Belthorn residents urge neighbouring villages to join anti-windfarm campaign

9:00pm Tuesday 4th August 2009 in Belthorn Photograph of the Author By Nafeesa Shan, Reporter

CHAIRMAN: Stuart Kaufman led the meeting for residents of Belthorn CHAIRMAN: Stuart Kaufman led the meeting for residents of Belthorn

RESIDENTS in an East Lancashire village are launching a campaign to stop a windfarm being built.

Opposition against the proposed 12 turbine site on the moors between Oswaldtwistle and Haslingden has gained momentum among Belthorn residents.

They are to contact neighbouring villages such as Guide, Hoddlesden and Pickup Bank which would also be effected.

Led by Stuart Kaufman, whose property will be nearest the proposed windfarm, the group has already started a petition which has been left in the Dog Inn.

There are 70-plus signatures against Energie Kontor’s proposal which would see the turbines built on land near the Grey Mare pub, Grane Road.

Residents say the land which the windfarm is proposed for is common land, which belongs to the people, and they will fight to protect it.

Energie Kontor initially bid to site 24 turbines, but this number has since been reduced to 12.

Belthorn residents met in the Dog Inn on Monday night.

They raised concerns and strong opposition to the windfarm on a number of grounds, including the visual impact which they feel could distract drivers along the notorious Grane Road, the adverse effects on health, noise generated from the turbines, the danger if a propellor were to break and the effects on the moors themselves.

One resident said: “It is quite clear we don’t want this and there are numerous reasons but we will not engage with anything until the application is in.”

Another resident said: “This will cause a distraction to people driving along the Grane Road, people will be slowing down to look at it and it only takes one distraction for an accident to happen.”

Jean Bain said: “If they get permission to build the windfarm it opens up the area to other developments such as industrial sites. This will set a precedent.”

Comments (29)

9:46pm Tue 4 Aug 09

happycyclist says...

Not In My Back Yard!
Not In My Back Yard! happycyclist

10:46pm Tue 4 Aug 09

pip-pip says...

Don't forget that Energie Kontor will be paying Prospects in Hyndburn £100,000 per year for the next 25 years IF they get planning permission. As these wind mills are hugely subsidisesd, directly and indirectly from taxation, this £100,000 per year should not be looked on as a gift from the gods. It is money out of all our pockets to fund a very dodgy business model. Both financially and energy production wise the plans are very iffy..
Don't forget that Energie Kontor will be paying Prospects in Hyndburn £100,000 per year for the next 25 years IF they get planning permission. As these wind mills are hugely subsidisesd, directly and indirectly from taxation, this £100,000 per year should not be looked on as a gift from the gods. It is money out of all our pockets to fund a very dodgy business model. Both financially and energy production wise the plans are very iffy.. pip-pip

7:30am Wed 5 Aug 09

happycyclist says...

Never mind offering Hyndburn council £100,000 per year as a bribe, how about offering the residents of Belthorn free electricity for the next 25 years?

Never mind offering Hyndburn council £100,000 per year as a bribe, how about offering the residents of Belthorn free electricity for the next 25 years? happycyclist

9:26am Wed 5 Aug 09

Jimmy Paterson says...

'they feel could distract drivers along the notorious Grane Road'

Well isn't this what Belthornites have been moaning about for the past god knows how many years? At least if drivers slow down to look at the windmills they won't be going as fast through your village???
The common land mentioned is actually not where the windmills would be sited - but a nice try to pull in the ninja ramblers!!
'they feel could distract drivers along the notorious Grane Road' Well isn't this what Belthornites have been moaning about for the past god knows how many years? At least if drivers slow down to look at the windmills they won't be going as fast through your village??? The common land mentioned is actually not where the windmills would be sited - but a nice try to pull in the ninja ramblers!! Jimmy Paterson

9:42am Wed 5 Aug 09

GP says...

