Bournemouth residents aired their views at packed Navitus wind farm meeting today

Bournemouth Echo: A packed Tregonwell Hall at the BIC today A packed Tregonwell Hall at the BIC today

MORE than 600 Bournemouth residents gathered at the BIC this afternoon to discuss the Navitus Bay wind farm application.

The meeting was organised by Bournemouth Council, which as a statutory consultee will pass its views on to the planning inspectorate when they come to consider the plans, submitted by the developer earlier this week.

The audience heard from speakers for and against the application, including Navitus Bay Development Ltd project director Mike Unsworth, Roy Pointer of the Poole and Christchurch Bays' Association and Andrew Langley of campaign group Challenge Navitus.

They also had a chance to air their own views in a lengthy public session.

Council leader John Beesley, who told the meeting about the council's role on the process, said the turnout reflected the great strength of feeling among residents.

"We welcome the opportunity to listen to the views of Bournemouth residents," he said.

"They will be fed into the process so that we can reflect on them when we make our views known to the planning inspectorate.

"We have a period of time in which to make representations.

"There is a lot of data to go through and we need to make sure we have understood all that before we give an evidence-based view.

"It needs to be based on planning policy and it needs to be sustainable."

He said the views of the public expressed at the meeting, part of the council's consultation process, would have "very significant weight" with the planning inspectorate.

It is anticipated that the final decision on the application will be made by the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change after the next general election.

The £3billion wind farm would consist of up to 194 turbines, up to 200 metres high.

Cables would hit land at Taddiford Gap, between Barton-on-Sea and New Milton, and run 22 miles to a new sub-station at Mannington near Wimborne.

It is officially designated as a 'nationally significant' infrastructure project.

For more details of the meeting please see our live blog here.

Comments (44)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:02pm Sat 10 May 14

robertjg says...

The wind farm is a great idea. I can't wait until it gets built.
The wind farm is a great idea. I can't wait until it gets built. robertjg
  • Score: 16

6:17pm Sat 10 May 14

Sir Retry69 says...

A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)
A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :) Sir Retry69
  • Score: 11

6:30pm Sat 10 May 14

JayaDC says...

As one of the VERY few young people attending, I was disappointed by the lack of balance. Speakers against far outweighed speakers for, and the audience was not representative of the age profile of the Bournemouth population. Many people my age are in favour of the plans. I feel younger people could have been offered a way to contribute that is more up-to-date and accessible for them. Will there be a way for people to have their say, that weren't at the meeting?
As one of the VERY few young people attending, I was disappointed by the lack of balance. Speakers against far outweighed speakers for, and the audience was not representative of the age profile of the Bournemouth population. Many people my age are in favour of the plans. I feel younger people could have been offered a way to contribute that is more up-to-date and accessible for them. Will there be a way for people to have their say, that weren't at the meeting? JayaDC
  • Score: 22

6:46pm Sat 10 May 14

kalebmoledirt says...

Now we know it doesn't bring down buildings with the noise, smell, kill migrating birds get In step with the rest of the UK and look forward to a wind farm near you..you have lost your status as a smart gracious resort.Your no more than a dormitory for petty crimes and failed travellers.Ie. the Sherwoods
Now we know it doesn't bring down buildings with the noise, smell, kill migrating birds get In step with the rest of the UK and look forward to a wind farm near you..you have lost your status as a smart gracious resort.Your no more than a dormitory for petty crimes and failed travellers.Ie. the Sherwoods kalebmoledirt
  • Score: -14

6:46pm Sat 10 May 14

rozmister says...

Sir Retry69 wrote:
A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)
The photos taken from above the meeting. Forego well hall has seating running underneath the balcony this was shot from, all of which was packed! The empty seats on the right are probably empty because they were at the far end to the entrance and lots of people arrived late.
[quote][p][bold]Sir Retry69[/bold] wrote: A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)[/p][/quote]The photos taken from above the meeting. Forego well hall has seating running underneath the balcony this was shot from, all of which was packed! The empty seats on the right are probably empty because they were at the far end to the entrance and lots of people arrived late. rozmister
  • Score: 1

7:35pm Sat 10 May 14

clr WHAT! says...

There were many spurious, but well cheered for, facts. ~Tobias gave a good reason for nimbyism what would you expect to the 'packed' audience, not so subtly lacking in the under 30's, let alone the under 20's. UNESCO Heritage coast, yes, but not for the views, for the geology. People also cheer facts that supported a NO, even when the facts contradicted what seems to other main arguments against the project. So, land side impact was cited as a major factor against the project, but other objections where it was too close, further out would be ok. Land based impact changes how? Bird strikes, but no mention of other man-made impacts on birds, to put stuff into context, I'm looking fwd to the ban of pet felines, as they account for tens of millions of bird deaths. Or the fact that it costs 3x as much to produce wind power! No Facts, or the decommissioning costs, nuclear comes to mind here. No account of, and little comment about the cost of environmental damage unless we change our generating options. A lot said about our prestigious location and views, to me the flip side, is sod every body else, where the generating and raw material sourcing is carried out. The objections are many and all too many of those not substantiated. Those that could be substantiated, said more about the failings of a private corporation to sell Navitas and be forthcoming and honest about the project. As for not so subtle anti foreign comments, if you vote a govt. hell bent on liberalisation of your services, then anyone with the cash can own them, hard luck. Tourism losses, Um like to see the raw data, as bmth is renowned for clubbing and hen/stage do's oh and the value of our student population, with a lot of people lamenting the loss of family holiday makers
There were many spurious, but well cheered for, facts. ~Tobias gave a good reason for nimbyism what would you expect to the 'packed' audience, not so subtly lacking in the under 30's, let alone the under 20's. UNESCO Heritage coast, yes, but not for the views, for the geology. People also cheer facts that supported a NO, even when the facts contradicted what seems to other main arguments against the project. So, land side impact was cited as a major factor against the project, but other objections where it was too close, further out would be ok. Land based impact changes how? Bird strikes, but no mention of other man-made impacts on birds, to put stuff into context, I'm looking fwd to the ban of pet felines, as they account for tens of millions of bird deaths. Or the fact that it costs 3x as much to produce wind power! No Facts, or the decommissioning costs, nuclear comes to mind here. No account of, and little comment about the cost of environmental damage unless we change our generating options. A lot said about our prestigious location and views, to me the flip side, is sod every body else, where the generating and raw material sourcing is carried out. The objections are many and all too many of those not substantiated. Those that could be substantiated, said more about the failings of a private corporation to sell Navitas and be forthcoming and honest about the project. As for not so subtle anti foreign comments, if you vote a govt. hell bent on liberalisation of your services, then anyone with the cash can own them, hard luck. Tourism losses, Um like to see the raw data, as bmth is renowned for clubbing and hen/stage do's oh and the value of our student population, with a lot of people lamenting the loss of family holiday makers clr WHAT!
  • Score: 1

