Opinions
Category:
General and Impact on Views
Browse in :
All
> Topics
> General
(1550)
All > Topics > Impact on Landscape > Impact on Views (33)
Any of these categories
All > Topics > Impact on Landscape > Impact on Views (33)
Any of these categories
Is it right that a small number of people should make substantial financial gain from development that impacts so greatly on their neighbours and the surrounding landscape? Is it right that the Council should permit it? I think not, but your readers should judge for themselves as it is very likely that this type of development will be before the planning department very soon again.
But these are early days. It is one thing for St. Leon to play pioneer, to embrace the opportunities that a wind farm presents; it is quite another to force, shame or cajole people to join the pioneers against their wishes, or to expect people who have chosen to behold an open range from their property to give up that view to help electrify the concrete jungle of urban energy users.
But already some people are complaining about turbine's visual impact on the region's scenic landscape (Transcript story, Page 1 on Saturday). The 265-foot-high turbine can be seen clearly from many spots in Hancock, from Pontoosuc Lake in Lanesborough and Pittsfield and, we suspect, from a lot of other spots in surrounding communities.
This is only one windmill. Imagine the complaints to come when turbines begin to sprout up in the 10s and 20s and hundreds, in Hancock, Florida, Monroe, Savoy and off the waters of Cape Cod - if these projects come to fruition.
The wind turbines would be far taller than Jiminy's - from 350 feet to well over 400. Most would be built by out-of-state developers with substantial help from government subsidies (read taxpayers' subsidies) and would require significant tree cutting and road building, not only to get the turbines where they must be but also to connect them to the grid.
The residents of Berkshire County should seriously consider if the end result would be worth it.
Mr. Keller writes about surprise in "extent of the decline" in the production of the province's four wind farms. There is no surprise among those who have studying the bigger industry picture and are not seduced by the exaggerated claims made by the industry and its supporters. Perhaps that surprise comes from the dawning realization that these turbines are not all that they have made out to be.......
Wind generation is not even a partial solution to our energy needs, and climate concerns.
Also filed under [
Impact on Landscape|
Impact on People|
Noise|
Lighting|
Impact on Economy|
Property Values|
Canada]
I really hope that everyone on the west side of Bloomington keeps fighting against construction of a wind farm. The Ellsworth-Arrowsmith area is virtually destroyed by turbines as far as you can see complete with red flashing lights at night.
Many roads are virtually unusable because of damage caused by large trucks.
Wind farms should be built on tracts of land, as close together as possible. That's how they are done in Arizona. They shouldn't be scattered all over the countryside!
Wind power would seem to be a necessary component of any strategy by North Carolina to increase the amount of energy produced here from alternative sources. Put simply, there’s plenty of wind in these parts.
The downside is that sections of the state where wind currents are strongest and most consistent also happen to be ones that are heavily dependent on tourism and where there is an understandable priority on protecting natural views. That holds for the coast, and it holds for the mountains.
The issue of whether and how to take advantage of mountain winds now is before the state Utilities Commission. The commission yesterday held a hearing focused on a proposed Ashe County “wind farm” — 25 or so giant turbines that would be built near Creston in the state’s far northwest. It is easy to see why the project has stirred local opposition in an area where vacation-home development is an economic mainstay.
The Dartmoor Preservation Association applauds the two planning inspectors who have endorsed local democracy and upheld West Devon Council’s planning committee’s refusal of turbines at Yelland and now Lamerton.The deciding factor for both was the harm to the special landscapes surrounding Dartmoor National Park and the distant views to and from the high moor. Critical too for Lamerton was the quiet, still, distinctive local landscape which is the very special setting of Brent Tor Church and the scheduled barrows below it.
Take us up on this offer and we believe you will come to understand why most Highlanders have reached the conclusion this proposal is more about profit for a very few people at taxpayers’ expense than a viable source of new energy, and that it will destroy much more than the views we now enjoy. It will lead to the destruction of our natural heritage which, as outlined in our comprehensive land use plans, is the foundation of our promising future.