Richard Staveley - Better Generation

Nov 19

Relaxed laws on turbines at micro level should have come earlier....

Posted by: Richard Staveley | Comment (0)

To follow up on yesterday's very relevant blog, we thought that the announcement was important enough to include some additional material....

Nov 17

China leads the way in renewable energy development

Posted by: Richard Staveley | Comment (0)

The USA TODAY has reported that there is a surge of apprehension stateside as China continues to cement itself as leader in renewable energy development.

Experts believe the race is still on to be industry leader in research and manufacturing, but between the main contenders, China looks set to pull away from the chasing pack. On the positive, China leads the world in the production of solar cells which is the key component of solar panels, though on the negative 70% of China’s energy comes from coal - the biggest producer of carbon dioxide.

Nov 16

Hopes of securing new climate change legislation at COP15 fade

Posted by: Richard Staveley | Comment (0)

The burning question of the last few weeks, regarding whether or not major world leaders would be able to reach an agreement at COP15 has finally been answered, and not everybody is happy with the outcome. The Copenhagen talks, which run from December 7^th to the 18^th, hope to build on the 1997 Kyoto Protocol targets which will expire in 2012, have been dealt a significant blow.

Tagged in: WWF , Singapore , Russia , Lars Lokke Rasmussen , Kyoto Protocol , Joss Garmen , Japan , Hu Jintao , Greenpeace UK , Greenpeace , Ed Miliband , Diane McFadzien , Denmark , Copenhagen , COP15 , Connie Hedegaard , China , Barack Obama , Apec , Andrew Marr

Nov 12

Wind farm debate rages on as 2009 climate change summit looms

Posted by: Richard Staveley | Comment (0)

We are within a month of COP15 – the 2009 climate change summit, which this year is to be held in Copenhagen. As campaigners and politicians finalise their rallies, speeches, and propositions alike, the wind farm debate continues to rage on as strong as ever before.

A glance at the COP15 official website displays their latest news headline – ‘Stormy weather breaks Spanish wind energy record’. On Sunday, between the early hours of 3AM and 8.30AM, a whopping 53% of the country’s electricity demand was met by wind energy.Detractors will no doubt argue that electricity demand is at its lowest in the middle of the night, and that on this Sunday evening Spain was experiencing particularly savage storms. But the point remains, as head of the Spanish Wind Energy Association points out, the wind system in place in 2004 would not have been able to handle more than a 14% demand, and this represents phenomenal growth.

Another article announces that Suzlon Energy has signed a memorandum of understanding

with the Maldives, for a 25MW wind farm to be built at a cost of $40m (£24m), which, with a $200m farm planned already at Gaafaru, goes quite some distance to meeting the carbon neutral target the island nation has set itself by 2020.

Whilst we can take heart from such reports of renewable energy prowess, our potential to harness this wind energy here in the UK is hindered just as much by the average Nimby as technological limitations (Nimby being an acronym formed from the phrase ‘not in my back yard’). The Nimby is largely considered to be representative of the rural community who are against the ‘eyesore’ of the wind turbine.

The BWEA announced last week that the last two years have seen a drop in large wind farm approvals from 57% to an all time low of 25%. Gemma Grimes suggested that this was a reflection on politics becoming ‘more and more entrenched at the local level’. Adrian Snook, of ‘Stop the Spin’, a group who oppose ‘inappropriately placed turbines’, believes there are two key reasons why this group of people are so vehemently opposed to the wind farms.

Firstly Snook suggests that the government lacked a great deal of foresight, by subcontracting wind power jobs to large commercial energy companies, who in the past have made ‘vast fortunes’ by producing carbon dioxide from fossil fuels. These companies do not have the support from the rural dweller.

Secondly, Snook highlights that there is very little community incentive for the average individual living in the country. He maintains that turbines bring in no jobs, and that there is little material benefit, refuting suggestions that turbines can bring in any degree of tourism on the basis that fundamentally, these windmills are significant eyesores.

Peter Luff, a Conservative MP, proposed a bill last week, suggesting that a number of his constituents stood to suffer from the ‘noise, flicker effect, and resulting health effects’, associated with large scale wind turbines. He proposed a series of figures, largely relating to the distances the turbines should be located from residential houses. He suggested that, for example, a turbine of up to 100 metres should be no closer than a mile to its nearest house, though he would be happy to accept this as one kilometre, if forced to adhere to the metric system. Apparently he has failed to overlook the fact that one mile and one kilometre are in no way equidistant.

The aesthetic appeal of a wind turbine is a contentious issue. I believe the turbine is an object of beauty, signifying clean living and technological prowess. One Swedish journalist believes the turbine is a ‘graceful object’, which manages to create an awe inspiring balance of being both delicate and powerful. Yuriko Saito, of Contemporary Aesthetics believes that we can make the turbines more pleasing to the eye by being more selective over colour, shape, and height, arranging them in proportion to the landscape. Whilst I cannot imagine a better colour than the purity of white, I do not live in an area where there appears to be any danger of having a giant windmill land in my back garden.

Respondents to a County Life survey suggested that they found the wind turbine the ‘most egregious type of blemish across England’. Bearing in mind that this magazine claims to be ‘the home of premium property’, one has to question whether or not this can be entirely representative of the country dweller.

Adam Bruce, of the BWEA, has today responded to Snook in an article on the Guardian website. He has suggested that wind farm opponents must decide if they want electricity or not. Whilst we might not be facing this frightening conundrum right now, we will be one day and very possibly in our lifetime. He also claims that there are many rural inhabitants who support the wind farm, on account of the thousands of tourists that flock every year to see the turbines in all their glory. He also suggests that in some cases those who are to be directly affected by the farms have indeed been compensated significantly, in the form of part ownership of a wind farm.

This argument can and will go on. What do any of you think about this topical and imperative issue?