7:43pm Sat 10 May 14

lionheart says...

kalebmoledirt wrote:
Now we know it doesn't bring down buildings with the noise, smell, kill migrating birds get In step with the rest of the UK and look forward to a wind farm near you..you have lost your status as a smart gracious resort.Your no more than a dormitory for petty crimes and failed travellers.Ie. the Sherwoods
It is a fact that they have had to switch off some wind turbines in the US because of the number of birds that have been killed. Smithsonian.com and Natural Reactions blog, report a recent independent survey. The estimate in the USA is that up to 328.000 wild birds are killed annually and the taller the turbine the more wild birds will be killed.

There are wind turbines in 39 states. USA are looking to ultimately produce 20% of its power from this source and if this is reached then it is estimated that 1.4 million wild birds will be smashed to pieces annually.

Whilst USA is a far bigger country it just goes to show what people with a vested interest will tell you.

Like electricity pylons wind turbines are a blot on the landscape.

With the natural double tides around the south coast we should be looking at underwater turbines to take advantage of the daily tides. What wind speed is needed to make it worthwhile and how many days per year is this achievable on average?
[quote][p][bold]kalebmoledirt[/bold] wrote: Now we know it doesn't bring down buildings with the noise, smell, kill migrating birds get In step with the rest of the UK and look forward to a wind farm near you..you have lost your status as a smart gracious resort.Your no more than a dormitory for petty crimes and failed travellers.Ie. the Sherwoods[/p][/quote]It is a fact that they have had to switch off some wind turbines in the US because of the number of birds that have been killed. Smithsonian.com and Natural Reactions blog, report a recent independent survey. The estimate in the USA is that up to 328.000 wild birds are killed annually and the taller the turbine the more wild birds will be killed. There are wind turbines in 39 states. USA are looking to ultimately produce 20% of its power from this source and if this is reached then it is estimated that 1.4 million wild birds will be smashed to pieces annually. Whilst USA is a far bigger country it just goes to show what people with a vested interest will tell you. Like electricity pylons wind turbines are a blot on the landscape. With the natural double tides around the south coast we should be looking at underwater turbines to take advantage of the daily tides. What wind speed is needed to make it worthwhile and how many days per year is this achievable on average? lionheart
  • Score: 19

7:43pm Sat 10 May 14

lionheart says...

kalebmoledirt wrote:
Now we know it doesn't bring down buildings with the noise, smell, kill migrating birds get In step with the rest of the UK and look forward to a wind farm near you..you have lost your status as a smart gracious resort.Your no more than a dormitory for petty crimes and failed travellers.Ie. the Sherwoods
It is a fact that they have had to switch off some wind turbines in the US because of the number of birds that have been killed. Smithsonian.com and Natural Reactions blog, report a recent independent survey. The estimate in the USA is that up to 328.000 wild birds are killed annually and the taller the turbine the more wild birds will be killed.

There are wind turbines in 39 states. USA are looking to ultimately produce 20% of its power from this source and if this is reached then it is estimated that 1.4 million wild birds will be smashed to pieces annually.

Whilst USA is a far bigger country it just goes to show what people with a vested interest will tell you.

Like electricity pylons wind turbines are a blot on the landscape.

With the natural double tides around the south coast we should be looking at underwater turbines to take advantage of the daily tides. What wind speed is needed to make it worthwhile and how many days per year is this achievable on average?
[quote][p][bold]kalebmoledirt[/bold] wrote: Now we know it doesn't bring down buildings with the noise, smell, kill migrating birds get In step with the rest of the UK and look forward to a wind farm near you..you have lost your status as a smart gracious resort.Your no more than a dormitory for petty crimes and failed travellers.Ie. the Sherwoods[/p][/quote]It is a fact that they have had to switch off some wind turbines in the US because of the number of birds that have been killed. Smithsonian.com and Natural Reactions blog, report a recent independent survey. The estimate in the USA is that up to 328.000 wild birds are killed annually and the taller the turbine the more wild birds will be killed. There are wind turbines in 39 states. USA are looking to ultimately produce 20% of its power from this source and if this is reached then it is estimated that 1.4 million wild birds will be smashed to pieces annually. Whilst USA is a far bigger country it just goes to show what people with a vested interest will tell you. Like electricity pylons wind turbines are a blot on the landscape. With the natural double tides around the south coast we should be looking at underwater turbines to take advantage of the daily tides. What wind speed is needed to make it worthwhile and how many days per year is this achievable on average? lionheart
  • Score: 8

7:47pm Sat 10 May 14

kalebmoledirt says...

