Residents ‘in favour’ of Purbeck wind farm project (From Dorset Echo)

These numbers only add up to 99%.
What about the views of those who did not or could not attend? Did every visitor fill in a form? If only 10 people completed a form and 7 gave their support, then these figures could be manipulated to give the results.

Maximus it doesn't take much to work out that 2 people spoiled their votes. Ther emust have been at least 100 voters to get the stats shown, that's half the visitors. However the figures are manipulated it's still a significant difference between the Pro and Anti lobby. If people can't be bothered to turn out to the exhibition (as with Council Elections) they probably don't care and thus can't complain if it gets built (accepting, there may be a few who could not attend). A victory for the pro-lobby in spite of dirty tactics by a few antis at the beginning (which probably served to publicise the exhibition quite well)

Once again the CPRE resort to childish, foot-stamping tactics.

They're becoming an embarrassment to green groups everywhere.

Man-made climate change is the greatest global threat that we face today, action must be taken to address it which means supporting renewable technologies. The UK has 40% of the European wind resource yet we are falling shamefully behind other countries, in 2007 the US installed 12 times more wind capacity than the UK,Spain 8 times, China 8 times, India 4 times, Germany 4 times and France double. Why is it that developing and developed countries are able to see the potential in wind power but we can't ? Wind power must and will play a key role in the UK's energy mix along with other renewables and energy efficiency. Wind power in Dorset ? Go for it !

Dreamweaver wrote:
Man-made climate change is the greatest global threat that we face today, action must be taken to address it which means supporting renewable technologies. The UK has 40% of the European wind resource yet we are falling shamefully behind other countries, in 2007 the US installed 12 times more wind capacity than the UK,Spain 8 times, China 8 times, India 4 times, Germany 4 times and France double. Why is it that developing and developed countries are able to see the potential in wind power but we can't ? Wind power must and will play a key role in the UK's energy mix along with other renewables and energy efficiency. Wind power in Dorset ? Go for it !

What a load of crap, Global Warming a natural cycle that is proven by history & nothing we do is going to change that, as for all the other figures I didn’t realise we where having a race to see who can pour the most money down the drain, I would not argue that wind turbines create electricity, what I would like to know is how many turbines you need to equal the output of a nuclear power station. Also we have a problem with rubbish why not burn it & produce power that way.

mikeman wrote:

Dreamweaver wrote: Man-made climate change is the greatest global threat that we face today, action must be taken to address it which means supporting renewable technologies. The UK has 40% of the European wind resource yet we are falling shamefully behind other countries, in 2007 the US installed 12 times more wind capacity than the UK,Spain 8 times, China 8 times, India 4 times, Germany 4 times and France double. Why is it that developing and developed countries are able to see the potential in wind power but we can't ? Wind power must and will play a key role in the UK's energy mix along with other renewables and energy efficiency. Wind power in Dorset ? Go for it !

What a load of crap, Global Warming a natural cycle that is proven by history & nothing we do is going to change that, as for all the other figures I didn’t realise we where having a race to see who can pour the most money down the drain, I would not argue that wind turbines create electricity, what I would like to know is how many turbines you need to equal the output of a nuclear power station. Also we have a problem with rubbish why not burn it & produce power that way.

Mikeman: Please support your Global Warming statement / theory by demonstrating how the scientific community has got it wrong.

With regard to generating capacity, wind power provides some 19% of Denmark's requirements, and some 6% o=g Germany's (much more industrialised).
Globally, it is estimated that some 70+Terrawatts of electricity can be produced by wind-power.
The ammount that can be produced annually by a turbine varies according to location. For that reason, a 1MW theoetical-capacity generator will actually produce less. Models suggest that it's feasible for Europe to meet its requirements by renewable sources. Variations (no wind in one area) can be accommodated in the same way as conventional generating plants - i.e., a national grid. Moreover, just as hydroeleictic plants can pump water back into a dam during off-peak periods, wind-generated electricity can perform the same function.
wwww.windpower.org is a useful site.