Where can I sign up to show my support to the scheme?
Where can I sign up to show my support to the scheme? GP

10:00am Wed 5 Aug 09

Opti says...

Build a nuclear plant up there then.

I assume the people of Belthorn use electricity.

We already subsidise their road surfacing, utilities, broadband internet etc I don't see why they can't have a few wind turbines up there.

What is it that makes people think they have a god given right to 360 degree views anyway?
Build a nuclear plant up there then. I assume the people of Belthorn use electricity. We already subsidise their road surfacing, utilities, broadband internet etc I don't see why they can't have a few wind turbines up there. What is it that makes people think they have a god given right to 360 degree views anyway? Opti

11:27am Wed 5 Aug 09

HarwoodBiker says...

"Could distract drivers"? If people are easily enough distracted that a wind turbine could cause them to crash, they shouldn't be on the road in the first place.

And as for the 'adverse effects on health' - I've a good mind to put in a planning application to build a coal plant there, just to get on their nerves.
"Could distract drivers"? If people are easily enough distracted that a wind turbine could cause them to crash, they shouldn't be on the road in the first place. And as for the 'adverse effects on health' - I've a good mind to put in a planning application to build a coal plant there, just to get on their nerves. HarwoodBiker

12:16pm Wed 5 Aug 09

Have Yr Say says...

No one subsidises Belthorn's road surfacing, the residents there pay for it with their council tax, just like anyone else. As for utilities, broadband etc, most people usually pay this from their own hard earned monies.

Anyone interested in the fight please check out the Belthorn website www.belthornvillage.
co.uk and leave your contact details or check the comments page.
No one subsidises Belthorn's road surfacing, the residents there pay for it with their council tax, just like anyone else. As for utilities, broadband etc, most people usually pay this from their own hard earned monies. Anyone interested in the fight please check out the Belthorn website www.belthornvillage. co.uk and leave your contact details or check the comments page. Have Yr Say

2:08pm Wed 5 Aug 09

BelTower says...

When Opti & Harwood Biker eventually return from "La La Land" with their Nuclear/Coal "solutions" because be honest that isn't going to happen 3 miles from a major conurbation. Irrespective of any payout to Hyndburn Council, we are being asked to support a heavily subsidised and uneconomical system of generating electricity. Only a cynical politician or a mindless tree hugger would argue this method has credibility.
When Opti & Harwood Biker eventually return from "La La Land" with their Nuclear/Coal "solutions" because be honest that isn't going to happen 3 miles from a major conurbation. Irrespective of any payout to Hyndburn Council, we are being asked to support a heavily subsidised and uneconomical system of generating electricity. Only a cynical politician or a mindless tree hugger would argue this method has credibility. BelTower

2:50pm Wed 5 Aug 09

DavidBurnley says...

I'm sorry but I don't see the problem. There is a wind farm that has a road straight through the middle nr Burnley with very similar landscape to the Grane. I'm not aware of anyone ever having been distracted by the turbines.

Having stood directly underneath these on several occasions, I can testify that they are virtually silent other than the sound of the wind itself - which is not an unpleasant sound. If the farm is to be situated at the distance mentioned from Belthorn itself, then I doubt you will be able to hear anything at all.

Finally, the instances of turbine blades actually coming off 'in flight' is about as rarer than rocking horse poo! Such a small risk that I don't think it poses any great threat to residents - and even if it did happen, the RMP of these machines means it could not possibly fly far enough to hit a building and for around 280 out of every 360 degree turn a falling blade would go either straight up or down and not be flung off sideways.