clr WHAT! wrote:
There were many spurious, but well cheered for, facts. ~Tobias gave a good reason for nimbyism what would you expect to the 'packed' audience, not so subtly lacking in the under 30's, let alone the under 20's. UNESCO Heritage coast, yes, but not for the views, for the geology. People also cheer facts that supported a NO, even when the facts contradicted what seems to other main arguments against the project. So, land side impact was cited as a major factor against the project, but other objections where it was too close, further out would be ok. Land based impact changes how? Bird strikes, but no mention of other man-made impacts on birds, to put stuff into context, I'm looking fwd to the ban of pet felines, as they account for tens of millions of bird deaths. Or the fact that it costs 3x as much to produce wind power! No Facts, or the decommissioning costs, nuclear comes to mind here. No account of, and little comment about the cost of environmental damage unless we change our generating options. A lot said about our prestigious location and views, to me the flip side, is sod every body else, where the generating and raw material sourcing is carried out. The objections are many and all too many of those not substantiated. Those that could be substantiated, said more about the failings of a private corporation to sell Navitas and be forthcoming and honest about the project. As for not so subtle anti foreign comments, if you vote a govt. hell bent on liberalisation of your services, then anyone with the cash can own them, hard luck. Tourism losses, Um like to see the raw data, as bmth is renowned for clubbing and hen/stage do's oh and the value of our student population, with a lot of people lamenting the loss of family holiday makers
Early night cup of Co Co
[quote][p][bold]clr WHAT![/bold] wrote: There were many spurious, but well cheered for, facts. ~Tobias gave a good reason for nimbyism what would you expect to the 'packed' audience, not so subtly lacking in the under 30's, let alone the under 20's. UNESCO Heritage coast, yes, but not for the views, for the geology. People also cheer facts that supported a NO, even when the facts contradicted what seems to other main arguments against the project. So, land side impact was cited as a major factor against the project, but other objections where it was too close, further out would be ok. Land based impact changes how? Bird strikes, but no mention of other man-made impacts on birds, to put stuff into context, I'm looking fwd to the ban of pet felines, as they account for tens of millions of bird deaths. Or the fact that it costs 3x as much to produce wind power! No Facts, or the decommissioning costs, nuclear comes to mind here. No account of, and little comment about the cost of environmental damage unless we change our generating options. A lot said about our prestigious location and views, to me the flip side, is sod every body else, where the generating and raw material sourcing is carried out. The objections are many and all too many of those not substantiated. Those that could be substantiated, said more about the failings of a private corporation to sell Navitas and be forthcoming and honest about the project. As for not so subtle anti foreign comments, if you vote a govt. hell bent on liberalisation of your services, then anyone with the cash can own them, hard luck. Tourism losses, Um like to see the raw data, as bmth is renowned for clubbing and hen/stage do's oh and the value of our student population, with a lot of people lamenting the loss of family holiday makers[/p][/quote]Early night cup of Co Co kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 0

7:54pm Sat 10 May 14

Sir Retry69 says...

rozmister wrote:
Sir Retry69 wrote:
A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)
The photos taken from above the meeting. Forego well hall has seating running underneath the balcony this was shot from, all of which was packed! The empty seats on the right are probably empty because they were at the far end to the entrance and lots of people arrived late.
"Carry on laughing"
[quote][p][bold]rozmister[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sir Retry69[/bold] wrote: A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)[/p][/quote]The photos taken from above the meeting. Forego well hall has seating running underneath the balcony this was shot from, all of which was packed! The empty seats on the right are probably empty because they were at the far end to the entrance and lots of people arrived late.[/p][/quote]"Carry on laughing" Sir Retry69
  • Score: -4

7:58pm Sat 10 May 14

Sir Retry69 says...

Sir Retry69 wrote:
rozmister wrote:
Sir Retry69 wrote:
A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)
The photos taken from above the meeting. Forego well hall has seating running underneath the balcony this was shot from, all of which was packed! The empty seats on the right are probably empty because they were at the far end to the entrance and lots of people arrived late.
"Carry on laughing"
Even the name of the hall suits a carry on film :)
[quote][p][bold]Sir Retry69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rozmister[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sir Retry69[/bold] wrote: A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)[/p][/quote]The photos taken from above the meeting. Forego well hall has seating running underneath the balcony this was shot from, all of which was packed! The empty seats on the right are probably empty because they were at the far end to the entrance and lots of people arrived late.[/p][/quote]"Carry on laughing"[/p][/quote]Even the name of the hall suits a carry on film :) Sir Retry69
  • Score: 0

8:05pm Sat 10 May 14

Sir Retry69 says...

rozmister wrote:
Sir Retry69 wrote:
A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)
The photos taken from above the meeting. Forego well hall has seating running underneath the balcony this was shot from, all of which was packed! The empty seats on the right are probably empty because they were at the far end to the entrance and lots of people arrived late.
I have been informed it was at the Tregonwell Hall which has a seating capacity of 1159, attendance was 630 something hardly packed wouldn't you say,or is my info incorrect
[quote][p][bold]rozmister[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sir Retry69[/bold] wrote: A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)[/p][/quote]The photos taken from above the meeting. Forego well hall has seating running underneath the balcony this was shot from, all of which was packed! The empty seats on the right are probably empty because they were at the far end to the entrance and lots of people arrived late.[/p][/quote]I have been informed it was at the Tregonwell Hall which has a seating capacity of 1159, attendance was 630 something hardly packed wouldn't you say,or is my info incorrect Sir Retry69
  • Score: -1

8:13pm Sat 10 May 14

Old Colonial says...

JayaDC wrote:
As one of the VERY few young people attending, I was disappointed by the lack of balance. Speakers against far outweighed speakers for, and the audience was not representative of the age profile of the Bournemouth population. Many people my age are in favour of the plans. I feel younger people could have been offered a way to contribute that is more up-to-date and accessible for them. Will there be a way for people to have their say, that weren't at the meeting?
"..more up-to-date and acceptable.."! Have you and your generation really forgotten, or never experienced, what real face to face contact in a debate is all about? Or are you so used to the anonymity and arms length communication of technology? Sad, very sad.
[quote][p][bold]JayaDC[/bold] wrote: As one of the VERY few young people attending, I was disappointed by the lack of balance. Speakers against far outweighed speakers for, and the audience was not representative of the age profile of the Bournemouth population. Many people my age are in favour of the plans. I feel younger people could have been offered a way to contribute that is more up-to-date and accessible for them. Will there be a way for people to have their say, that weren't at the meeting?[/p][/quote]"..more up-to-date and acceptable.."! Have you and your generation really forgotten, or never experienced, what real face to face contact in a debate is all about? Or are you so used to the anonymity and arms length communication of technology? Sad, very sad. Old Colonial
  • Score: 3

8:16pm Sat 10 May 14

K.Richards88 says...