Birdseye wrote:

mikeman wrote:

Dreamweaver wrote: Man-made climate change is the greatest global threat that we face today, action must be taken to address it which means supporting renewable technologies. The UK has 40% of the European wind resource yet we are falling shamefully behind other countries, in 2007 the US installed 12 times more wind capacity than the UK,Spain 8 times, China 8 times, India 4 times, Germany 4 times and France double. Why is it that developing and developed countries are able to see the potential in wind power but we can't ? Wind power must and will play a key role in the UK's energy mix along with other renewables and energy efficiency. Wind power in Dorset ? Go for it !

What a load of crap, Global Warming a natural cycle that is proven by history & nothing we do is going to change that, as for all the other figures I didn’t realise we where having a race to see who can pour the most money down the drain, I would not argue that wind turbines create electricity, what I would like to know is how many turbines you need to equal the output of a nuclear power station. Also we have a problem with rubbish why not burn it & produce power that way.

Mikeman: Please support your Global Warming statement / theory by demonstrating how the scientific community has got it wrong. With regard to generating capacity, wind power provides some 19% of Denmark's requirements, and some 6% o=g Germany's (much more industrialised). Globally, it is estimated that some 70+Terrawatts of electricity can be produced by wind-power. The ammount that can be produced annually by a turbine varies according to location. For that reason, a 1MW theoetical-capacity generator will actually produce less. Models suggest that it's feasible for Europe to meet its requirements by renewable sources. Variations (no wind in one area) can be accommodated in the same way as conventional generating plants - i.e., a national grid. Moreover, just as hydroeleictic plants can pump water back into a dam during off-peak periods, wind-generated electricity can perform the same function. wwww.windpower.org is a useful site.

You only have to look back in history to see how the world has changed due to weather changes i.e. the ice age. Whatever will be will be, we can’t change it & we certainly won’t be here to see it, so stop worrying and enjoy life. As for the scientist they change their minds on a daily basis. But I do know we need energy & whatever we choose it won’t be cheap & I would go for nuclear power as we have control over that

Im still waiting to find out the pay back time for the energy used to build a wind turbine and the infrastructure required?

Mikeman.

1. You obviously don't understand science.

2. "We can't change it and won't be here to see it" is a typically selfish comment. As it happens, people around the globe are already "seeing it".

Unfortunately, the UN report on climate change was greatly watered down to make it acceptable to all signatories, because the immediate action required to begin to mitigate the worst effects would bring with it economic disadvantages.
The scientists haven't got it wrong. Nor have they been changing their minds in a daily basis. Instead, because the report was watered down, it's now being suggested that scientists under-estimated the problem.

As usual, it's the Politicians who are letting us and our children down.

Dorset Guy, it's 3-6 months

Birdseye wrote:
Mikeman. 1. You obviously don't understand science. 2. "We can't change it and won't be here to see it" is a typically selfish comment. As it happens, people around the globe are already "seeing it". Unfortunately, the UN report on climate change was greatly watered down to make it acceptable to all signatories, because the immediate action required to begin to mitigate the worst effects would bring with it economic disadvantages. The scientists haven't got it wrong. Nor have they been changing their minds in a daily basis. Instead, because the report was watered down, it's now being suggested that scientists under-estimated the problem. As usual, it's the Politicians who are letting us and our children down.

You are quite right I am not a scientist I am a realist & I do not believe that we can alter global change anymore than I believe in God. As far as I am concerned its all clap trap & we should live & enjoy life not worry about things we have no control over if you want to worry your life away that’s fine but don’t ask me too.

Hmm - I am a scientist - at least by training, and was taught to critically examine all the evidence.

What I see is clear evidence that this planet has been exerting massive changes to its climate in the past and continues to do so.

Yes, there may be an overlying man-made contribution, but think on this - let's say the eco-fairy waves her magic wand and removes all man made climate change - what then do we do when we realise that natural climate change is continuing - do we fight that?

Does the name Canute spring to mind?

Incidentally, and to get back on point - I used to live quite near Dreamweaver's Tan y Grisiau, and s/he wouldn't need to look very far to see both a pumped storage hydro electric power station and a sadly, now decomissioned nuclear power station, both of which contributed vast sums to the local econony for many years, something which wind turbines would totally fail to do.

Wind farms are a blot on the landscape - and most of the pressure to have them sited on land is commercial pressure wrapped up in eco-babble - if these companies are so eco friendly, why not site the turbines out of sight offshore or underwater? - because they would be more costly, and less profitable that's why.