I think the real issue is that the people in Belthorn just don't want a wind farm near them because they think it looks unsightly. That's a different argument and one that I'm not totally in disagreement with. What I would say is try not to use spurious and weak arguments that can easily be disproved to try and win a repreive because it won't work. If you don't want it because you think it looks bad, just be honest and say so.
I'm sorry but I don't see the problem. There is a wind farm that has a road straight through the middle nr Burnley with very similar landscape to the Grane. I'm not aware of anyone ever having been distracted by the turbines. Having stood directly underneath these on several occasions, I can testify that they are virtually silent other than the sound of the wind itself - which is not an unpleasant sound. If the farm is to be situated at the distance mentioned from Belthorn itself, then I doubt you will be able to hear anything at all. Finally, the instances of turbine blades actually coming off 'in flight' is about as rarer than rocking horse poo! Such a small risk that I don't think it poses any great threat to residents - and even if it did happen, the RMP of these machines means it could not possibly fly far enough to hit a building and for around 280 out of every 360 degree turn a falling blade would go either straight up or down and not be flung off sideways. I think the real issue is that the people in Belthorn just don't want a wind farm near them because they think it looks unsightly. That's a different argument and one that I'm not totally in disagreement with. What I would say is try not to use spurious and weak arguments that can easily be disproved to try and win a repreive because it won't work. If you don't want it because you think it looks bad, just be honest and say so. DavidBurnley

5:57pm Wed 5 Aug 09

Opti says...

So how *DO* the people of Belthorn want electricity to be produced, and more to the point, where?
So how *DO* the people of Belthorn want electricity to be produced, and more to the point, where? Opti

7:08pm Wed 5 Aug 09

BelTower says...

Opti
I thought we had a National Grid - or are you saying all towns have now to generate their own supply? Sensible points only please.....you've not thought this through have you
Opti I thought we had a National Grid - or are you saying all towns have now to generate their own supply? Sensible points only please.....you've not thought this through have you BelTower

7:29pm Wed 5 Aug 09

Nad says...

It's you and the rest of the Belthorn NIMBY's who haven't thought it through BelTower.

Can anyone out there tell me where I can sign up to support the project?
It's you and the rest of the Belthorn NIMBY's who haven't thought it through BelTower. Can anyone out there tell me where I can sign up to support the project? Nad

7:38pm Wed 5 Aug 09

Opti says...

BelTower...

I can only assume usage is going to increase rather than decrease.

Plus current stations will reach the end of their life at some point and will need to be decommissioned and new ones built.

Should the folks who have always suffered living near power stations always have to, so that people who have beautiful 360 degree views always get to?

That said I don't know what the problem is, there was talk of them coming to Darwen at one point, I for one would welcome them.
BelTower... I can only assume usage is going to increase rather than decrease. Plus current stations will reach the end of their life at some point and will need to be decommissioned and new ones built. Should the folks who have always suffered living near power stations always have to, so that people who have beautiful 360 degree views always get to? That said I don't know what the problem is, there was talk of them coming to Darwen at one point, I for one would welcome them. Opti

7:46pm Wed 5 Aug 09

sideways says...

i wish those living in belthorn and other rural areas would move and take their poxy dwellins with them... they are spoing the view from my window from my des res council slum , here in highercoft
i wish those living in belthorn and other rural areas would move and take their poxy dwellins with them... they are spoing the view from my window from my des res council slum , here in highercoft sideways

8:28pm Wed 5 Aug 09

BelTower says...

Sideways:
Thanks for the voice of reason.
It's not the actual equipment that's the issue here - it's the presumption that Wind Power will solve our energy problems, it can't and it won't. And whilst these multi national keep taking the "incentives" from government they will be queuing up to plough up vast tracts of land under the guise of a "green" agenda. Wind Power, Wave Power it's all tosh. There's only one answer - Nuclear, but no government has got the balls to adopt a potentially vote losing policy.
Sideways: Thanks for the voice of reason. It's not the actual equipment that's the issue here - it's the presumption that Wind Power will solve our energy problems, it can't and it won't. And whilst these multi national keep taking the "incentives" from government they will be queuing up to plough up vast tracts of land under the guise of a "green" agenda. Wind Power, Wave Power it's all tosh. There's only one answer - Nuclear, but no government has got the balls to adopt a potentially vote losing policy. BelTower

9:58am Thu 6 Aug 09

DavidBurnley says...