Democracy Tobias states, I don't think so, not when there are plenty of speakers providing an against wind farms argument (which actually became quite boring and repetitive to listen to after the third time) and just one speaker offering a 'for' argument. This is not the democracy I know nor is it providing a fair or balanced meeting. Apparently, specific details and facts have not been provided by Navitus according to Beesley. However, some people in the crowd as well as speakers were ranting about the sizes, noise pollution, red lights as though they were definite planned detail already provided by Navitus but how can this be when Beesley suggest certain details have not been disclosed. So some of the views expressed today appear to be based upon subjective, closed minded assumptions not just the facts. I ask myself the question, how beautiful will Bournemouth look when we have reached crisis point? Maybe then we will not be so concerned by little red lights flashing in the distance or a little noise. I can sacrifice part of my horizon line for the sake of a more sustainable, self reliant future.
Democracy Tobias states, I don't think so, not when there are plenty of speakers providing an against wind farms argument (which actually became quite boring and repetitive to listen to after the third time) and just one speaker offering a 'for' argument. This is not the democracy I know nor is it providing a fair or balanced meeting. Apparently, specific details and facts have not been provided by Navitus according to Beesley. However, some people in the crowd as well as speakers were ranting about the sizes, noise pollution, red lights as though they were definite planned detail already provided by Navitus but how can this be when Beesley suggest certain details have not been disclosed. So some of the views expressed today appear to be based upon subjective, closed minded assumptions not just the facts. I ask myself the question, how beautiful will Bournemouth look when we have reached crisis point? Maybe then we will not be so concerned by little red lights flashing in the distance or a little noise. I can sacrifice part of my horizon line for the sake of a more sustainable, self reliant future. K.Richards88
  • Score: 7

8:38pm Sat 10 May 14

Townee says...

lionheart wrote:
kalebmoledirt wrote:
Now we know it doesn't bring down buildings with the noise, smell, kill migrating birds get In step with the rest of the UK and look forward to a wind farm near you..you have lost your status as a smart gracious resort.Your no more than a dormitory for petty crimes and failed travellers.Ie. the Sherwoods
It is a fact that they have had to switch off some wind turbines in the US because of the number of birds that have been killed. Smithsonian.com and Natural Reactions blog, report a recent independent survey. The estimate in the USA is that up to 328.000 wild birds are killed annually and the taller the turbine the more wild birds will be killed.

There are wind turbines in 39 states. USA are looking to ultimately produce 20% of its power from this source and if this is reached then it is estimated that 1.4 million wild birds will be smashed to pieces annually.

Whilst USA is a far bigger country it just goes to show what people with a vested interest will tell you.

Like electricity pylons wind turbines are a blot on the landscape.

With the natural double tides around the south coast we should be looking at underwater turbines to take advantage of the daily tides. What wind speed is needed to make it worthwhile and how many days per year is this achievable on average?
If a flock of bird number thousands can fly together without hitting one another then I'm sure they can miss a bloody great wind mill over 100 mtrs tall.
This idea that thousands of birds will be killed is pure hype on behalf of the NIMBY's.
[quote][p][bold]lionheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]kalebmoledirt[/bold] wrote: Now we know it doesn't bring down buildings with the noise, smell, kill migrating birds get In step with the rest of the UK and look forward to a wind farm near you..you have lost your status as a smart gracious resort.Your no more than a dormitory for petty crimes and failed travellers.Ie. the Sherwoods[/p][/quote]It is a fact that they have had to switch off some wind turbines in the US because of the number of birds that have been killed. Smithsonian.com and Natural Reactions blog, report a recent independent survey. The estimate in the USA is that up to 328.000 wild birds are killed annually and the taller the turbine the more wild birds will be killed. There are wind turbines in 39 states. USA are looking to ultimately produce 20% of its power from this source and if this is reached then it is estimated that 1.4 million wild birds will be smashed to pieces annually. Whilst USA is a far bigger country it just goes to show what people with a vested interest will tell you. Like electricity pylons wind turbines are a blot on the landscape. With the natural double tides around the south coast we should be looking at underwater turbines to take advantage of the daily tides. What wind speed is needed to make it worthwhile and how many days per year is this achievable on average?[/p][/quote]If a flock of bird number thousands can fly together without hitting one another then I'm sure they can miss a bloody great wind mill over 100 mtrs tall. This idea that thousands of birds will be killed is pure hype on behalf of the NIMBY's. Townee
  • Score: 1

10:32pm Sat 10 May 14

rozmister says...

Sir Retry69 wrote:
rozmister wrote:
Sir Retry69 wrote:
A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)
The photos taken from above the meeting. Forego well hall has seating running underneath the balcony this was shot from, all of which was packed! The empty seats on the right are probably empty because they were at the far end to the entrance and lots of people arrived late.
I have been informed it was at the Tregonwell Hall which has a seating capacity of 1159, attendance was 630 something hardly packed wouldn't you say,or is my info incorrect
It was Tregonwell not Forego well unfortunately autocorrect doesn't recognise Tregonwell on my phone!

About 300 - 400 of those seats would be on the balcony which wasn't utilised for this meeting at all (except by press) so the floor that was used was quite packed. Space for maybe 100 more although the figure of 630 doesn't include the numerous speakers and their entourage, just residents. Whilst they may not count for the figures they still take up space!
[quote][p][bold]Sir Retry69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rozmister[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sir Retry69[/bold] wrote: A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)[/p][/quote]The photos taken from above the meeting. Forego well hall has seating running underneath the balcony this was shot from, all of which was packed! The empty seats on the right are probably empty because they were at the far end to the entrance and lots of people arrived late.[/p][/quote]I have been informed it was at the Tregonwell Hall which has a seating capacity of 1159, attendance was 630 something hardly packed wouldn't you say,or is my info incorrect[/p][/quote]It was Tregonwell not Forego well unfortunately autocorrect doesn't recognise Tregonwell on my phone! About 300 - 400 of those seats would be on the balcony which wasn't utilised for this meeting at all (except by press) so the floor that was used was quite packed. Space for maybe 100 more although the figure of 630 doesn't include the numerous speakers and their entourage, just residents. Whilst they may not count for the figures they still take up space! rozmister
  • Score: -2

11:23pm Sat 10 May 14

Sir Retry69 says...

rozmister wrote:
Sir Retry69 wrote:
rozmister wrote:
Sir Retry69 wrote:
A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)
The photos taken from above the meeting. Forego well hall has seating running underneath the balcony this was shot from, all of which was packed! The empty seats on the right are probably empty because they were at the far end to the entrance and lots of people arrived late.
I have been informed it was at the Tregonwell Hall which has a seating capacity of 1159, attendance was 630 something hardly packed wouldn't you say,or is my info incorrect
It was Tregonwell not Forego well unfortunately autocorrect doesn't recognise Tregonwell on my phone!

