Friday, January 27, 2012

Wind farm

Details about the proposed offshore wind farm, including some impressive images of what it would look like.


Local Resident said...

Shame the post didnt mention that this link and site is against the wind farm and not a balanced view of the pros and cons

SillyWhim said...

Does anyone remember BP being challenged over positioning the well head on an artificial island out on Poole Bay some 20+ years ago, a challenge due to the fact that it would spoil the view? An idea BP itself sorted by drilling from Wytch Farm and drilling almost horizontally to reach the oil reserves out under the Bay?

This is a thousand times worse, in terms of destroying Purbeck's unique and singular beauty. At the very least, if they go ahead can they be somehow camouflaged as Navy ships used to be (razzle dazzle I believe it was called) so that, from a horizontal viewpoint and at a distance, they become virtually invisible to anyone on the shore? Can they use the same lateral thinking BP did to make this palatable??

SillyWhim said...

9:42 PM

I do not think one has to be a Rhodes Scholar to work that out!

David Furmage said...

Well if this gets built and wind exceeds 90 mph plus , looking forward to an awesome fire display ;) probably the best swanage will ever see:)

Anonymous said...

Eneco is proposing to site the wind farm as near as possible to land in order to save on transportation - they could move the whole thing further out......

SillyWhim said...

3.14 Certainly it also has to do with the depth of the sea floor???

Anonymous said...

is it just me or is the coming up with a holding page now?

SillyWhim said...

What page are you looking for? I can see it all.

Anonymous said...

re 28/1/12 5:38 PM

Getting a 404 on all the pages on your links.

Anonymous said...


This domain has been reserved for a customer of Pixel Internet

Pixel Internet, a UK web hosting company supplying outstanding Windows and Linux
Web Hosting, Domain Names and Website Builder software since 2005.
on the domain name now

Anonymous said...

Must be GCHQ at Cheltenham 'filtering' Swanage traffic looking for baddies!

Robin from Swanage said...

A wind farm should not be located in an area of outstanding natural beauty.

Anonymous said...

re 29/1/12 8:20 AM

So its ok to have wind farms as long as its not in your back yard?

Robin from Swanage said...


seeview said...

I think the big question is why do Eneco want to position the farm so close to the coast.They have a huge area in which it can be located, but have chosen to put it at its nearest to the coastline.

Obviously cost is the answer, but the huge savings they will make will not be passed on to the energy consumer.Any electricity generated will obviously be sold to the National Grid at a set price, which won't change whether the windfarm is 1 mile or 50 offshore.Therefore I can only assume that it is being sited as near as possible to the coastline so as to maximise Eneco's profits.

So, as with the foreign companies that now own much of the UK energy industry,profits increase at the expense of the UK consumer with the blessings of the UK Government.

I would support an offshore windfarm if it is sited much further out and I think a lot of other people would, too.

As it stands I don't support it for the following reasons.

Firstly, its siting is obviously profit driven and has sod all to do with any ecological reasons.

Secondly, it might at first seem a novelty and an interesting sight offshore for those of us who live along the coast between Weymouth and Southampton, but certainly Swanage will be particulary affected as the windfarm will dominate the horizon and dwarf even the Isle of Wight.I think the novelty is likely to wear off after a couple of months and people will begin to yearn for a clear view of the horizon.

Thirdly,I think it probably will affect tourism as is seems unlikely that the type of people attracted to the Jurrasic Coast are going to feel that such a large industrial site and its attendant maintenance boats, buoys, warning signs, etc. are an attractive addition.It's the kind of thing that you might want to see once, but perhaps not for an entire walk from,say,Kimmeridge to Swanage.

I am put in mind of the pustule that blights the middle of Swanage.The festering whitehead that covers the tennis courts (that as far as I am aware no locals are encouraged to use)at the language school and which is visible day and night from every vantage point within a ten mile radius.Like the windfarm it is a nice little earner for the owner, but an unsightly eyesore for everyone else.Although I suppose the lights of the windfarm will be prettier at night.

So, I think supporters of the present proposals should ask themselves if they really want to be staring at a windfarm day and night for the next 20 - 50 years?

I will support a windfarm if it is sited further offshore, but I won't support this application.

Anonymous said...

