Made in Chelsea star returns to Dorset for windfarm campaign

Made in Chelsea star returns to Dorset for windfarm campaign

Francis Boulle is back in Dorset today backing anti-turbine campaign TAINT

Francis Boulle with other campaigners against TAINT

First published in News
Last updated
by

A TELEVISION star has returned to Dorset in support of a campaign against a proposed windfarm.

Made in Chelsea's Francis Boulle joined the Tolpuddle Against Industrial Turbines (TAINT) group at Waterston Manor today.

The manor was opened to the public for the first time to raise funds for the group and to celebrate 140 years since the publication of Thomas Hardy's Far From the Madding Crowd.

Renewable energy company West Coast Energy submitted a revised planning application for the wind farm near Tolpuddle last week, with the number of proposed turbines reduced from nine to five and the height of each turbine reduced from 126.5 metres to 115 metres.

But the new plans have not appeased TAINT, which has vowed to carry on fighting the proposals.

Mr Boulle has thrown his weight behind the campaign, and attended a similar event last year.

He said: “I am a big fan of clean energy and obviously we have got a responsibility to develop that.

“I used to be in favour of wind farms but when I started to read more into it I realised what a contradiction they are to clean energy, in the sense of production techniques used to build them and the blight on the country side that they are.

“They are a huge blight on the countryside.

“I am a Londoner but I love the British countryside and I really think it should be preserved.

“I am happy to support TAINT, it is something I strongly agree with and they will hopefully achieve a positive outcome which is for these turbines not to be installed.”

Richard Slocock, of TAINT, said: “Nobody can deny that it will generate electricity, but for the relatively modest contribution they produce it is too high a price to pay.

“These are industrial turbines; they are huge structures that we do not want installed.

“If they are installed it would be a landmark disgrace.”

Katherine Butler, vice chairman of TAINT, owns Waterston Manor and officially opened the gardens at the event along with Mr Boulle.

She said: “The changes that have been made to the planning application are just cosmetic.

“They are 10 metres shorter but they are still horrendous industrial monstrosities, and yes they have reduced the number, but I think one wind turbine is too much.”

West Coast Energy has said the local community would be guaranteed a payment of £5,000 for each megawatt of electricity generated, or 10 per cent of the profts generated from the farm, if the windfarm gets the go-ahead.

Steve Salt, planning and public affairs director at West Coast Energy, said last week: “We are pleased to announce that we have submitted our revised planning application for West Dorset Wind Farm to West Dorset District Council.

“We look forward to a continued engagement with the community as the application progresses through the planning system.”

Comments (15)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:39pm Sun 8 Jun 14

mr commonsense says...

Another nimby joins the rest.
Oh ye of closed minds and not understanding that within the next 10 years it is highly likely you won't be able to switch your lights on all t he time.
Get real people we need ALL forms of power generation over the next decade if we are to continue to be a G7 country. Stop burying your heads in the sand and embrace all available technologies we have today.
Another nimby joins the rest. Oh ye of closed minds and not understanding that within the next 10 years it is highly likely you won't be able to switch your lights on all t he time. Get real people we need ALL forms of power generation over the next decade if we are to continue to be a G7 country. Stop burying your heads in the sand and embrace all available technologies we have today. mr commonsense
  • Score: 7

6:27pm Sun 8 Jun 14

Budgie@home says...

mr commonsense wrote:
Another nimby joins the rest.
Oh ye of closed minds and not understanding that within the next 10 years it is highly likely you won't be able to switch your lights on all t he time.
Get real people we need ALL forms of power generation over the next decade if we are to continue to be a G7 country. Stop burying your heads in the sand and embrace all available technologies we have today.
What rubbish! These monsters produce 2 - 3 MW of power each compared to a normal power station of 1000 MW +. If these things are built you wont be able to switch on the lights because THEY DONT WORK WHEN THERE IS NO WIND OR TOO MUCH WIND. And when they don't work there is probably a Diesel generator waiting in the wings to step in at an even greater subsidy. These things produce more misery than electricity for everyone apart from the developers and the landowners who are having a feeding frenzy on the handouts . There is nothing green about them. Check out the C02 produced in their manufacture and import from Germany and the vast concrete foundations needed to keep them upright
[quote][p][bold]mr commonsense[/bold] wrote: Another nimby joins the rest. Oh ye of closed minds and not understanding that within the next 10 years it is highly likely you won't be able to switch your lights on all t he time. Get real people we need ALL forms of power generation over the next decade if we are to continue to be a G7 country. Stop burying your heads in the sand and embrace all available technologies we have today.[/p][/quote]What rubbish! These monsters produce 2 - 3 MW of power each compared to a normal power station of 1000 MW +. If these things are built you wont be able to switch on the lights because THEY DONT WORK WHEN THERE IS NO WIND OR TOO MUCH WIND. And when they don't work there is probably a Diesel generator waiting in the wings to step in at an even greater subsidy. These things produce more misery than electricity for everyone apart from the developers and the landowners who are having a feeding frenzy on the handouts . There is nothing green about them. Check out the C02 produced in their manufacture and import from Germany and the vast concrete foundations needed to keep them upright Budgie@home
  • Score: 0