About 300 - 400 of those seats would be on the balcony which wasn't utilised for this meeting at all (except by press) so the floor that was used was quite packed. Space for maybe 100 more although the figure of 630 doesn't include the numerous speakers and their entourage, just residents. Whilst they may not count for the figures they still take up space!
Nice spin,doctor or matron,carry on lol
[quote][p][bold]rozmister[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sir Retry69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rozmister[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sir Retry69[/bold] wrote: A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)[/p][/quote]The photos taken from above the meeting. Forego well hall has seating running underneath the balcony this was shot from, all of which was packed! The empty seats on the right are probably empty because they were at the far end to the entrance and lots of people arrived late.[/p][/quote]I have been informed it was at the Tregonwell Hall which has a seating capacity of 1159, attendance was 630 something hardly packed wouldn't you say,or is my info incorrect[/p][/quote]It was Tregonwell not Forego well unfortunately autocorrect doesn't recognise Tregonwell on my phone! About 300 - 400 of those seats would be on the balcony which wasn't utilised for this meeting at all (except by press) so the floor that was used was quite packed. Space for maybe 100 more although the figure of 630 doesn't include the numerous speakers and their entourage, just residents. Whilst they may not count for the figures they still take up space![/p][/quote]Nice spin,doctor or matron,carry on lol Sir Retry69
  • Score: -2

11:42pm Sat 10 May 14

A N Archist says...

http://spbsearchligh
t.com/to-windfarm-or
-not-to-windfarm/
http://spbsearchligh t.com/to-windfarm-or -not-to-windfarm/ A N Archist
  • Score: 0

12:15am Sun 11 May 14

carveup says...

Absolutely need more energy production like this proposal. I didn't know this meeting was happening, not too well advertised really. The thing is there is nothing there to see apart from sea, horizon and sky, there is no view to ruin! Its our generation and our children that are going to have to deal with the fall out of mismanagement of this planet by the purple rinse brigade. Why should their say over ride the very survival of the next generation just to save a non existent view!!!!? It makes me sick. The older generation had their chance and they screwed it up, move over and let us at least attempt to try and make a future for out children and grandchildren before its too late.
Absolutely need more energy production like this proposal. I didn't know this meeting was happening, not too well advertised really. The thing is there is nothing there to see apart from sea, horizon and sky, there is no view to ruin! Its our generation and our children that are going to have to deal with the fall out of mismanagement of this planet by the purple rinse brigade. Why should their say over ride the very survival of the next generation just to save a non existent view!!!!? It makes me sick. The older generation had their chance and they screwed it up, move over and let us at least attempt to try and make a future for out children and grandchildren before its too late. carveup
  • Score: 2

1:29am Sun 11 May 14

HRH of Boscombe says...

JayaDC wrote:
As one of the VERY few young people attending, I was disappointed by the lack of balance. Speakers against far outweighed speakers for, and the audience was not representative of the age profile of the Bournemouth population. Many people my age are in favour of the plans. I feel younger people could have been offered a way to contribute that is more up-to-date and accessible for them. Will there be a way for people to have their say, that weren't at the meeting?
Sweet but a naive comment. These kind of meetings always attract the OPPOSERS
[quote][p][bold]JayaDC[/bold] wrote: As one of the VERY few young people attending, I was disappointed by the lack of balance. Speakers against far outweighed speakers for, and the audience was not representative of the age profile of the Bournemouth population. Many people my age are in favour of the plans. I feel younger people could have been offered a way to contribute that is more up-to-date and accessible for them. Will there be a way for people to have their say, that weren't at the meeting?[/p][/quote]Sweet but a naive comment. These kind of meetings always attract the OPPOSERS HRH of Boscombe
  • Score: 6

1:43am Sun 11 May 14

ASM says...

will it mean cheaper utility bills?
I would rather 3 billion being spent buying back British gas (and everything else Margret fatcher sold to the french)..
I am in favour of the plans, having been to places like Beijing where the air is so polluted you can barely see the building across the street.
will it mean cheaper utility bills? I would rather 3 billion being spent buying back British gas (and everything else Margret fatcher sold to the french).. I am in favour of the plans, having been to places like Beijing where the air is so polluted you can barely see the building across the street. ASM
  • Score: 0

3:34am Sun 11 May 14

MrPitiful says...

So approximately 600 or so people from a conurbation with a population of over 400 thousand turn up on a Saturday afternoon to discuss something which they will ultimately have little - or any - control over.

Moaning about spoilt views is a weak argument. This was the main moan about the Imax. How many of those who whinged have actually been there and enjoyed the view since its demolition? - I reckon not many - after all it is the same type of people who claim the town centre is too dangerous to enter these days.

This wind farm is just another example of progression in the town. Another step away from the ice-cream parlours, town centre bus station and all the other golden-oldie features of yesteryear Bournemouth that anyone under the age of 40 doesn't really give a monkey's hoot about.

Time to move on and embrace these things - some will work out and benefit the town and some won't.

The simple answer is this - if you don't like it, either use your vote and get rid of those who have been in local power for far too long or quite simply move away to somewhere you consider better.
So approximately 600 or so people from a conurbation with a population of over 400 thousand turn up on a Saturday afternoon to discuss something which they will ultimately have little - or any - control over. Moaning about spoilt views is a weak argument. This was the main moan about the Imax. How many of those who whinged have actually been there and enjoyed the view since its demolition? - I reckon not many - after all it is the same type of people who claim the town centre is too dangerous to enter these days. This wind farm is just another example of progression in the town. Another step away from the ice-cream parlours, town centre bus station and all the other golden-oldie features of yesteryear Bournemouth that anyone under the age of 40 doesn't really give a monkey's hoot about. Time to move on and embrace these things - some will work out and benefit the town and some won't. The simple answer is this - if you don't like it, either use your vote and get rid of those who have been in local power for far too long or quite simply move away to somewhere you consider better. MrPitiful
  • Score: 1

7:34am Sun 11 May 14

Lord Spring says...