Visit the 3,000,000 hits you get when you Google:- wind farm wars bbc

I have a programme recorded which raises much of the duplicity of the applicants and the apparent complicity of the Planners, especially with regards to; AMPLITUDE MODULATION, WAKE TURBULENCE AND WIND SHEER etc.

Fortunately when Wessex Water was built the Environment Deptartment had to record ambient sound level at Peveril, a copy of which I have.

Unless a coordinated action group is formed Purbeck/Swanage will score an own goal.

Closer is:

David Furmage said...

I will just copy and paste what I said in last in the other wind farm subject:)

Tidal power is an effective way to harness energy. I am all for renewable energy , though I think that the government are rushing into this whole wind farm issue , just so it looks like they are doing their " green " bit. I was just wondering weather or not our electric will be alot cheaper or will the power of these 100 or so turbines just go into the national grid?

Thing is that gets me is this " free " energy , yeah it's around us and it's free , though it's not free really when your bill comes through the post. Yeah companies have costs and budgets to meet. At end of the day it's not free :(

Here's a case study which makes a good read;)

Wind Turbines vs. Energy Saving - a case study

Most efficientt wind farms would produce about 20 MW a year assuming that a standard 500 kW 150 ft turbine produces about 125 kW - about 25% maximum capacity. modern turbines of 1.5 MW capacity can get up to about 400 kW. 

There are 1,628,000 houses in the UK with pitched roof 
and no roof insulation

3780 kWh of energy are lost by each such house each year.

Insulation to 1990 Building Regulations standard would save 3375 kWh p.a.

The annual output of a 750 kW turbine is 1.64 m units.

Insulating 485 houses would save that amount of energy each year.

New funding arrangements will give wind energy a subsidy of 2p per unit.

The annual subsidy of the turbine will be £32,850.

The cost of insulation is a one-off £122 per house, say £60,000 for 485 houses.

Over the 100 year life of the houses, the energy saving cost averages £600 pa 

Saving pollution by insulation is 55 times more cost-effective than saving it by wind turbines!

And look at the birds you save!

Anonymous said...

Likewise, here’s one I posted earlier:-

Not withstanding the esthetical citing of the wind farm, the low frequency sound emissions both from the blades and the power inverters were demonstrated on the BBC Programme ‘WINDFARM WARS’ BBC 2 aired on 27/05/2 011

DAILY MAIL Friday 16th September 2011
“Are you wind~ing me up ?
HALF the time they sit motionless, but this week when the tail-end of Hurricane Katia bent trees at right angles across Britain, 13 wind farms had to close because they were generating too much electricity.

Enough energy to power Bristol was lost and the National Grid must now pay wind farm operators almost £2m. to compensate for the disconnection, which is higher than the going rate for the fuel.

Never forget, some genius in Whitehall came up with this energy plan. Well paid for it he was too.”

In view of the corruption of the environment, ecology and shore aspect I would ask our planners to justify the proposed offshore wind farm off Dorset in light of the above article.


Nickthefish said...

Hi David & RobO,
I have bought a book on this subject to see what is going on. But logically Hampshire, Somerset and Dorset have very few windmills and quite a lot of watermills...

David Furmage said...

Well said Nick , you summed it up in one ! Watermills :)
I have discussed this many times about the harnessing the power of our water that flows through Swanage. There is so much energy to tap into. Even Wareham and Corfe could do it and I reckon that's alot of energy that could be used for our towns ;)

Any chance popping round to see this book ?

Nickthefish said...

Dave give me till Monday to finish it

David Furmage said...

Thank you Nick:) I see David Hollister in the gazette is wondering why there's no Swanage campaign group against this. Looks like no one is bothered about this:(

Anonymous said...

This is the website all Swanage 'Bloggers' should visit re the Wind Farm and register. They've also posted their video on UTube.

I've suggested a petition is started, firstly at the Mowlem meeting on the 21st; only three weeks away.


Anonymous said...

Hardly a World Heritage Site:

BBC Tuesday 2nd FEB;

"No appeal over Swindon
Honda plant turbine plans

The car company had proposed building three wind
turbines at its Swindon plant
Continue reading the main story
Related Stories
• Honda turbine plans are rejected
• Hundreds at Honda turbines summit
• Turbine protesters to 'fight on'
Honda will not appeal against the decision to refuse plans to build wind turbines at its Swindon plant.
The car company wanted to erect three wind turbines to power its plant near South Marston.
Planning officers had recommended Swindon Borough Council approve the plans but councillors rejected the application in October.
A Honda spokesman said "following extensive discussions" the company would not appeal.
In a statement, the car company said: "Honda and its partner Ecotricity still have complete confidence in the proposal, as proven by similar wind parks already working successfully at many other locations elsewhere across the UK.
"However, in making the final decision, Honda carefully considered the different views of Swindon residents, councillors, businesses and organisations."
Residents opposing the scheme had claimed the 394ft (120m) high turbines would be be too large and noisy.
The company said it remained committed to meeting its "challenging CO2 reduction targets by further developing a mix of renewable energy technologies" at its Swindon site."


Anonymous said...

Swindon is lovely! Once you leave it you are in beautiful countryside. And it has employment - and local secondary schools - unlike Swanage.

Why pick on Swindon?

David Furmage said...

I think the person is using the story as an example;)

Anyway this might be a bit out there but think about it if you could ;)

I visited several wind farms while i lived in Scotland and work with a ( chef whos dad design some of them ) anyway to determine the effect upon the environment. I found that wind turbines disrupt the flow of the life force, what acupuncturists and feng shui practitioners call chi, or qi, and what Hindu Vedanta calls prana.
“…Earth prana is released from ducts on the surface of the earth and is drawn to an earth chakra a few hundred meters away. Like a human chakra the vortex of the earth chakra draws the prana in and recycles it through the earth before it is sent back into the air. Prana moves in a fairly straight line in the ether around us. Material objects and other factors can alter or even disrupt its flow.”
There may be severe consequences of the disruption, blockage and stagnation of the flow of earth prana, such as depriving the Earth’s subtle body and plant kingdom of nourishment and reducing the Earth’s ability to maintain the environment.
I conclude in my report: “The rush to increase the use of wind turbines by our government  and environmentalist around the world needs to come to a halt. We are rushing into something without understanding the implications of what we are doing. We must not let ourselves be pressured
by scientific research that points to a coming tipping point when we cannot stop the assault; some say we have already passed that point and the melting of the polar ice caps, much higher temperatures and other disturbance are inevitable.
“The bigger risk is that by rushing into alternative forms of energy we may be further damaging Mother Earth’s subtle body. It is damage that may accelerate global warming by further compromising Mother Earth’s subtle body to properly function. We may also be doing irrevocable damage to her, or damage that will take a long time to heal.”

Anonymous said...

But haven't we seriously compromised things by taking stuff out, like coal and oil and gas?

Anonymous said...

I suggest that the two above go to 'earth alerts' at; and see what Mother Earth does to herself on a daily basis.


Anonymous said...


5 February 2012 Last updated at 11:29

Wind farm subsidy cut urged by MPs
More than 100 Conservative MPs have written to the prime minister urging him to cut subsidies for wind turbines.
They also want planning rules changed to make it easier for local people to object to their construction.
The Tory MPs - joined by some backbenchers from other parties - questioned the amount of money going to the sector during "straitened times".


Anonymous said...

'A wind farm should not be located in an area of outstanding natural beauty.'

So why do we think its ok for us to destroy other beautiful environments ?

It seems to be a case of out of site out of mind. We have been more than happy to destroy ecosystems overseas, to the point where these enviroments are no longer able to sustain indigenous species

We don't want it here !!

We seem to care alot about this environment, but not so much about the impact to others.

The extraction of Oil/gas, and the growing of bio fuels are imposed on less developed countries, often in places where peoples carbon footprints are low !! Fossil fuels are extracted to feed the energy hungry West. These overseas areas of outstanding natural beauty such as the tropical rainforests are being destroyed every day, thanks to people like us!!

When are we going to stand up and take responsibility for providing our own energy.

Our beautiful local landscapes should be preserved but there is a wider debate.

We need to do something different about how our energy is reduced/produced !
There are more searching questions to be asked. We need renewable energy to come from somewhere, and we need to reduce carbon emissions urgently. Many many environmentalists (naturalists, zoologists, ecologists) are confirming there is a problem.

There is a reluctance to accept that climate change is in any way influenced by human behaviour.

Whilst these people/groups are 'shouting loudly' its difficult to know who to trust.

Below is an extract from the Met Office. They are joined in this view by many other environmental groups.

