of day, whereas if they were used only to power local loads then there would not be enough load to absorb all the energy produced!

But we should all see the benefit of cheap renewable energy in the end, and they have to go somewhere!

(although I am personally a big fan of offshore windfarms and I can see why you wouldn't want land-based wind farms nearby).

Cheers.