Sir Retry69 wrote:
rozmister wrote:
Sir Retry69 wrote:
rozmister wrote:
Sir Retry69 wrote:
A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)
The photos taken from above the meeting. Forego well hall has seating running underneath the balcony this was shot from, all of which was packed! The empty seats on the right are probably empty because they were at the far end to the entrance and lots of people arrived late.
I have been informed it was at the Tregonwell Hall which has a seating capacity of 1159, attendance was 630 something hardly packed wouldn't you say,or is my info incorrect
It was Tregonwell not Forego well unfortunately autocorrect doesn't recognise Tregonwell on my phone!

About 300 - 400 of those seats would be on the balcony which wasn't utilised for this meeting at all (except by press) so the floor that was used was quite packed. Space for maybe 100 more although the figure of 630 doesn't include the numerous speakers and their entourage, just residents. Whilst they may not count for the figures they still take up space!
Nice spin,doctor or matron,carry on lol
She must have given you a mighty tap on the shoulder to come back in this fighting mood.
[quote][p][bold]Sir Retry69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rozmister[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sir Retry69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rozmister[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sir Retry69[/bold] wrote: A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)[/p][/quote]The photos taken from above the meeting. Forego well hall has seating running underneath the balcony this was shot from, all of which was packed! The empty seats on the right are probably empty because they were at the far end to the entrance and lots of people arrived late.[/p][/quote]I have been informed it was at the Tregonwell Hall which has a seating capacity of 1159, attendance was 630 something hardly packed wouldn't you say,or is my info incorrect[/p][/quote]It was Tregonwell not Forego well unfortunately autocorrect doesn't recognise Tregonwell on my phone! About 300 - 400 of those seats would be on the balcony which wasn't utilised for this meeting at all (except by press) so the floor that was used was quite packed. Space for maybe 100 more although the figure of 630 doesn't include the numerous speakers and their entourage, just residents. Whilst they may not count for the figures they still take up space![/p][/quote]Nice spin,doctor or matron,carry on lol[/p][/quote]She must have given you a mighty tap on the shoulder to come back in this fighting mood. Lord Spring
  • Score: 0

7:50am Sun 11 May 14

we-shall-see says...

JayaDC wrote:
As one of the VERY few young people attending, I was disappointed by the lack of balance. Speakers against far outweighed speakers for, and the audience was not representative of the age profile of the Bournemouth population. Many people my age are in favour of the plans. I feel younger people could have been offered a way to contribute that is more up-to-date and accessible for them. Will there be a way for people to have their say, that weren't at the meeting?
On the contrary, there have been several local meetings where people of any age could air their views, yet not many attended those either. Having the meeting on a saturday means no school/college/Uni for the day, which is an ideal time for young people to attend.

Perhaps young people are too busy having fun to worry about the future, whereas older people genuinely care about the future and the environment - after all many of today's "oldies", were yesterdays hippies from the 60's when environmental issues really took off with the help of such people.

I guess I would fall into the middle age bracket, neither young nor old, but I still don't like the thought of turbines on our sea bed. They are proven to be inefficient and that is my only reason for dislike of them. They will destroy sea bed habitat and in a few years time when they become defunct, will simply be left to rot into the sea.....

If sea power or solar were harnessed in a more efficient way, we would not be having this conversation, but I still maintain that young people "could" have attended, if they could have been bothered :o/
[quote][p][bold]JayaDC[/bold] wrote: As one of the VERY few young people attending, I was disappointed by the lack of balance. Speakers against far outweighed speakers for, and the audience was not representative of the age profile of the Bournemouth population. Many people my age are in favour of the plans. I feel younger people could have been offered a way to contribute that is more up-to-date and accessible for them. Will there be a way for people to have their say, that weren't at the meeting?[/p][/quote]On the contrary, there have been several local meetings where people of any age could air their views, yet not many attended those either. Having the meeting on a saturday means no school/college/Uni for the day, which is an ideal time for young people to attend. Perhaps young people are too busy having fun to worry about the future, whereas older people genuinely care about the future and the environment - after all many of today's "oldies", were yesterdays hippies from the 60's when environmental issues really took off with the help of such people. I guess I would fall into the middle age bracket, neither young nor old, but I still don't like the thought of turbines on our sea bed. They are proven to be inefficient and that is my only reason for dislike of them. They will destroy sea bed habitat and in a few years time when they become defunct, will simply be left to rot into the sea..... If sea power or solar were harnessed in a more efficient way, we would not be having this conversation, but I still maintain that young people "could" have attended, if they could have been bothered :o/ we-shall-see
  • Score: 4

8:00am Sun 11 May 14

eaststandman says...

JayaDC wrote:
As one of the VERY few young people attending, I was disappointed by the lack of balance. Speakers against far outweighed speakers for, and the audience was not representative of the age profile of the Bournemouth population. Many people my age are in favour of the plans. I feel younger people could have been offered a way to contribute that is more up-to-date and accessible for them. Will there be a way for people to have their say, that weren't at the meeting?
If you were that concerened about the 'young' vote, why did you not get them to take their eyes of 'facebook' or their 'ps4's' for an hour - or get them out of their money wasting ' drinking barns' in the town centre.......and get them to attend ?
[quote][p][bold]JayaDC[/bold] wrote: As one of the VERY few young people attending, I was disappointed by the lack of balance. Speakers against far outweighed speakers for, and the audience was not representative of the age profile of the Bournemouth population. Many people my age are in favour of the plans. I feel younger people could have been offered a way to contribute that is more up-to-date and accessible for them. Will there be a way for people to have their say, that weren't at the meeting?[/p][/quote]If you were that concerened about the 'young' vote, why did you not get them to take their eyes of 'facebook' or their 'ps4's' for an hour - or get them out of their money wasting ' drinking barns' in the town centre.......and get them to attend ? eaststandman
  • Score: -4

8:01am Sun 11 May 14

fedupwithjobsworths says...

Windfarms don't work ,,, nuclear power is the only viable sustainable option.
Windfarms don't work ,,, nuclear power is the only viable sustainable option. fedupwithjobsworths
  • Score: 4

8:11am Sun 11 May 14

thisloginprocessisdaft says...

Old wealthy people who will be dead in 10 - 20 years complaining about something that is going to help save future generations. Some who live in the most expensive areas don't want it near them, they'd rather have it in the middle of somewhere else as it will spoil their view, it isn't your view anyway.