7:45pm Sun 8 Jun 14

Dorset69 says...

**** off back to london. Its people like him who come to the countryside who for some reason think they can change any thing they want
**** off back to london. Its people like him who come to the countryside who for some reason think they can change any thing they want Dorset69
  • Score: 4

9:45pm Sun 8 Jun 14

Sorted Echo says...

budgie@home's reference to wind turbines as 'monsters' is not only laughable but pitiful.
It's this mindset that is holding back progress in clean energy development and is most often based on an old school nimby mentality. The arguments against are insignificant compared to the consequences of a nuclear power event like Fukushima or fracking which is well documented for the incidence of polluting aquifers, is that the legacy you anti lobbyists really want to leave behind for future generations?
budgie@home's reference to wind turbines as 'monsters' is not only laughable but pitiful. It's this mindset that is holding back progress in clean energy development and is most often based on an old school nimby mentality. The arguments against are insignificant compared to the consequences of a nuclear power event like Fukushima or fracking which is well documented for the incidence of polluting aquifers, is that the legacy you anti lobbyists really want to leave behind for future generations? Sorted Echo
  • Score: 0

9:49pm Sun 8 Jun 14

Sorted Echo says...

I would wager good money this d list grumpy looking 'celebrity' has an undeclared interest... family living locally?
I would wager good money this d list grumpy looking 'celebrity' has an undeclared interest... family living locally? Sorted Echo
  • Score: 1

10:12pm Sun 8 Jun 14

Budgie@home says...

Sorted Echo wrote:
budgie@home's reference to wind turbines as 'monsters' is not only laughable but pitiful.
It's this mindset that is holding back progress in clean energy development and is most often based on an old school nimby mentality. The arguments against are insignificant compared to the consequences of a nuclear power event like Fukushima or fracking which is well documented for the incidence of polluting aquifers, is that the legacy you anti lobbyists really want to leave behind for future generations?
What is it that you don't understand about the misery inflicted by the intermittent production of a mere 2 to 3 MW per turbine compared with conventional power stations which produce 1000MW plus?
[quote][p][bold]Sorted Echo[/bold] wrote: budgie@home's reference to wind turbines as 'monsters' is not only laughable but pitiful. It's this mindset that is holding back progress in clean energy development and is most often based on an old school nimby mentality. The arguments against are insignificant compared to the consequences of a nuclear power event like Fukushima or fracking which is well documented for the incidence of polluting aquifers, is that the legacy you anti lobbyists really want to leave behind for future generations?[/p][/quote]What is it that you don't understand about the misery inflicted by the intermittent production of a mere 2 to 3 MW per turbine compared with conventional power stations which produce 1000MW plus? Budgie@home
  • Score: 1

10:55pm Sun 8 Jun 14

mr commonsense says...

Budgie@home is typical of the argument that wind doesn't blow all the time, we know that, however it blows somewhere in the country and is fed into something called the National Grid. It will never produce all the energy we need but it is a permanent addition to all other forms of energy production.
Could I ask you sir what alternative energy production you believe will solve our energy needs over the next 10 years? Please don't say nuclear because I do not wish to live close to a potential nuclear bomb, ask the Japanese, Americans and Russians how they feel about nuclear.
Budgie@home is typical of the argument that wind doesn't blow all the time, we know that, however it blows somewhere in the country and is fed into something called the National Grid. It will never produce all the energy we need but it is a permanent addition to all other forms of energy production. Could I ask you sir what alternative energy production you believe will solve our energy needs over the next 10 years? Please don't say nuclear because I do not wish to live close to a potential nuclear bomb, ask the Japanese, Americans and Russians how they feel about nuclear. mr commonsense
  • Score: 0

11:23pm Sun 8 Jun 14

Grey Fox says...