BelTower, you are ofcourse talking rubbish. Althought he current percentage of electricity produced by wind power is not very high, that fact is purely because there are not enough turbines.

The UK is the windiest country in Europe and could easily generate more than enough electricity from wind power (probably using a mix of off shore and land based wind farms) and become a massive exporter of electricity. We currently generate around 1% of our electricty using this method but could easily get up to 20% within a few years. It's safer, cleaner and looks better than nuclear power reactors.

Cmon Belthorn come clean and admit you just don't like the thought of looking at the turbines. It's nothing to do with econmics or danger posed by the turbines.
BelTower, you are ofcourse talking rubbish. Althought he current percentage of electricity produced by wind power is not very high, that fact is purely because there are not enough turbines. The UK is the windiest country in Europe and could easily generate more than enough electricity from wind power (probably using a mix of off shore and land based wind farms) and become a massive exporter of electricity. We currently generate around 1% of our electricty using this method but could easily get up to 20% within a few years. It's safer, cleaner and looks better than nuclear power reactors. Cmon Belthorn come clean and admit you just don't like the thought of looking at the turbines. It's nothing to do with econmics or danger posed by the turbines. DavidBurnley

11:31am Thu 6 Aug 09

Opti says...

'There's only one answer - Nuclear'

Tell it to the people of Chernobyl.
I know a repeat isn't likely but it's even less likely if we don't go down the nuclear route.

Anyway, last I heard, all the nuclear waste created to date is piling up while the powers that be decide what to do with it.
'There's only one answer - Nuclear' Tell it to the people of Chernobyl. I know a repeat isn't likely but it's even less likely if we don't go down the nuclear route. Anyway, last I heard, all the nuclear waste created to date is piling up while the powers that be decide what to do with it. Opti

11:37am Thu 6 Aug 09

Opti says...

Have a read of this,

http://news.bbc.co.u
k/1/hi/sci/tech/7421
879.stm
http://tinyurl.com/l
prb6j

Some snippets....
'Nineteen sites across the country, some dating from the 1950s, are due to be dismantled in the coming decades.

National Audit Office said that the cost of decommissioning ageing power sites had risen from £12bn to £73bn.

At the largest site, Sellafield, on the Cumbrian coast, I saw for myself one of the "ponds" in which an unknown mass of radioactive material was dumped in the 1950s.

For the moment the blocks - along with all nuclear waste - are stored in temporary facilities while the government decides where and when to build a long-term underground dump.'


Bring me turbines any day.
Have a read of this, http://news.bbc.co.u k/1/hi/sci/tech/7421 879.stm http://tinyurl.com/l prb6j Some snippets.... 'Nineteen sites across the country, some dating from the 1950s, are due to be dismantled in the coming decades. National Audit Office said that the cost of decommissioning ageing power sites had risen from £12bn to £73bn. At the largest site, Sellafield, on the Cumbrian coast, I saw for myself one of the "ponds" in which an unknown mass of radioactive material was dumped in the 1950s. For the moment the blocks - along with all nuclear waste - are stored in temporary facilities while the government decides where and when to build a long-term underground dump.' Bring me turbines any day. Opti

12:33pm Thu 6 Aug 09

Joseph Yossarian says...

Opti wrote:
So how *DO* the people of Belthorn want electricity to be produced, and more to the point, where?
In my back yard instead, presumably.
[quote][p][bold]Opti[/bold] wrote: So how *DO* the people of Belthorn want electricity to be produced, and more to the point, where?[/p][/quote]In my back yard instead, presumably. Joseph Yossarian

12:46pm Thu 6 Aug 09

BelTower says...