When MPs get involved and are anti something there are two reasons. They have no financial gain or it directly has a bearing on them. The Daily Echo does it's best to stir things up as usual.
Old wealthy people who will be dead in 10 - 20 years complaining about something that is going to help save future generations. Some who live in the most expensive areas don't want it near them, they'd rather have it in the middle of somewhere else as it will spoil their view, it isn't your view anyway. When MPs get involved and are anti something there are two reasons. They have no financial gain or it directly has a bearing on them. The Daily Echo does it's best to stir things up as usual. thisloginprocessisdaft
  • Score: 3

8:24am Sun 11 May 14

mooninpisces says...

It is hardly surprising that the age profile at the BIC meeting was so imbalanced. Opponents of any development are always more likely than supporters to attend meetings of this nature, and the latest DECC survey of UK public attitudes to onshore wind, carried out in March, shows a clear age difference. Less than 5% of 16-44 year olds were opposed to onshore wind. The proportions rose to 9% for 45-54 year olds, 18% for 15-64 year olds, and 25% for those 65 and over. (Opposition to offshore wind was not recorded, but would be lower)
It is hardly surprising that the age profile at the BIC meeting was so imbalanced. Opponents of any development are always more likely than supporters to attend meetings of this nature, and the latest DECC survey of UK public attitudes to onshore wind, carried out in March, shows a clear age difference. Less than 5% of 16-44 year olds were opposed to onshore wind. The proportions rose to 9% for 45-54 year olds, 18% for 15-64 year olds, and 25% for those 65 and over. (Opposition to offshore wind was not recorded, but would be lower) mooninpisces
  • Score: 3

8:46am Sun 11 May 14

BmthNewshound says...

I used to think that the term Jurassic Coast referred to the natural history of the Dorset and East Devon coast. How wrong was I.
.
Jurassic Coast refers to dinosaurs who still inhabit the area. Beesley, Burns and Ellwood are supporting the campaign against Navitus to secure the grey vote that keeps them in power. What is striking about the photographs taken at the BIC is the lack of people of pre-retirement age in the audience - the meeting should have been called Pensioners against Navitus.
.
This generation of pensioners will go down in history as being the most selfish and narrow mined in this countrys history. Whilst their parents fought in they have enjoyed a charmed life – secure and well paid employment, generous pensions, benefitted from significant increases in property prices, generous state benefits including triple lock on state pension, free bus travel, winter fuel allowance, free presecriptions etc. They claim it is theirs by right but if you analyse the figures they are taking more out than they ever paid in.
.
Their legacy – a country in which their grand children can expect to work until they are into their 70’s and the chance they could face real poverty in old age partly the result of high energy prices as we have to import ever increasing amounts of energy as we are unable to meet demand because todays pensioners object to attempts to secure our country’s energy security.
I used to think that the term Jurassic Coast referred to the natural history of the Dorset and East Devon coast. How wrong was I. . Jurassic Coast refers to dinosaurs who still inhabit the area. Beesley, Burns and Ellwood are supporting the campaign against Navitus to secure the grey vote that keeps them in power. What is striking about the photographs taken at the BIC is the lack of people of pre-retirement age in the audience - the meeting should have been called Pensioners against Navitus. . This generation of pensioners will go down in history as being the most selfish and narrow mined in this countrys history. Whilst their parents fought in they have enjoyed a charmed life – secure and well paid employment, generous pensions, benefitted from significant increases in property prices, generous state benefits including triple lock on state pension, free bus travel, winter fuel allowance, free presecriptions etc. They claim it is theirs by right but if you analyse the figures they are taking more out than they ever paid in. . Their legacy – a country in which their grand children can expect to work until they are into their 70’s and the chance they could face real poverty in old age partly the result of high energy prices as we have to import ever increasing amounts of energy as we are unable to meet demand because todays pensioners object to attempts to secure our country’s energy security. BmthNewshound
  • Score: 11

9:02am Sun 11 May 14

Letcommonsenseprevail says...

Must have been dreadful with some many NIMBYs in such a small space.....
Must have been dreadful with some many NIMBYs in such a small space..... Letcommonsenseprevail
  • Score: 1

9:55am Sun 11 May 14

lowemustgo says...

Just one 4GW modern coal fired power station (think Didcott on the A34 -now closed) supplies TEN times the electricity that the Navitus Boondongles will do and when we need it -not when its blowing a gale at 3am.
194 ugly, low tech, flashing red and green turbines covering 6 square miles of beautiful seascape will abate just 0.0045% of global CO2 emissions. EACH ONE has a swept area of 200,000 square feet, which at 881 feet high exceeds the height of Salisbury Cathedral by 25% and is 44% higher.
WAKE UP GREENS - this is a huge environmental disaster on your doorstep.
Just one 4GW modern coal fired power station (think Didcott on the A34 -now closed) supplies TEN times the electricity that the Navitus Boondongles will do and when we need it -not when its blowing a gale at 3am. 194 ugly, low tech, flashing red and green turbines covering 6 square miles of beautiful seascape will abate just 0.0045% of global CO2 emissions. EACH ONE has a swept area of 200,000 square feet, which at 881 feet high exceeds the height of Salisbury Cathedral by 25% and is 44% higher. WAKE UP GREENS - this is a huge environmental disaster on your doorstep. lowemustgo
  • Score: 1

10:24am Sun 11 May 14

bobsworthforever says...

Townee wrote:
lionheart wrote:
kalebmoledirt wrote:
Now we know it doesn't bring down buildings with the noise, smell, kill migrating birds get In step with the rest of the UK and look forward to a wind farm near you..you have lost your status as a smart gracious resort.Your no more than a dormitory for petty crimes and failed travellers.Ie. the Sherwoods
It is a fact that they have had to switch off some wind turbines in the US because of the number of birds that have been killed. Smithsonian.com and Natural Reactions blog, report a recent independent survey. The estimate in the USA is that up to 328.000 wild birds are killed annually and the taller the turbine the more wild birds will be killed.

There are wind turbines in 39 states. USA are looking to ultimately produce 20% of its power from this source and if this is reached then it is estimated that 1.4 million wild birds will be smashed to pieces annually.