Please take the trouble to read the current application WD/D /14/000885 on the WDDC website. The developer started with a proposal for 15 turbines, then 10, then 9 and now 5. That ought to tell you about the sums of money involved, ie a third reduction from the original plans and still they keep coming. Who has a business plan that is still that profitable when they have had to slash it by that amount?
Please take the trouble to read the current application WD/D /14/000885 on the WDDC website. The developer started with a proposal for 15 turbines, then 10, then 9 and now 5. That ought to tell you about the sums of money involved, ie a third reduction from the original plans and still they keep coming. Who has a business plan that is still that profitable when they have had to slash it by that amount? Grey Fox
  • Score: 5

10:51am Mon 9 Jun 14

Budgie@home says...

mr commonsense wrote:
Budgie@home is typical of the argument that wind doesn't blow all the time, we know that, however it blows somewhere in the country and is fed into something called the National Grid. It will never produce all the energy we need but it is a permanent addition to all other forms of energy production.
Could I ask you sir what alternative energy production you believe will solve our energy needs over the next 10 years? Please don't say nuclear because I do not wish to live close to a potential nuclear bomb, ask the Japanese, Americans and Russians how they feel about nuclear.
Your opening comment was that we should embrace all available technologies we have today but not, it now appears, nuclear because you don't want "to live close to a potential nuclear bomb". So who's a nimby? Answer, we all are really if we disapprove of any development near to where we live that may affect the place we cherish. Before I answer your specific question please can you clarify your position on this? Are you saying that wind turbines are the answer for the next 10 years?
[quote][p][bold]mr commonsense[/bold] wrote: Budgie@home is typical of the argument that wind doesn't blow all the time, we know that, however it blows somewhere in the country and is fed into something called the National Grid. It will never produce all the energy we need but it is a permanent addition to all other forms of energy production. Could I ask you sir what alternative energy production you believe will solve our energy needs over the next 10 years? Please don't say nuclear because I do not wish to live close to a potential nuclear bomb, ask the Japanese, Americans and Russians how they feel about nuclear.[/p][/quote]Your opening comment was that we should embrace all available technologies we have today but not, it now appears, nuclear because you don't want "to live close to a potential nuclear bomb". So who's a nimby? Answer, we all are really if we disapprove of any development near to where we live that may affect the place we cherish. Before I answer your specific question please can you clarify your position on this? Are you saying that wind turbines are the answer for the next 10 years? Budgie@home
  • Score: 4

6:45pm Mon 9 Jun 14

CoogarUK.com says...

I don't suppose he'll ever have to worry about how to pay his electricity bill.
I don't suppose he'll ever have to worry about how to pay his electricity bill. CoogarUK.com
  • Score: 0

11:40am Tue 10 Jun 14

Sorted Echo says...

Budgie@home wrote:
Sorted Echo wrote:
budgie@home's reference to wind turbines as 'monsters' is not only laughable but pitiful.
It's this mindset that is holding back progress in clean energy development and is most often based on an old school nimby mentality. The arguments against are insignificant compared to the consequences of a nuclear power event like Fukushima or fracking which is well documented for the incidence of polluting aquifers, is that the legacy you anti lobbyists really want to leave behind for future generations?
What is it that you don't understand about the misery inflicted by the intermittent production of a mere 2 to 3 MW per turbine compared with conventional power stations which produce 1000MW plus?
what is it you don't understand about looking after the interests of future generations? I'm not interested in your figures on turbine efficiency... this is about moving away from fossil and nuclear fuels which are screwing up our planet, and anything that reduces dependancy on those diminishing resources is a step in the right direction, not whinging because there might be a sustainable power source in view. Incidentally I lived for over a decade with only solar and wind turbines for every drop of my energy so know the technology works just fine!
[quote][p][bold]Budgie@home[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sorted Echo[/bold] wrote: budgie@home's reference to wind turbines as 'monsters' is not only laughable but pitiful. It's this mindset that is holding back progress in clean energy development and is most often based on an old school nimby mentality. The arguments against are insignificant compared to the consequences of a nuclear power event like Fukushima or fracking which is well documented for the incidence of polluting aquifers, is that the legacy you anti lobbyists really want to leave behind for future generations?[/p][/quote]What is it that you don't understand about the misery inflicted by the intermittent production of a mere 2 to 3 MW per turbine compared with conventional power stations which produce 1000MW plus?[/p][/quote]what is it you don't understand about looking after the interests of future generations? I'm not interested in your figures on turbine efficiency... this is about moving away from fossil and nuclear fuels which are screwing up our planet, and anything that reduces dependancy on those diminishing resources is a step in the right direction, not whinging because there might be a sustainable power source in view. Incidentally I lived for over a decade with only solar and wind turbines for every drop of my energy so know the technology works just fine! Sorted Echo
  • Score: -4