'Natural causes can explain only a small part of this warming. The overwhelming majority of scientists agree that this is due to rising concentrations of heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere caused by human activities.'

There isn't a perfect answer to providing our own energy, but wouldn't we prefer that we take responsibility for our own renewable energy, rather than destroying the habitats of those threatened species overseas,and to know where our energy is coming from. This may include putting up with something different that can seen, such as windfarms, rather than our energy coming from an invisible source.

There is an uncertain future with regards to fossil fuels so there is a need to explore new possibilities.

Should we stop saying NO, and ask more questions, if we don't move forward with renewable energy, our grandchildren may not be thanking us.

Lets make sure we are infomed and have an open debate.

There are many films and books available: eg. A Crude Awakening, An inconvenient truth, The End of Surburbia.

Reduce, Reuse and then Recycle.

Anonymous said...

Should all energy be produced by wind farms leading to a consequential elimination of Global Warming, there would be no hot air to rise and draw in cold air thereby creating the wind to drive the wind farms wich would stand idle even more than they do now! QED.

seeview said...

Try going to -

The sample animations there give some idea of how intrusive such a vast (the biggest in the world) wind farm would be.

Eneco are a Dutch company, but to quote from challengenavitus,

"For example, the Dutch government plans windfarms more than 24km from the coast (compared with 13km), and the German government, more than 30km. At these greater distances, the turbines have much less visual impact."

So, in other words they couldn't build this off the Dutch coast and so they have decided that it will be far more profitable and less politically divisive to build it off the english coast.

To the poster at 4:16

It is not enough to simply say you support alternative energy and so therefore anything anyone proposes is fine by you.You need to think beyond that.Many of these proposals are by international corporations which are profit driven.Ask yourself,if this is such a great plan why isn't Eneco building off the Dutch coast?Perhaps, because further out to sea means less profit for them?

The lifespan of this windfarm is likely to be 50 years, so they might seem attractive now, but what will they look like in thirty years time?The sea and wind will have taken an immense toll and the pristine white turbines are likely to look anything but after ten or twenty years.

We should be like Germany and insist companies build these farms 30km offshore.Okay, it'll mean less profit for them, but it will be better for ordinary people.

seeview said...

Incidentally,where's PEAT in all of this.They're website (2 months out of date) doesn't even mention this windfarm.

Anonymous said...

The CROWN ESTATE website at:-

Shows their policy regarding the exploitation of their land and its seabed i.e. The United Kingdom, (we ‘subjects’ can have the ‘Freehold’ use of the surface but it still belongs to the Crown, the Land Registration Act 2002).

They state that they;
• “engage with statutory and non-statutory bodies….local and national governments, shipping fisheries etc.” Has PDC or STC, Poole Harbour or fishermen heard from them ?
• “Undertake, ‘expensive but very important surveys’. Done by ABP Southampton who have a vested interest!?!
• Their website shows a map of ROUND 3 OFFSHORE WIND FARM ZONES, No. 7 Navitus Bay (Purbeck) has been awarded to; ‘ENECO ROUND 3 DEVELOPMENT LIMITED’.
• Companies House website shows it as being a newly formed, £1 LTD Co. with 3 Mortgages charged over it, with Marc EILHELMUS & MARIA VAN DER LINDEN as its Officers.
• There are also Eneco, Holdings, Project and 1, 2, 3 Ltd..
• It is registered at McGeigors LLJ 5 Old Bailey, London EC4M 7BA.
• ENECO ROUND 3 DEVELOPMENT LIMITED’. Is obviously a ‘fire wall’ with no assets so if anything goes wrong it can be liquidated at a stroke.

I note Richard Drax MP is also against wind farms…. He has his Swanage Surgery on the 2nd March??


Anonymous said...

It is not just 'yes' or 'no' to windfarms, but proximity, orientation and impact that are key in this debate.

Eneco's publicly stated firm intention prior to any of the impact assessments dictated within the process, is for construction of the 256sq km windfarm within the section of the 'licenced' area closest to and impacting most on residential areas. The siting is also closer to residential areas than any existing wind farm approaching this scale.

There are so many 'firsts' and unknowns in this proposal, so this require more consideration and consultation than any preceding wind farm.

It should be noted also that any impact assessments that Eneco describes in its own litereature (as it must by decree) are actually driven, ie funded, by Eneco. Where is the independent thinking in this?

So, to go back to the beginning, the debate is not necessarily about 'yes' or 'no' to windfarms, and of course this one in particular, but to reject the propsal in its current form and to have a full review of other orinetations, proximity and timely independent impact assessments.

Then, and only then, could an informed proposal be configured for due diligence and debate. And only when the least harmful, practical solution is proven acceptable to corporates and communities, should actual go ahead be considered.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, I disagree.

Until windfarms are a viable, economical alternative to other forms of energy production, there is little point in going on.

Where are the FACTS that support wind farms? I pass many, mostly still, in France, that were built on a whim and a prayer.

Facts. Not emotions.

David Furmage said...


5 February 2012 Last updated at 11:29

Wind farm subsidy cut urged by MPs
More than 100 Conservative MPs have written to the prime minister urging him to cut subsidies for wind turbines.
They also want planning rules changed to make it easier for local people to object to their construction.
The Tory MPs - joined by some backbenchers from other parties - questioned the amount of money going to the sector during "straitened times".

OMG does this mean the conservatives are finally starting to wake up? Or is it cos of the resigning of Humme that the blanket has been pulled from their heads:)

Hosting companies said...

Excellent Blog. I really want to admire the quality of this post. I like the way of your presenting ideas, views and valuable content. No doubt you are doing great work.

David Furmage said...

Just a quick word , Nick got the book about this wind farm scam. What a read and a book everyone should read who has had the blanket pulled over their eyes regarding wind farms :)

Nickthefish said...

The Wind Farm Scam (Independent Minds) by John Etherington. Sorry to post a spoiler but the author concludes Nuclear Power is the only solution.

Anonymous said...

Re 10/2/12 8:46 AM
Nuclear Power is the only solution.

How about a new station on the old school site on Northbrook road?

David Furmage said...

That site is for the new free school and affordable houses

Though the old recycling centre or the dump could be a good place for one:) the more I read this book Nick the more I see the scam:)

David Furmage said...

Nick , finished the book and took it back down to yours;) thanks again and if possible do have a link to buy this book ? Cheers:)

Anonymous said...

Having personally set up an All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG-Against Financial Exploitation) about ten years ago, ( ) therefore being aware of the influence they can have, I checked new APPGs’ relating to ‘re-newable energy and found; ‘APPG Renewable & Sustainable Energy’ which received; £2,500 from each of the following: Centrica, ConocoPhilips, E.ON UK, Micropower Council, National Grid, Renewable UK, Solarcentury, The NAPIT Group, Nibe Energy Systems, Sharp, Mitsubishi; plus £8000 from Carillion Energy Services and £10,500 from RWE Npower Renewables = £46,000?!?


Anonymous said...

So the same author that suggests wind is not a good source of renewable energy suggests Nuclear is the answer. Mmmm

Is that the answer?? Would people be happy for a nuclear power plant instead of the windfarm.

Think we should be careful what we wish for.

SillyWhim said...


Even the most ardent advocate of alternative energy sources admits that we need a steady backup of energy to supply the grid when wind, tide, solar or whatever is not consistent.

In an ideal world, we would be placing every spare penny into finding means of storing electricity (or kinetic energy) so that we can rely solely upon alternative sources.

Until that day, we burn oil, gas and coal, which we all know is bad for the environment, our balance of payments, and even our security.

Throwing up a string of windmills is altruistic but, at best it is tilting at windmills.

We need a backup. This is a good national debate. Do we use oil, gas, coal, or nuclear. There are no other sources.

What is discouraging to me is that we think a string of windmills will solve the problems. It will not.

So..let's have a real debate, and in the meantime accept that (due to our intransigence over the past ten years) there will have to be unpalatable compromises.

David Furmage said...

Thing is most of our electric comes from France by EDF which is a French company and how do they get their electricity? Through Nuclear power. So in a way we are getting ours through the same way. Putting up thousands of turbines all over our country is not the way forward , we can rush into this scam:(

David Furmage said...

:) :)

Anonymous said...

I endorse David Furmage's posting at 13/2/12 3:34 PM and agree with; ""

Robin from Swanage said...

Wind farm will make it difficult to create films like Moonfleet, Tess of the D'Urbervilles and the Mayor of Casterbridge on the Jurassic Coast.

David Furmage said...

Will be difficult to create tourism , let alone films:(