Group opposing controversial Navitus Bay wind farm challenges ‘flawed’ scheme at first opportunity

CHALLENGE: Andrew Langley on Swanage seafront

CHALLENGE: Andrew Langley on Swanage seafront

First published in News by , Chief Reporter

ONE of the groups opposing the Navitus Bay wind farm has challenged its planning application at the first opportunity.

Navitus Bay Development Ltd was intending to submit its application for the park, which could see as many as 194 turbines as high as 200m, to the Planning Inspectorate this week.

Once submitted, there is a four-week period where the inspectorate will check the application to make sure it is valid.

Challenge Navitus has compiled an 11-page dossier highlighting what it says are flaws in NBDL’s consultation process in an attempt to persuade the government to reject the application at the first hurdle.

But NBDL says Challenge Navitus’s objections were always going to be included as per planning law and says its process was “certainly not flawed”.

Dr Andrew Langley, of Challenge Navitus, said: “We think NBDL’s consultation failed to meet that standard in key areas.

“As a result of incomplete, unclear and even misleading information, people have been ill-prepared to respond. We now look to the Planning Inspectorate to ensure that the public will become fully informed before any examination of NBDL’s application begins.”

Criticisms levelled at NBDL by Challenge Navitus include claims that photomontages have under-represented the visual impact of the proposal; that there has been an “incomplete, inconsistent, unrealistic and unclear” presentation of the socio-economic impacts and that “adverse conclusions” in NBDL’s own surveys – such as potentially up to a third of visitors staying away during construction years and an 11 per cent drop in number during wind farm operation – were not highlighted in the consultation.

It also said that environmental impacts from port operations had not been fully assessed.

Consultation ‘was not flawed’

STUART Grant, senior project manager at Navitus Bay, said that Challenge Navitus’s objections were included, as per planning law, as part of the application.

“The consultation process that we undertook was certainly not flawed.

“We followed the directions of PINS (the Planning Inspectorate) throughout and, in fact, have gone above and beyond by holding a fourth round of public consultation and four rounds of additional drop-in surgeries.

“We wanted to give local residents as many opportunities as possible to find out more about the project.

Comments (36)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:29am Sun 13 Apr 14

tinker49 says...

In a democracy the people have a right to protest and i completely support that right. But how many of those people protesting will be alive when we RUN OUT of oil to power light heating etc......
In a democracy the people have a right to protest and i completely support that right. But how many of those people protesting will be alive when we RUN OUT of oil to power light heating etc...... tinker49
  • Score: 20

10:37am Sun 13 Apr 14

Townee says...

Just get the things built and stop being NIMBY's we need these things as much as any other source of power. I for one will take anything that keeps the lights on and prices down.
Just get the things built and stop being NIMBY's we need these things as much as any other source of power. I for one will take anything that keeps the lights on and prices down. Townee
  • Score: 14

11:09am Sun 13 Apr 14

bobsworthforever says...

Yes weve all got the right to protest but the Swanage NIMBYS do nothing but protest get on and build it its going to be built sooner or later
Yes weve all got the right to protest but the Swanage NIMBYS do nothing but protest get on and build it its going to be built sooner or later bobsworthforever
  • Score: 3

11:33am Sun 13 Apr 14

PUZZLED ONE says...

Nuclear power works 24/7/365.
Electricity from Wind is only available when the wind is the right speed - too little or too much wind and they are switched off and the owners are still paid an exorbitant price.
Electricity demand occurs constantly.
If it were not that these windmills are subsidised, I doubt that they would exist
Nuclear power works 24/7/365. Electricity from Wind is only available when the wind is the right speed - too little or too much wind and they are switched off and the owners are still paid an exorbitant price. Electricity demand occurs constantly. If it were not that these windmills are subsidised, I doubt that they would exist PUZZLED ONE
  • Score: 16

11:44am Sun 13 Apr 14

muscliffman says...

tinker49 wrote:
In a democracy the people have a right to protest and i completely support that right. But how many of those people protesting will be alive when we RUN OUT of oil to power light heating etc......
People also have the right to point out that we have recently affirmed that the UK independently has access to thousands of years worth of energy in it's own coal and shale gas reserves. We should therefore invest in cleaning up these reliable proven 24/7 ways of producing UK power instead of subsidising a grossly inefficient system that only works (just) when the wind happens to blow at the right speed.

Wind farms are a passing 'green' fad founded on empty if well intended promises, we shall deeply regret building the UK ones we already have - a stage several other Countries have now clearly reached.
[quote][p][bold]tinker49[/bold] wrote: In a democracy the people have a right to protest and i completely support that right. But how many of those people protesting will be alive when we RUN OUT of oil to power light heating etc......[/p][/quote]People also have the right to point out that we have recently affirmed that the UK independently has access to thousands of years worth of energy in it's own coal and shale gas reserves. We should therefore invest in cleaning up these reliable proven 24/7 ways of producing UK power instead of subsidising a grossly inefficient system that only works (just) when the wind happens to blow at the right speed. Wind farms are a passing 'green' fad founded on empty if well intended promises, we shall deeply regret building the UK ones we already have - a stage several other Countries have now clearly reached. muscliffman
  • Score: 13

11:45am Sun 13 Apr 14

Mindvor says...