No one is saying we don't have sufficient wind in this country to generate power; but AGAIN at what cost! I disagree that wind power is cleaner, these things don't just grow out of the ground, the have to be manufactured, maintained and their lifespan is unproven. The audit office figures (which are 2007 I think) never took into account the ammount of power these stations will have generated in their lifetime balance against the cost of decommissioning. As for saying we can increase output easily from 1% to 20% Wow! again at what cost never mind the esthetics do the sums. As for Chernobyl admittedly unfortunate, but sadly old technology.
No one is saying we don't have sufficient wind in this country to generate power; but AGAIN at what cost! I disagree that wind power is cleaner, these things don't just grow out of the ground, the have to be manufactured, maintained and their lifespan is unproven. The audit office figures (which are 2007 I think) never took into account the ammount of power these stations will have generated in their lifetime balance against the cost of decommissioning. As for saying we can increase output easily from 1% to 20% Wow! again at what cost never mind the esthetics do the sums. As for Chernobyl admittedly unfortunate, but sadly old technology. BelTower

12:57pm Thu 6 Aug 09

DavidBurnley says...

BelTower, I think you need to do some research before you emabrras yourselves with this campaign. You're clearly out of date. The cost per unit of production for electricity from windfarms as opposed to nuclear is lower. That makes wind power cheaper once the infrastructure is in place. Admittedly, the turbines have to be manufactured, erected and maintained. From time to time, blades and other components would need to be replaced. That is provides an ongoing employment opportunity for those making, constructing and maintaining them.

I suppose you have seen the news items about the poor guys on the Isle of Wight who have been 'sitting in' to protect their jobs in a wind turbine blade factory? The main reason the company gives for these jobs going is the over complex and difficult planning laws in the UK to get wind farms agreed. It is an unfortunate fact that it is campaigns like yours that are costing these guys their jobs.

Sorry - I just think you are being oversensitive about something that actually looks ok and that is good for both employment and the environment.
BelTower, I think you need to do some research before you emabrras yourselves with this campaign. You're clearly out of date. The cost per unit of production for electricity from windfarms as opposed to nuclear is lower. That makes wind power cheaper once the infrastructure is in place. Admittedly, the turbines have to be manufactured, erected and maintained. From time to time, blades and other components would need to be replaced. That is provides an ongoing employment opportunity for those making, constructing and maintaining them. I suppose you have seen the news items about the poor guys on the Isle of Wight who have been 'sitting in' to protect their jobs in a wind turbine blade factory? The main reason the company gives for these jobs going is the over complex and difficult planning laws in the UK to get wind farms agreed. It is an unfortunate fact that it is campaigns like yours that are costing these guys their jobs. Sorry - I just think you are being oversensitive about something that actually looks ok and that is good for both employment and the environment. DavidBurnley

1:22pm Thu 6 Aug 09

BelTower says...

DavidBurnley
I am eternally grateful to you for pointing out I may have embarrassed myself, Why, How - All you have done is offered a contrary opinion and one that is continually spun by anyone with a "enviro" agenda. Thanks again but I happy with my comments. As for this campaign costing jobs -thats the fault of a poor business plan that doesn't stack up, not the fault of a small village who won't roll over because "the man" says so.
DavidBurnley I am eternally grateful to you for pointing out I may have embarrassed myself, Why, How - All you have done is offered a contrary opinion and one that is continually spun by anyone with a "enviro" agenda. Thanks again but I happy with my comments. As for this campaign costing jobs -thats the fault of a poor business plan that doesn't stack up, not the fault of a small village who won't roll over because "the man" says so. BelTower

1:32pm Thu 6 Aug 09

DavidBurnley says...

BelTower I have anything but an 'enviro' agenda - if anything I am anti green and I don't subscribe to the whole 'climate change is our fault' point of view.

I just think, and you are right that it's only a personal opinion' that the real reason behind why you don't wnat the turbines is that you don't like the way they look. Businesses don't just fail because of a poor business plan, there are many reasons. If the planning process in the UK is more complex than elsewhere, then obviously a business will choose to take the easy route and build elsewhere. That damages UK jobs whether you like it or not. I didn't say it was the fault of Belthorn that these guys are losing their jobs - I said it is campaigns like yours - of which there are a number - that cumulatively contribute.