12:04pm Tue 10 Jun 14

Budgie@home says...

Sorted Echo wrote:
Budgie@home wrote:
Sorted Echo wrote:
budgie@home's reference to wind turbines as 'monsters' is not only laughable but pitiful.
It's this mindset that is holding back progress in clean energy development and is most often based on an old school nimby mentality. The arguments against are insignificant compared to the consequences of a nuclear power event like Fukushima or fracking which is well documented for the incidence of polluting aquifers, is that the legacy you anti lobbyists really want to leave behind for future generations?
What is it that you don't understand about the misery inflicted by the intermittent production of a mere 2 to 3 MW per turbine compared with conventional power stations which produce 1000MW plus?
what is it you don't understand about looking after the interests of future generations? I'm not interested in your figures on turbine efficiency... this is about moving away from fossil and nuclear fuels which are screwing up our planet, and anything that reduces dependancy on those diminishing resources is a step in the right direction, not whinging because there might be a sustainable power source in view. Incidentally I lived for over a decade with only solar and wind turbines for every drop of my energy so know the technology works just fine!
That's a new one on me. I wasn't aware that nuclear fuel was a diminishing resource?? I appreciate that someone so sanctimonious wont get this but I am very much concerned about future generations and, if you don't look after this generation there wont be many more future ones. We need affordable and reliable electricity generation if we are to remain a thriving economy. That way we can finance the needs of today and the future. And of course the figures are important, to ignore them is crass.
[quote][p][bold]Sorted Echo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Budgie@home[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sorted Echo[/bold] wrote: budgie@home's reference to wind turbines as 'monsters' is not only laughable but pitiful. It's this mindset that is holding back progress in clean energy development and is most often based on an old school nimby mentality. The arguments against are insignificant compared to the consequences of a nuclear power event like Fukushima or fracking which is well documented for the incidence of polluting aquifers, is that the legacy you anti lobbyists really want to leave behind for future generations?[/p][/quote]What is it that you don't understand about the misery inflicted by the intermittent production of a mere 2 to 3 MW per turbine compared with conventional power stations which produce 1000MW plus?[/p][/quote]what is it you don't understand about looking after the interests of future generations? I'm not interested in your figures on turbine efficiency... this is about moving away from fossil and nuclear fuels which are screwing up our planet, and anything that reduces dependancy on those diminishing resources is a step in the right direction, not whinging because there might be a sustainable power source in view. Incidentally I lived for over a decade with only solar and wind turbines for every drop of my energy so know the technology works just fine![/p][/quote]That's a new one on me. I wasn't aware that nuclear fuel was a diminishing resource?? I appreciate that someone so sanctimonious wont get this but I am very much concerned about future generations and, if you don't look after this generation there wont be many more future ones. We need affordable and reliable electricity generation if we are to remain a thriving economy. That way we can finance the needs of today and the future. And of course the figures are important, to ignore them is crass. Budgie@home
  • Score: 3

1:19pm Wed 11 Jun 14

Budgie@home says...

Front page of today's Daily Telegraph:
"Businesses will be paid to switch off their power to stop the lights going out because wind farms are unreliable, the National Grid has said.... Steve Holliday, the National Grid's chief executive, said that factories which use a lot of energy could be paid to reduce their electricity usage when there is low wind to prevent possible blackouts."
Front page of today's Daily Telegraph: "Businesses will be paid to switch off their power to stop the lights going out because wind farms are unreliable, the National Grid has said.... Steve Holliday, the National Grid's chief executive, said that factories which use a lot of energy could be paid to reduce their electricity usage when there is low wind to prevent possible blackouts." Budgie@home
  • Score: 2

8:58pm Thu 12 Jun 14

Sorted Echo says...

Budgie@home wrote:
Sorted Echo wrote:
Budgie@home wrote:
Sorted Echo wrote:
budgie@home's reference to wind turbines as 'monsters' is not only laughable but pitiful.
It's this mindset that is holding back progress in clean energy development and is most often based on an old school nimby mentality. The arguments against are insignificant compared to the consequences of a nuclear power event like Fukushima or fracking which is well documented for the incidence of polluting aquifers, is that the legacy you anti lobbyists really want to leave behind for future generations?
What is it that you don't understand about the misery inflicted by the intermittent production of a mere 2 to 3 MW per turbine compared with conventional power stations which produce 1000MW plus?
what is it you don't understand about looking after the interests of future generations? I'm not interested in your figures on turbine efficiency... this is about moving away from fossil and nuclear fuels which are screwing up our planet, and anything that reduces dependancy on those diminishing resources is a step in the right direction, not whinging because there might be a sustainable power source in view. Incidentally I lived for over a decade with only solar and wind turbines for every drop of my energy so know the technology works just fine!
That's a new one on me. I wasn't aware that nuclear fuel was a diminishing resource?? I appreciate that someone so sanctimonious wont get this but I am very much concerned about future generations and, if you don't look after this generation there wont be many more future ones. We need affordable and reliable electricity generation if we are to remain a thriving economy. That way we can finance the needs of today and the future. And of course the figures are important, to ignore them is crass.
Budgie
Sorry but it's plain ignorant to talk about looking after future generations by looking after the interests of this generation first. Can you not see how irresponsible our generation is with house prices currently rising over £600/week and the bubble set to pop again. Our energy supply has been largely signed over to the Chinese and our gas supply could take a hammering should the Russians turn off the pipeline. The issues are grave and will get worse, renewable energy is the only logical way forwards and that means, wind farms, solar farms, wave and tide power. In reference to your comment about nuclear power not being a diminishing resource, it's all about how much uranium is still in the ground, same as fossil fuels... it's not rocket science but if you won't listen you're part of the problem.
[quote][p][bold]Budgie@home[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sorted Echo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Budgie@home[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sorted Echo[/bold] wrote: budgie@home's reference to wind turbines as 'monsters' is not only laughable but pitiful. It's this mindset that is holding back progress in clean energy development and is most often based on an old school nimby mentality. The arguments against are insignificant compared to the consequences of a nuclear power event like Fukushima or fracking which is well documented for the incidence of polluting aquifers, is that the legacy you anti lobbyists really want to leave behind for future generations?[/p][/quote]What is it that you don't understand about the misery inflicted by the intermittent production of a mere 2 to 3 MW per turbine compared with conventional power stations which produce 1000MW plus?[/p][/quote]what is it you don't understand about looking after the interests of future generations? I'm not interested in your figures on turbine efficiency... this is about moving away from fossil and nuclear fuels which are screwing up our planet, and anything that reduces dependancy on those diminishing resources is a step in the right direction, not whinging because there might be a sustainable power source in view. Incidentally I lived for over a decade with only solar and wind turbines for every drop of my energy so know the technology works just fine![/p][/quote]That's a new one on me. I wasn't aware that nuclear fuel was a diminishing resource?? I appreciate that someone so sanctimonious wont get this but I am very much concerned about future generations and, if you don't look after this generation there wont be many more future ones. We need affordable and reliable electricity generation if we are to remain a thriving economy. That way we can finance the needs of today and the future. And of course the figures are important, to ignore them is crass.[/p][/quote]Budgie Sorry but it's plain ignorant to talk about looking after future generations by looking after the interests of this generation first. Can you not see how irresponsible our generation is with house prices currently rising over £600/week and the bubble set to pop again. Our energy supply has been largely signed over to the Chinese and our gas supply could take a hammering should the Russians turn off the pipeline. The issues are grave and will get worse, renewable energy is the only logical way forwards and that means, wind farms, solar farms, wave and tide power. In reference to your comment about nuclear power not being a diminishing resource, it's all about how much uranium is still in the ground, same as fossil fuels... it's not rocket science but if you won't listen you're part of the problem. Sorted Echo
  • Score: 0

10:05am Fri 13 Jun 14

Budgie@home says...

Sorted Echo wrote:
Budgie@home wrote:
Sorted Echo wrote:
Budgie@home wrote:
Sorted Echo wrote:
budgie@home's reference to wind turbines as 'monsters' is not only laughable but pitiful.
It's this mindset that is holding back progress in clean energy development and is most often based on an old school nimby mentality. The arguments against are insignificant compared to the consequences of a nuclear power event like Fukushima or fracking which is well documented for the incidence of polluting aquifers, is that the legacy you anti lobbyists really want to leave behind for future generations?
What is it that you don't understand about the misery inflicted by the intermittent production of a mere 2 to 3 MW per turbine compared with conventional power stations which produce 1000MW plus?
what is it you don't understand about looking after the interests of future generations? I'm not interested in your figures on turbine efficiency... this is about moving away from fossil and nuclear fuels which are screwing up our planet, and anything that reduces dependancy on those diminishing resources is a step in the right direction, not whinging because there might be a sustainable power source in view. Incidentally I lived for over a decade with only solar and wind turbines for every drop of my energy so know the technology works just fine!
That's a new one on me. I wasn't aware that nuclear fuel was a diminishing resource?? I appreciate that someone so sanctimonious wont get this but I am very much concerned about future generations and, if you don't look after this generation there wont be many more future ones. We need affordable and reliable electricity generation if we are to remain a thriving economy. That way we can finance the needs of today and the future. And of course the figures are important, to ignore them is crass.
Budgie
Sorry but it's plain ignorant to talk about looking after future generations by looking after the interests of this generation first. Can you not see how irresponsible our generation is with house prices currently rising over £600/week and the bubble set to pop again. Our energy supply has been largely signed over to the Chinese and our gas supply could take a hammering should the Russians turn off the pipeline. The issues are grave and will get worse, renewable energy is the only logical way forwards and that means, wind farms, solar farms, wave and tide power. In reference to your comment about nuclear power not being a diminishing resource, it's all about how much uranium is still in the ground, same as fossil fuels... it's not rocket science but if you won't listen you're part of the problem.
Goodbye!
[quote][p][bold]Sorted Echo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Budgie@home[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sorted Echo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Budgie@home[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sorted Echo[/bold] wrote: budgie@home's reference to wind turbines as 'monsters' is not only laughable but pitiful. It's this mindset that is holding back progress in clean energy development and is most often based on an old school nimby mentality. The arguments against are insignificant compared to the consequences of a nuclear power event like Fukushima or fracking which is well documented for the incidence of polluting aquifers, is that the legacy you anti lobbyists really want to leave behind for future generations?[/p][/quote]What is it that you don't understand about the misery inflicted by the intermittent production of a mere 2 to 3 MW per turbine compared with conventional power stations which produce 1000MW plus?[/p][/quote]what is it you don't understand about looking after the interests of future generations? I'm not interested in your figures on turbine efficiency... this is about moving away from fossil and nuclear fuels which are screwing up our planet, and anything that reduces dependancy on those diminishing resources is a step in the right direction, not whinging because there might be a sustainable power source in view. Incidentally I lived for over a decade with only solar and wind turbines for every drop of my energy so know the technology works just fine![/p][/quote]That's a new one on me. I wasn't aware that nuclear fuel was a diminishing resource?? I appreciate that someone so sanctimonious wont get this but I am very much concerned about future generations and, if you don't look after this generation there wont be many more future ones. We need affordable and reliable electricity generation if we are to remain a thriving economy. That way we can finance the needs of today and the future. And of course the figures are important, to ignore them is crass.[/p][/quote]Budgie Sorry but it's plain ignorant to talk about looking after future generations by looking after the interests of this generation first. Can you not see how irresponsible our generation is with house prices currently rising over £600/week and the bubble set to pop again. Our energy supply has been largely signed over to the Chinese and our gas supply could take a hammering should the Russians turn off the pipeline. The issues are grave and will get worse, renewable energy is the only logical way forwards and that means, wind farms, solar farms, wave and tide power. In reference to your comment about nuclear power not being a diminishing resource, it's all about how much uranium is still in the ground, same as fossil fuels... it's not rocket science but if you won't listen you're part of the problem.[/p][/quote]Goodbye! Budgie@home
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

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