Where do you get these figures of an 11% drop in visitor numbers? The CN website itself even states, multiple times, that "It is very difficult to prove in advance what the impact of a windfarm would be on the local economy."
Personally, in my opinion I think CN website mock ups make the horizon even more stunning and simply add to the splendour of the land-based scenery (just how stunning is an empty sea horizon anyway?)...I for one look forward to taking my family there and showing off how at least we're trying something to mitigate the dependency on fossil fuels....and much rather this than having nuclear power stations dotted everywhere.
Good luck NBDL, I wish you every success :)
Where do you get these figures of an 11% drop in visitor numbers? The CN website itself even states, multiple times, that "It is very difficult to prove in advance what the impact of a windfarm would be on the local economy." Personally, in my opinion I think CN website mock ups make the horizon even more stunning and simply add to the splendour of the land-based scenery (just how stunning is an empty sea horizon anyway?)...I for one look forward to taking my family there and showing off how at least we're trying something to mitigate the dependency on fossil fuels....and much rather this than having nuclear power stations dotted everywhere. Good luck NBDL, I wish you every success :) Mindvor
  • Score: 14

11:57am Sun 13 Apr 14

boardsandphotos says...

PUZZLED ONE wrote:
Nuclear power works 24/7/365.
Electricity from Wind is only available when the wind is the right speed - too little or too much wind and they are switched off and the owners are still paid an exorbitant price.
Electricity demand occurs constantly.
If it were not that these windmills are subsidised, I doubt that they would exist
Nuclear Power.

A new Nuclear Power Station has just been approved in Hinkley, Somerset. It will cost £16 billion of French and Chinese money to build, (so that's the energy companies of two foreign countries subsidising our state energy) it won't be competed until 2023 and it will only be able to give us energy for 60 years.

Yeah sounds great!
[quote][p][bold]PUZZLED ONE[/bold] wrote: Nuclear power works 24/7/365. Electricity from Wind is only available when the wind is the right speed - too little or too much wind and they are switched off and the owners are still paid an exorbitant price. Electricity demand occurs constantly. If it were not that these windmills are subsidised, I doubt that they would exist[/p][/quote]Nuclear Power. A new Nuclear Power Station has just been approved in Hinkley, Somerset. It will cost £16 billion of French and Chinese money to build, (so that's the energy companies of two foreign countries subsidising our state energy) it won't be competed until 2023 and it will only be able to give us energy for 60 years. Yeah sounds great! boardsandphotos
  • Score: 8

12:16pm Sun 13 Apr 14

BmthNewshound says...

It seems that the protesters all expect electricity to be available at the flick of a switch but expect someone else to be inconvenienced or have their home blighted to ensure that the supplies continue when the old coal fired power stations are switched off.
.
Compared to the harmful environmental impact of fracking and very expensive and controversial nuclear power a wind farm several miles off shore is a small price to pay. The scare stories about the impact on tourism are absolutely rubbish, for a large number of days a year the turbines won't be visible from shore or even when they are will be nothing more than dots on the horizon.
.
We've got so used to a constant and reliable supply of electricity that we don't give any thought to where it comes from. Wind turbines are only part of the solution but unless the protesters can come up with a viable alternative their protests are nothing more than NIMBYISM.
It seems that the protesters all expect electricity to be available at the flick of a switch but expect someone else to be inconvenienced or have their home blighted to ensure that the supplies continue when the old coal fired power stations are switched off. . Compared to the harmful environmental impact of fracking and very expensive and controversial nuclear power a wind farm several miles off shore is a small price to pay. The scare stories about the impact on tourism are absolutely rubbish, for a large number of days a year the turbines won't be visible from shore or even when they are will be nothing more than dots on the horizon. . We've got so used to a constant and reliable supply of electricity that we don't give any thought to where it comes from. Wind turbines are only part of the solution but unless the protesters can come up with a viable alternative their protests are nothing more than NIMBYISM. BmthNewshound
  • Score: 13

12:18pm Sun 13 Apr 14

muscliffman says...

boardsandphotos wrote:
PUZZLED ONE wrote:
Nuclear power works 24/7/365.
Electricity from Wind is only available when the wind is the right speed - too little or too much wind and they are switched off and the owners are still paid an exorbitant price.
Electricity demand occurs constantly.
If it were not that these windmills are subsidised, I doubt that they would exist
Nuclear Power.

A new Nuclear Power Station has just been approved in Hinkley, Somerset. It will cost £16 billion of French and Chinese money to build, (so that's the energy companies of two foreign countries subsidising our state energy) it won't be competed until 2023 and it will only be able to give us energy for 60 years.

Yeah sounds great!
As before I agree with your point, but it's our illustrious politicians that have fouled up in allowing this foreign financial involvement at Hinkley, with the profits and any UK subsidies doubtless heading overseas - presumably as they will if Navitus proceeds.