As far as your information is concerned - I'm simply saying that you need to make sure that it is accurate if you want to have a chance of success. Some of what you have said so far is actually incorrect and can easily have holes picked in it - that wouldn't do your campaign any service would it?

Personally, I couldn't care less if they put turbines at Belthorn or not - it would just be a few more windmills up on the hills as I drive along the M65.
BelTower I have anything but an 'enviro' agenda - if anything I am anti green and I don't subscribe to the whole 'climate change is our fault' point of view. I just think, and you are right that it's only a personal opinion' that the real reason behind why you don't wnat the turbines is that you don't like the way they look. Businesses don't just fail because of a poor business plan, there are many reasons. If the planning process in the UK is more complex than elsewhere, then obviously a business will choose to take the easy route and build elsewhere. That damages UK jobs whether you like it or not. I didn't say it was the fault of Belthorn that these guys are losing their jobs - I said it is campaigns like yours - of which there are a number - that cumulatively contribute. As far as your information is concerned - I'm simply saying that you need to make sure that it is accurate if you want to have a chance of success. Some of what you have said so far is actually incorrect and can easily have holes picked in it - that wouldn't do your campaign any service would it? Personally, I couldn't care less if they put turbines at Belthorn or not - it would just be a few more windmills up on the hills as I drive along the M65. DavidBurnley

8:45pm Thu 6 Aug 09

Opti says...

So, in summary....

1) Belthorn don't want turbines as they aren't beautiful and have an unproven efficiency record.

2) Chernobyl was 'unfortunate'.

Fair enough.
So, in summary.... 1) Belthorn don't want turbines as they aren't beautiful and have an unproven efficiency record. 2) Chernobyl was 'unfortunate'. Fair enough. Opti

9:33am Sun 9 Aug 09

tosh103 says...

I can see turbines from my front window and dont mind them one bit!! Mat be the people from surrounding areas should boycot the bussinesses of belthorn ie their pubs(dog inn), builders ect ect if they want to be so self sufficient!! let them be
I can see turbines from my front window and dont mind them one bit!! Mat be the people from surrounding areas should boycot the bussinesses of belthorn ie their pubs(dog inn), builders ect ect if they want to be so self sufficient!! let them be tosh103

9:39am Sun 9 Aug 09

tosh103 says...

(carried on from message above) If they dont want to help the res of the world in reduceing green house gasses dont help them pay their mortgages bu using their bussines. May be they will have to move then and we will no longer have them complaining. I wont be spending any money that would go in to that village
(carried on from message above) If they dont want to help the res of the world in reduceing green house gasses dont help them pay their mortgages bu using their bussines. May be they will have to move then and we will no longer have them complaining. I wont be spending any money that would go in to that village tosh103

11:25pm Thu 20 Aug 09

Kapitan Erich Topp (U-552) says...

...and im quite sure that some of it went to an old mineshaft just outside Belthorn in the 1950's?
Low grade stuff from the nuke power stations,such as gloves,overalls etc.
The pit can still be seen just up the road from that pub that used to be an Italian for while...whatsitsname
???,cant think at the mo??
...and im quite sure that some of it went to an old mineshaft just outside Belthorn in the 1950's? Low grade stuff from the nuke power stations,such as gloves,overalls etc. The pit can still be seen just up the road from that pub that used to be an Italian for while...whatsitsname ???,cant think at the mo?? Kapitan Erich Topp (U-552)

11:27pm Thu 20 Aug 09

Kapitan Erich Topp (U-552) says...

oops! its seems Opti's post about Nuclear waste didnt attach to my post?
Thats what im trying to say above..
oops! its seems Opti's post about Nuclear waste didnt attach to my post? Thats what im trying to say above.. Kapitan Erich Topp (U-552)

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree