Happier diner Posted July 5 Share Posted July 5 1 hour ago, Mercenary said: Well by your Vestas source, Earystane (was approx double the annual MWh based on the mean wind speeds) @Cambon makes no sense at all. By his own calculations you would need 5 turbines at Jurby to produce the same power as 4 at earystane. Yet he still says Jurby is the 'obvious' choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philwebs Posted July 5 Share Posted July 5 For amusement: March 2023 "Taxpayers to dig for £20M for Liverpool Dock" July 2023 "Windfarm could cost up to £40 million" I wonder what the true cost will be. I wonder why private enterprise is not doing this. 4 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted July 5 Share Posted July 5 16 minutes ago, philwebs said: For amusement: March 2023 "Taxpayers to dig for £20M for Liverpool Dock" July 2023 "Windfarm could cost up to £40 million" I wonder what the true cost will be. I wonder why private enterprise is not doing this. Private enterprise? Give me an example of when that ever went well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finlo Posted July 5 Share Posted July 5 40 minutes ago, Gladys said: A bit like white vans? You're thinking of Concord! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted July 5 Share Posted July 5 1 hour ago, philwebs said: For amusement: March 2023 "Taxpayers to dig for £20M for Liverpool Dock" July 2023 "Windfarm could cost up to £40 million" I wonder what the true cost will be. I wonder why private enterprise is not doing this. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted July 5 Share Posted July 5 3 hours ago, Happier diner said: @Cambon makes no sense at all. By his own calculations you would need 5 turbines at Jurby to produce the same power as 4 at earystane. Yet he still says Jurby is the 'obvious' choice. Yes, so imagine what nine at jurby for the same price as four at Earystane would generate! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted July 5 Share Posted July 5 1 hour ago, Cambon said: Yes, so imagine what nine at jurby for the same price as four at Earystane would generate! How do you work that out? Just because it's jurby doesn't mean you qualify for social benefit in the world of wind turbines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cambon Posted July 5 Share Posted July 5 1 hour ago, Happier diner said: How do you work that out? Just because it's jurby doesn't mean you qualify for social benefit in the world of wind turbines. Nine versus five. The five have slightly higher average wind speed. The nine have more consistent wind speeds and from more directions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happier diner Posted July 5 Share Posted July 5 33 minutes ago, Cambon said: The nine have more consistent wind speeds and from more directions. I'd like to see a reference for that. I would agree that it would have consistently less wind. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banker Posted July 8 Share Posted July 8 Labour have removed ban on onshore wind farms and now encouraging them to get green investment so no reason not to proceed with ours either! 3 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Colombe Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 19 hours ago, Banker said: Labour have removed ban on onshore wind farms That's impressively proactive for a party that was supposed to lack any sort of a plan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amadeus Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 Sorry are we seriously still talking about fucking up the landscape with wind turbines? The same biosphere landscape that’s apparently so unique and needs to be protected? These things couldn’t be put offshore no? We’re just going to let them fuck another thing up? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted July 9 Share Posted July 9 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monasqueen Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 17 hours ago, Amadeus said: Sorry are we seriously still talking about fucking up the landscape with wind turbines? The same biosphere landscape that’s apparently so unique and needs to be protected? These things couldn’t be put offshore no? We’re just going to let them fuck another thing up? No. Offshore is at least as bad, effing up shipping lanes, trawler nets, dolphins and whales, and then when they rot, they fall onto the seabed and eff everything up that's down there, 'cos it costs too much to clear them up. They're big buggers, too. How close is the nearest currently? About 17 miles? And don't they mess up the horizon now? I used to be able to see Walney Island on a clear day. Now it's just a barrage of huge windmills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTeapot Posted July 10 Share Posted July 10 They wouldn't be there if they weren't making money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.