The principle of nuclear power itself is not the problem, because unlike wind farms it IS a very sound part of the UK's solution for future energy provision.
[quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PUZZLED ONE[/bold] wrote: Nuclear power works 24/7/365. Electricity from Wind is only available when the wind is the right speed - too little or too much wind and they are switched off and the owners are still paid an exorbitant price. Electricity demand occurs constantly. If it were not that these windmills are subsidised, I doubt that they would exist[/p][/quote]Nuclear Power. A new Nuclear Power Station has just been approved in Hinkley, Somerset. It will cost £16 billion of French and Chinese money to build, (so that's the energy companies of two foreign countries subsidising our state energy) it won't be competed until 2023 and it will only be able to give us energy for 60 years. Yeah sounds great![/p][/quote]As before I agree with your point, but it's our illustrious politicians that have fouled up in allowing this foreign financial involvement at Hinkley, with the profits and any UK subsidies doubtless heading overseas - presumably as they will if Navitus proceeds. The principle of nuclear power itself is not the problem, because unlike wind farms it IS a very sound part of the UK's solution for future energy provision. muscliffman
  • Score: 10

1:25pm Sun 13 Apr 14

Letcommonsenseprevail says...

NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY
NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY Letcommonsenseprevail
  • Score: 2

2:54pm Sun 13 Apr 14

High Treason says...

France has had nuclear power for years with no problems. They export electricity to the UK, Germany etc and it is cheaper in France to use electricity than gas for heating. Like them or not the French have better railways and an energy plan. We have neither.
France has had nuclear power for years with no problems. They export electricity to the UK, Germany etc and it is cheaper in France to use electricity than gas for heating. Like them or not the French have better railways and an energy plan. We have neither. High Treason
  • Score: 19

5:04pm Sun 13 Apr 14

Townee says...

We need to build any power generating systems our selves not pay other countries to build and run them. In doing that we would be paying them a premium to supply our power and prices would be high. We need a national power company owned and run by the UK.
Bloody Thatcher sold everything this country should have been proud of and now we are paying for her mistakes. Gas bought from Russia and other European countries, power companies owned by. France and Germany, we subsidies there bills to the detriment of our bills. Now we have a postal service that is owned by big companies who only interest is money.
We need to build any power generating systems our selves not pay other countries to build and run them. In doing that we would be paying them a premium to supply our power and prices would be high. We need a national power company owned and run by the UK. Bloody Thatcher sold everything this country should have been proud of and now we are paying for her mistakes. Gas bought from Russia and other European countries, power companies owned by. France and Germany, we subsidies there bills to the detriment of our bills. Now we have a postal service that is owned by big companies who only interest is money. Townee
  • Score: 1

5:09pm Sun 13 Apr 14

itsneverblackorwhite says...

We still have millions of tons of coal in this country and the technology to burn it smokeless, an industry re-born and potentially become an exporter of energy not an importer.
We still have millions of tons of coal in this country and the technology to burn it smokeless, an industry re-born and potentially become an exporter of energy not an importer. itsneverblackorwhite
  • Score: 6

5:55pm Sun 13 Apr 14

mooninpisces says...

Letcommonsenseprevai
l
wrote:
NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY
It's worse than nimby.

Instead of waiting for the opportunity to present their case to the Planning Enquiry, they're trying to stop the Enquiry taking place at all.

And, while they're about it, depriving the rest of us of the opportunity to read the final proposals and have our reactions to them represented in the Enquiry.
[quote][p][bold]Letcommonsenseprevai l[/bold] wrote: NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY[/p][/quote]It's worse than nimby. Instead of waiting for the opportunity to present their case to the Planning Enquiry, they're trying to stop the Enquiry taking place at all. And, while they're about it, depriving the rest of us of the opportunity to read the final proposals and have our reactions to them represented in the Enquiry. mooninpisces
  • Score: -3

6:12pm Sun 13 Apr 14

Rich© says...

Jeez just get the bloody things built, the amount of hot air that is being spouted about at the moment would be enough to run a power plant !!!! They have these in France, they are not noisy, smelly or ruin the landscape, they are accepted.

Most people that are complaining wont be around long enough to see any benefit any way, so why not think of future generations that will benefit from them.
Jeez just get the bloody things built, the amount of hot air that is being spouted about at the moment would be enough to run a power plant !!!! They have these in France, they are not noisy, smelly or ruin the landscape, they are accepted. Most people that are complaining wont be around long enough to see any benefit any way, so why not think of future generations that will benefit from them. Rich©
  • Score: 3

7:33pm Sun 13 Apr 14

ShuttleX says...

itsneverblackorwhite wrote:
We still have millions of tons of coal in this country and the technology to burn it smokeless, an industry re-born and potentially become an exporter of energy not an importer.
Coal is not the answer to our energy prayers. Whilst it can be made smoke free, it will not burn co2 free, so up goes the carbon levels. Most sulphur can be caught, but not all, hence the increase in acid rain. Then of course you have the cost of extraction and transport. Before you can burn the coal, you will have to build coal fired power stations, and if you think the NIMBYs are out in force over this wind farm, they are deathly quiet compared to the ones who will come out in force if a power station was going to be built in their back yard. Wind farms are not the sole answer, nor is solar or tidal power. But a combination of all of them, plus nuclear would certainly go a long way to providing our power needs for years to come. We need to be less reliant on overseas power, as will be shown when the nutter in the Kremlin turns the taps off
[quote][p][bold]itsneverblackorwhite[/bold] wrote: We still have millions of tons of coal in this country and the technology to burn it smokeless, an industry re-born and potentially become an exporter of energy not an importer.[/p][/quote]Coal is not the answer to our energy prayers. Whilst it can be made smoke free, it will not burn co2 free, so up goes the carbon levels. Most sulphur can be caught, but not all, hence the increase in acid rain. Then of course you have the cost of extraction and transport. Before you can burn the coal, you will have to build coal fired power stations, and if you think the NIMBYs are out in force over this wind farm, they are deathly quiet compared to the ones who will come out in force if a power station was going to be built in their back yard. Wind farms are not the sole answer, nor is solar or tidal power. But a combination of all of them, plus nuclear would certainly go a long way to providing our power needs for years to come. We need to be less reliant on overseas power, as will be shown when the nutter in the Kremlin turns the taps off ShuttleX
  • Score: 9

9:13pm Sun 13 Apr 14

calamity carney says...

High Treason wrote:
France has had nuclear power for years with no problems. They export electricity to the UK, Germany etc and it is cheaper in France to use electricity than gas for heating. Like them or not the French have better railways and an energy plan. We have neither.
Yep. They invested in the 1980ies we had thatcher!
[quote][p][bold]High Treason[/bold] wrote: France has had nuclear power for years with no problems. They export electricity to the UK, Germany etc and it is cheaper in France to use electricity than gas for heating. Like them or not the French have better railways and an energy plan. We have neither.[/p][/quote]Yep. They invested in the 1980ies we had thatcher! calamity carney
  • Score: 0

9:20pm Sun 13 Apr 14

calamity carney says...

Molten salt reactors are well suited to thorium fuel, costly fuel fabrication is avoided. UK world leaders in research back in the 1970ies.
Molten salt reactors are well suited to thorium fuel, costly fuel fabrication is avoided. UK world leaders in research back in the 1970ies. calamity carney
  • Score: 1

10:13pm Sun 13 Apr 14

themummy says...

I am hoping to move to Iceland soon, this country need a big kick up the as...they use their natural resources effectively and yes sometimes it looks ugly, but they have the cleanest air to breathe, the cheapest energy and some **** fine produce, grown under polytunnels/greenhou
ses, using geo thermal energy.....I really do not care if there are wind turbines in my view when looking out to see....In North Wales they have them and I thought it looked interesting....lets face it, a horizon line and nothing in between is a rather boring 360....as long as the wildlife is not affected to greatly for too long Im happy for it to go ahead.
I am hoping to move to Iceland soon, this country need a big kick up the as...they use their natural resources effectively and yes sometimes it looks ugly, but they have the cleanest air to breathe, the cheapest energy and some **** fine produce, grown under polytunnels/greenhou ses, using geo thermal energy.....I really do not care if there are wind turbines in my view when looking out to see....In North Wales they have them and I thought it looked interesting....lets face it, a horizon line and nothing in between is a rather boring 360....as long as the wildlife is not affected to greatly for too long Im happy for it to go ahead. themummy
  • Score: 2

10:47pm Sun 13 Apr 14

calamity carney says...

Wonder how many of the "moaners" have shares or a pension that is invested in the "traditional" energy generating companies?
Wonder how many of the "moaners" have shares or a pension that is invested in the "traditional" energy generating companies? calamity carney
  • Score: 3

11:21pm Sun 13 Apr 14

boardsandphotos says...

boardsandphotos wrote:
PUZZLED ONE wrote:
Nuclear power works 24/7/365.
Electricity from Wind is only available when the wind is the right speed - too little or too much wind and they are switched off and the owners are still paid an exorbitant price.
Electricity demand occurs constantly.
If it were not that these windmills are subsidised, I doubt that they would exist
Nuclear Power.

A new Nuclear Power Station has just been approved in Hinkley, Somerset. It will cost £16 billion of French and Chinese money to build, (so that's the energy companies of two foreign countries subsidising our state energy) it won't be competed until 2023 and it will only be able to give us energy for 60 years.

Yeah sounds great!
I see facts continue to be difficult for some to swallow.

Fingers in ears time! LaLaLaLaLaLaLaLa.


Muscliffman - yep, willing to look at fracking too.
[quote][p][bold]boardsandphotos[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PUZZLED ONE[/bold] wrote: Nuclear power works 24/7/365. Electricity from Wind is only available when the wind is the right speed - too little or too much wind and they are switched off and the owners are still paid an exorbitant price. Electricity demand occurs constantly. If it were not that these windmills are subsidised, I doubt that they would exist[/p][/quote]Nuclear Power. A new Nuclear Power Station has just been approved in Hinkley, Somerset. It will cost £16 billion of French and Chinese money to build, (so that's the energy companies of two foreign countries subsidising our state energy) it won't be competed until 2023 and it will only be able to give us energy for 60 years. Yeah sounds great![/p][/quote]I see facts continue to be difficult for some to swallow. Fingers in ears time! LaLaLaLaLaLaLaLa. Muscliffman - yep, willing to look at fracking too. boardsandphotos
  • Score: -2

12:18am Mon 14 Apr 14

Marty Caine UKIP says...

We need to be self sufficient in our energy needs, if we let other countries control our energy they can easily adversely affect our economy. The only real sensible route is fracking as a temporary measure until of such time we have our own nuclear power stations. Wind farm have already been proven to be inefficient, so pointless to waste time and money on building them and for those protesting about fracking Wytch Farm has been fracking for over 20 years and has had no problems whatsoever, so what is the real fuss about it ?
We need to be self sufficient in our energy needs, if we let other countries control our energy they can easily adversely affect our economy. The only real sensible route is fracking as a temporary measure until of such time we have our own nuclear power stations. Wind farm have already been proven to be inefficient, so pointless to waste time and money on building them and for those protesting about fracking Wytch Farm has been fracking for over 20 years and has had no problems whatsoever, so what is the real fuss about it ? Marty Caine UKIP
  • Score: -5

7:26am Mon 14 Apr 14

mooninpisces says...

If the UKIP case for relying on fracking to solve our energy problems relies on the example of Wytch Farm to reassure us, then the Echo article on Perenco's applications to extend operations there (9 September 2013) might give us pause for thought.

There, a Perenco spokesman stated that its applications were about "continuing our business-as-usual activities and operations”, and that Wytch Farm is not a shale gas field but a conventional oil field that uses conventional techniques. He explained: “We believe that the current public concern about ‘fracking’ relates to extensive, high pressure, hydraulic fracturing using high-volumes of liquid in very low permeability rock to extract gas from shale, and methane from coal-beds. High volume hydraulic fracturing of this type has not been carried out at Wytch Farm."

It's this extensive high volume hydraulic fracturing to extract gas from shale that UKIP favour, not the much more benign process used at Wytch Farm to retrieve as much oil as possible from its conventional wells.
If the UKIP case for relying on fracking to solve our energy problems relies on the example of Wytch Farm to reassure us, then the Echo article on Perenco's applications to extend operations there (9 September 2013) might give us pause for thought. There, a Perenco spokesman stated that its applications were about "continuing our business-as-usual activities and operations”, and that Wytch Farm is not a shale gas field but a conventional oil field that uses conventional techniques. He explained: “We believe that the current public concern about ‘fracking’ relates to extensive, high pressure, hydraulic fracturing using high-volumes of liquid in very low permeability rock to extract gas from shale, and methane from coal-beds. High volume hydraulic fracturing of this type has not been carried out at Wytch Farm." It's this extensive high volume hydraulic fracturing to extract gas from shale that UKIP favour, not the much more benign process used at Wytch Farm to retrieve as much oil as possible from its conventional wells. mooninpisces
  • Score: 1

9:43am Mon 14 Apr 14

BarrHumbug says...

themummy wrote:
I am hoping to move to Iceland soon, this country need a big kick up the as...they use their natural resources effectively and yes sometimes it looks ugly, but they have the cleanest air to breathe, the cheapest energy and some **** fine produce, grown under polytunnels/greenhou

ses, using geo thermal energy.....I really do not care if there are wind turbines in my view when looking out to see....In North Wales they have them and I thought it looked interesting....lets face it, a horizon line and nothing in between is a rather boring 360....as long as the wildlife is not affected to greatly for too long Im happy for it to go ahead.
Yeah but an erupting volcano can really ruin your day ;)
[quote][p][bold]themummy[/bold] wrote: I am hoping to move to Iceland soon, this country need a big kick up the as...they use their natural resources effectively and yes sometimes it looks ugly, but they have the cleanest air to breathe, the cheapest energy and some **** fine produce, grown under polytunnels/greenhou ses, using geo thermal energy.....I really do not care if there are wind turbines in my view when looking out to see....In North Wales they have them and I thought it looked interesting....lets face it, a horizon line and nothing in between is a rather boring 360....as long as the wildlife is not affected to greatly for too long Im happy for it to go ahead.[/p][/quote]Yeah but an erupting volcano can really ruin your day ;) BarrHumbug
  • Score: 1

10:17am Mon 14 Apr 14

BarrHumbug says...

Townee wrote:
We need to build any power generating systems our selves not pay other countries to build and run them. In doing that we would be paying them a premium to supply our power and prices would be high. We need a national power company owned and run by the UK.
Bloody Thatcher sold everything this country should have been proud of and now we are paying for her mistakes. Gas bought from Russia and other European countries, power companies owned by. France and Germany, we subsidies there bills to the detriment of our bills. Now we have a postal service that is owned by big companies who only interest is money.
Both sides are to blame due to making vote winning policies rather than long term commitment and investment over the years on issues like power, transport and health that will still be there long after they have left and I really can't see that policy ever changing? Long term issues like that should be taken from short term party decisions?

And if you want to bash Thatcher, how about Gordons Fire Sale of 400 tonnes of the UK's Gold reserves? He pre announced the sale immediately causing the value to drop 10%, then flooded the market over a period of 3 years further driving down golds value to a 20yr low there by selling £19billion pounds worth of gold for £6billion, nice one Gordon!!!
[quote][p][bold]Townee[/bold] wrote: We need to build any power generating systems our selves not pay other countries to build and run them. In doing that we would be paying them a premium to supply our power and prices would be high. We need a national power company owned and run by the UK. Bloody Thatcher sold everything this country should have been proud of and now we are paying for her mistakes. Gas bought from Russia and other European countries, power companies owned by. France and Germany, we subsidies there bills to the detriment of our bills. Now we have a postal service that is owned by big companies who only interest is money.[/p][/quote]Both sides are to blame due to making vote winning policies rather than long term commitment and investment over the years on issues like power, transport and health that will still be there long after they have left and I really can't see that policy ever changing? Long term issues like that should be taken from short term party decisions? And if you want to bash Thatcher, how about Gordons Fire Sale of 400 tonnes of the UK's Gold reserves? He pre announced the sale immediately causing the value to drop 10%, then flooded the market over a period of 3 years further driving down golds value to a 20yr low there by selling £19billion pounds worth of gold for £6billion, nice one Gordon!!! BarrHumbug
  • Score: 1

10:55am Mon 14 Apr 14

Marty Caine UKIP says...

mooninpisces wrote:
If the UKIP case for relying on fracking to solve our energy problems relies on the example of Wytch Farm to reassure us, then the Echo article on Perenco's applications to extend operations there (9 September 2013) might give us pause for thought.

There, a Perenco spokesman stated that its applications were about "continuing our business-as-usual activities and operations”, and that Wytch Farm is not a shale gas field but a conventional oil field that uses conventional techniques. He explained: “We believe that the current public concern about ‘fracking’ relates to extensive, high pressure, hydraulic fracturing using high-volumes of liquid in very low permeability rock to extract gas from shale, and methane from coal-beds. High volume hydraulic fracturing of this type has not been carried out at Wytch Farm."

It's this extensive high volume hydraulic fracturing to extract gas from shale that UKIP favour, not the much more benign process used at Wytch Farm to retrieve as much oil as possible from its conventional wells.
Your cluelessness really does make it far too easy at times MiP, why don't you actually try to research what I post before saying I am wrong, it may actually save you embarrassing yourself so often :)

http://www.telegraph
.co.uk/earth/earthne
ws/10233955/The-town
-where-fracking-is-a
lready-happening.htm
l
[quote][p][bold]mooninpisces[/bold] wrote: If the UKIP case for relying on fracking to solve our energy problems relies on the example of Wytch Farm to reassure us, then the Echo article on Perenco's applications to extend operations there (9 September 2013) might give us pause for thought. There, a Perenco spokesman stated that its applications were about "continuing our business-as-usual activities and operations”, and that Wytch Farm is not a shale gas field but a conventional oil field that uses conventional techniques. He explained: “We believe that the current public concern about ‘fracking’ relates to extensive, high pressure, hydraulic fracturing using high-volumes of liquid in very low permeability rock to extract gas from shale, and methane from coal-beds. High volume hydraulic fracturing of this type has not been carried out at Wytch Farm." It's this extensive high volume hydraulic fracturing to extract gas from shale that UKIP favour, not the much more benign process used at Wytch Farm to retrieve as much oil as possible from its conventional wells.[/p][/quote]Your cluelessness really does make it far too easy at times MiP, why don't you actually try to research what I post before saying I am wrong, it may actually save you embarrassing yourself so often :) http://www.telegraph .co.uk/earth/earthne ws/10233955/The-town -where-fracking-is-a lready-happening.htm l Marty Caine UKIP
  • Score: -2

11:04am Mon 14 Apr 14

BarrHumbug says...

I don't know what Andrew Langley is moaning about, I can't even see the wind farm in his picture, your going to have to do better than that if you want to convince us Mr Langley?
I don't know what Andrew Langley is moaning about, I can't even see the wind farm in his picture, your going to have to do better than that if you want to convince us Mr Langley? BarrHumbug
  • Score: 1

11:27am Mon 14 Apr 14

Bugzy84 says...

Yes that wind farm you can barely see on the horizon it much worst than the massive power plant they will have to build on land, won't Dorset look so much better
Yes that wind farm you can barely see on the horizon it much worst than the massive power plant they will have to build on land, won't Dorset look so much better Bugzy84
  • Score: 1

1:35pm Mon 14 Apr 14

BarrHumbug says...

Bugzy84 wrote:
Yes that wind farm you can barely see on the horizon it much worst than the massive power plant they will have to build on land, won't Dorset look so much better
I don't think they're against the building of a wind farm, just not around here. I wonder how many of them travelled to Norfolk or North Wales in support of their fellow objectors...........
.Thought so?
[quote][p][bold]Bugzy84[/bold] wrote: Yes that wind farm you can barely see on the horizon it much worst than the massive power plant they will have to build on land, won't Dorset look so much better[/p][/quote]I don't think they're against the building of a wind farm, just not around here. I wonder how many of them travelled to Norfolk or North Wales in support of their fellow objectors........... .Thought so? BarrHumbug
  • Score: 0

8:55pm Mon 14 Apr 14

mooninpisces says...

Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
mooninpisces wrote:
If the UKIP case for relying on fracking to solve our energy problems relies on the example of Wytch Farm to reassure us, then the Echo article on Perenco's applications to extend operations there (9 September 2013) might give us pause for thought.

There, a Perenco spokesman stated that its applications were about "continuing our business-as-usual activities and operations”, and that Wytch Farm is not a shale gas field but a conventional oil field that uses conventional techniques. He explained: “We believe that the current public concern about ‘fracking’ relates to extensive, high pressure, hydraulic fracturing using high-volumes of liquid in very low permeability rock to extract gas from shale, and methane from coal-beds. High volume hydraulic fracturing of this type has not been carried out at Wytch Farm."

It's this extensive high volume hydraulic fracturing to extract gas from shale that UKIP favour, not the much more benign process used at Wytch Farm to retrieve as much oil as possible from its conventional wells.
Your cluelessness really does make it far too easy at times MiP, why don't you actually try to research what I post before saying I am wrong, it may actually save you embarrassing yourself so often :)

http://www.telegraph

.co.uk/earth/earthne

ws/10233955/The-town

-where-fracking-is-a

lready-happening.htm

l
MC UKIP has made it very clear, many times, that his "research" on Google and Twitter means that we can completely discount the findings of climate science.

Now he reveals that his reading of a Telegraph article means that he is far more knowledgeable about the well stimulation operations at Perenco's Wytch Farm oil field than the company which carries them out.

I'm surprised Nigel Farage has not yet taken advantage of MC's extensive knowledge, expertise and communication skills to appoint him as the latest UKIP Energy and Climate spokesperson.
[quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mooninpisces[/bold] wrote: If the UKIP case for relying on fracking to solve our energy problems relies on the example of Wytch Farm to reassure us, then the Echo article on Perenco's applications to extend operations there (9 September 2013) might give us pause for thought. There, a Perenco spokesman stated that its applications were about "continuing our business-as-usual activities and operations”, and that Wytch Farm is not a shale gas field but a conventional oil field that uses conventional techniques. He explained: “We believe that the current public concern about ‘fracking’ relates to extensive, high pressure, hydraulic fracturing using high-volumes of liquid in very low permeability rock to extract gas from shale, and methane from coal-beds. High volume hydraulic fracturing of this type has not been carried out at Wytch Farm." It's this extensive high volume hydraulic fracturing to extract gas from shale that UKIP favour, not the much more benign process used at Wytch Farm to retrieve as much oil as possible from its conventional wells.[/p][/quote]Your cluelessness really does make it far too easy at times MiP, why don't you actually try to research what I post before saying I am wrong, it may actually save you embarrassing yourself so often :) http://www.telegraph .co.uk/earth/earthne ws/10233955/The-town -where-fracking-is-a lready-happening.htm l[/p][/quote]MC UKIP has made it very clear, many times, that his "research" on Google and Twitter means that we can completely discount the findings of climate science. Now he reveals that his reading of a Telegraph article means that he is far more knowledgeable about the well stimulation operations at Perenco's Wytch Farm oil field than the company which carries them out. I'm surprised Nigel Farage has not yet taken advantage of MC's extensive knowledge, expertise and communication skills to appoint him as the latest UKIP Energy and Climate spokesperson. mooninpisces
  • Score: 0

1:02am Wed 16 Apr 14

juniperberry says...

BarrHumbug wrote:
I don't know what Andrew Langley is moaning about, I can't even see the wind farm in his picture, your going to have to do better than that if you want to convince us Mr Langley?
That's the point, the visuals are a complete mis-representation, NBDL will not produce accurate visuals because we will all faint at the reality!

Wind farms are unreliable and intermittent and will cost us all millions with no real benefit. It's a big con!

http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=n7k4bIJAI
Os&feature=youtu.be
[quote][p][bold]BarrHumbug[/bold] wrote: I don't know what Andrew Langley is moaning about, I can't even see the wind farm in his picture, your going to have to do better than that if you want to convince us Mr Langley?[/p][/quote]That's the point, the visuals are a complete mis-representation, NBDL will not produce accurate visuals because we will all faint at the reality! Wind farms are unreliable and intermittent and will cost us all millions with no real benefit. It's a big con! http://www.youtube.c om/watch?v=n7k4bIJAI Os&feature=youtu.be juniperberry
  • Score: -1

1:12am Wed 16 Apr 14

mooninpisces says...

juniperberry - The visuals that Andrew Langley is showing us are his own exaggerated ones, not the ones produced by NBDL!
juniperberry - The visuals that Andrew Langley is showing us are his own exaggerated ones, not the ones produced by NBDL! mooninpisces
  • Score: 0

6:10am Wed 16 Apr 14

Marty Caine UKIP says...

mooninpisces wrote:
Marty Caine UKIP wrote:
mooninpisces wrote:
If the UKIP case for relying on fracking to solve our energy problems relies on the example of Wytch Farm to reassure us, then the Echo article on Perenco's applications to extend operations there (9 September 2013) might give us pause for thought.

There, a Perenco spokesman stated that its applications were about "continuing our business-as-usual activities and operations”, and that Wytch Farm is not a shale gas field but a conventional oil field that uses conventional techniques. He explained: “We believe that the current public concern about ‘fracking’ relates to extensive, high pressure, hydraulic fracturing using high-volumes of liquid in very low permeability rock to extract gas from shale, and methane from coal-beds. High volume hydraulic fracturing of this type has not been carried out at Wytch Farm."

It's this extensive high volume hydraulic fracturing to extract gas from shale that UKIP favour, not the much more benign process used at Wytch Farm to retrieve as much oil as possible from its conventional wells.
Your cluelessness really does make it far too easy at times MiP, why don't you actually try to research what I post before saying I am wrong, it may actually save you embarrassing yourself so often :)

http://www.telegraph


.co.uk/earth/earthne


ws/10233955/The-town


-where-fracking-is-a


lready-happening.htm


l
MC UKIP has made it very clear, many times, that his "research" on Google and Twitter means that we can completely discount the findings of climate science.

Now he reveals that his reading of a Telegraph article means that he is far more knowledgeable about the well stimulation operations at Perenco's Wytch Farm oil field than the company which carries them out.

I'm surprised Nigel Farage has not yet taken advantage of MC's extensive knowledge, expertise and communication skills to appoint him as the latest UKIP Energy and Climate spokesperson.
You really do not like being proven wrong do you and I thought you would be used to it by now :)
[quote][p][bold]mooninpisces[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marty Caine UKIP[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mooninpisces[/bold] wrote: If the UKIP case for relying on fracking to solve our energy problems relies on the example of Wytch Farm to reassure us, then the Echo article on Perenco's applications to extend operations there (9 September 2013) might give us pause for thought. There, a Perenco spokesman stated that its applications were about "continuing our business-as-usual activities and operations”, and that Wytch Farm is not a shale gas field but a conventional oil field that uses conventional techniques. He explained: “We believe that the current public concern about ‘fracking’ relates to extensive, high pressure, hydraulic fracturing using high-volumes of liquid in very low permeability rock to extract gas from shale, and methane from coal-beds. High volume hydraulic fracturing of this type has not been carried out at Wytch Farm." It's this extensive high volume hydraulic fracturing to extract gas from shale that UKIP favour, not the much more benign process used at Wytch Farm to retrieve as much oil as possible from its conventional wells.[/p][/quote]Your cluelessness really does make it far too easy at times MiP, why don't you actually try to research what I post before saying I am wrong, it may actually save you embarrassing yourself so often :) http://www.telegraph .co.uk/earth/earthne ws/10233955/The-town -where-fracking-is-a lready-happening.htm l[/p][/quote]MC UKIP has made it very clear, many times, that his "research" on Google and Twitter means that we can completely discount the findings of climate science. Now he reveals that his reading of a Telegraph article means that he is far more knowledgeable about the well stimulation operations at Perenco's Wytch Farm oil field than the company which carries them out. I'm surprised Nigel Farage has not yet taken advantage of MC's extensive knowledge, expertise and communication skills to appoint him as the latest UKIP Energy and Climate spokesperson.[/p][/quote]You really do not like being proven wrong do you and I thought you would be used to it by now :) Marty Caine UKIP
  • Score: 0

6:52am Wed 16 Apr 14

mooninpisces says...

MC UKIP - If your leader won't promote you, why don't you contact Perenco, and let them know that they don't understand what technology they are employing to extract the oil from Wytch Farm? I'm sure they will appreciate the advice. And perhaps they'll even offer you employment as a consultant?
MC UKIP - If your leader won't promote you, why don't you contact Perenco, and let them know that they don't understand what technology they are employing to extract the oil from Wytch Farm? I'm sure they will appreciate the advice. And perhaps they'll even offer you employment as a consultant? mooninpisces
  • Score: 0

7:30am Wed 16 Apr 14

Marty Caine UKIP says...

mooninpisces wrote:
MC UKIP - If your leader won't promote you, why don't you contact Perenco, and let them know that they don't understand what technology they are employing to extract the oil from Wytch Farm? I'm sure they will appreciate the advice. And perhaps they'll even offer you employment as a consultant?
Well they don't really need a consultant, anyone can Google "Wytch Farm Fracking" to see that I am right and you are wrong, yet again.

Have a nice day now MiPs :)
[quote][p][bold]mooninpisces[/bold] wrote: MC UKIP - If your leader won't promote you, why don't you contact Perenco, and let them know that they don't understand what technology they are employing to extract the oil from Wytch Farm? I'm sure they will appreciate the advice. And perhaps they'll even offer you employment as a consultant?[/p][/quote]Well they don't really need a consultant, anyone can Google "Wytch Farm Fracking" to see that I am right and you are wrong, yet again. Have a nice day now MiPs :) Marty Caine UKIP
  • Score: 0

7:48am Wed 16 Apr 14

mooninpisces says...

Anyone can Google 'Marty Caine UKIP' and see that he is right, the climate scientists are wrong, and the operators of Wytch Farm are wrong.
Anyone can Google 'Marty Caine UKIP' and see that he is right, the climate scientists are wrong, and the operators of Wytch Farm are wrong. mooninpisces
  • 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