Whilst USA is a far bigger country it just goes to show what people with a vested interest will tell you.

Like electricity pylons wind turbines are a blot on the landscape.

With the natural double tides around the south coast we should be looking at underwater turbines to take advantage of the daily tides. What wind speed is needed to make it worthwhile and how many days per year is this achievable on average?
If a flock of bird number thousands can fly together without hitting one another then I'm sure they can miss a bloody great wind mill over 100 mtrs tall.
This idea that thousands of birds will be killed is pure hype on behalf of the NIMBY's.
Absolutely ive been on numerous wind farm sites no sign whatsoever of dead birds as for noise there is noise but you have to be very close for it to be invasive and it has to be extremely windy ive seen the wind farms off the Welsh and Scottish coasts I just don't get what the nimbys are saying its not true
[quote][p][bold]Townee[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lionheart[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]kalebmoledirt[/bold] wrote: Now we know it doesn't bring down buildings with the noise, smell, kill migrating birds get In step with the rest of the UK and look forward to a wind farm near you..you have lost your status as a smart gracious resort.Your no more than a dormitory for petty crimes and failed travellers.Ie. the Sherwoods[/p][/quote]It is a fact that they have had to switch off some wind turbines in the US because of the number of birds that have been killed. Smithsonian.com and Natural Reactions blog, report a recent independent survey. The estimate in the USA is that up to 328.000 wild birds are killed annually and the taller the turbine the more wild birds will be killed. There are wind turbines in 39 states. USA are looking to ultimately produce 20% of its power from this source and if this is reached then it is estimated that 1.4 million wild birds will be smashed to pieces annually. Whilst USA is a far bigger country it just goes to show what people with a vested interest will tell you. Like electricity pylons wind turbines are a blot on the landscape. With the natural double tides around the south coast we should be looking at underwater turbines to take advantage of the daily tides. What wind speed is needed to make it worthwhile and how many days per year is this achievable on average?[/p][/quote]If a flock of bird number thousands can fly together without hitting one another then I'm sure they can miss a bloody great wind mill over 100 mtrs tall. This idea that thousands of birds will be killed is pure hype on behalf of the NIMBY's.[/p][/quote]Absolutely ive been on numerous wind farm sites no sign whatsoever of dead birds as for noise there is noise but you have to be very close for it to be invasive and it has to be extremely windy ive seen the wind farms off the Welsh and Scottish coasts I just don't get what the nimbys are saying its not true bobsworthforever
  • Score: 2

10:33am Sun 11 May 14

mooninpisces says...

lowemustgo wrote:
Just one 4GW modern coal fired power station (think Didcott on the A34 -now closed) supplies TEN times the electricity that the Navitus Boondongles will do and when we need it -not when its blowing a gale at 3am.
194 ugly, low tech, flashing red and green turbines covering 6 square miles of beautiful seascape will abate just 0.0045% of global CO2 emissions. EACH ONE has a swept area of 200,000 square feet, which at 881 feet high exceeds the height of Salisbury Cathedral by 25% and is 44% higher.
WAKE UP GREENS - this is a huge environmental disaster on your doorstep.
So lowemustgo is Lord Monckton of Brenchley! It won't be the first time he has appeared in disguise (think turning up at a UN conference as 'Monckton of Arabia' in full regalia, and then impersonating a delegate from Burma to get publicity for his denial of climate science).
[quote][p][bold]lowemustgo[/bold] wrote: Just one 4GW modern coal fired power station (think Didcott on the A34 -now closed) supplies TEN times the electricity that the Navitus Boondongles will do and when we need it -not when its blowing a gale at 3am. 194 ugly, low tech, flashing red and green turbines covering 6 square miles of beautiful seascape will abate just 0.0045% of global CO2 emissions. EACH ONE has a swept area of 200,000 square feet, which at 881 feet high exceeds the height of Salisbury Cathedral by 25% and is 44% higher. WAKE UP GREENS - this is a huge environmental disaster on your doorstep.[/p][/quote]So lowemustgo is Lord Monckton of Brenchley! It won't be the first time he has appeared in disguise (think turning up at a UN conference as 'Monckton of Arabia' in full regalia, and then impersonating a delegate from Burma to get publicity for his denial of climate science). mooninpisces
  • Score: -2

11:11am Sun 11 May 14

Stopmoaninganddo1 says...

I bet your bottom dollar that the people who turn up will be mid 60ś with beef in there bonnet about there pension and worry that the wind farm will decrease the value of their home... The fact is and we will never be able to ignor is we need more energy... and being that wind is 100% clean minus the production of the turbine its the best way to produce energy...
I bet your bottom dollar that the people who turn up will be mid 60ś with beef in there bonnet about there pension and worry that the wind farm will decrease the value of their home... The fact is and we will never be able to ignor is we need more energy... and being that wind is 100% clean minus the production of the turbine its the best way to produce energy... Stopmoaninganddo1
  • Score: -4

12:42pm Sun 11 May 14

retry69 says...

Lord Spring wrote:
Sir Retry69 wrote:
rozmister wrote:
Sir Retry69 wrote:
rozmister wrote:
Sir Retry69 wrote:
A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)
The photos taken from above the meeting. Forego well hall has seating running underneath the balcony this was shot from, all of which was packed! The empty seats on the right are probably empty because they were at the far end to the entrance and lots of people arrived late.
I have been informed it was at the Tregonwell Hall which has a seating capacity of 1159, attendance was 630 something hardly packed wouldn't you say,or is my info incorrect
It was Tregonwell not Forego well unfortunately autocorrect doesn't recognise Tregonwell on my phone!

About 300 - 400 of those seats would be on the balcony which wasn't utilised for this meeting at all (except by press) so the floor that was used was quite packed. Space for maybe 100 more although the figure of 630 doesn't include the numerous speakers and their entourage, just residents. Whilst they may not count for the figures they still take up space!
Nice spin,doctor or matron,carry on lol
She must have given you a mighty tap on the shoulder to come back in this fighting mood.
Nearly took my head off :)
[quote][p][bold]Lord Spring[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sir Retry69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rozmister[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sir Retry69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rozmister[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sir Retry69[/bold] wrote: A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)[/p][/quote]The photos taken from above the meeting. Forego well hall has seating running underneath the balcony this was shot from, all of which was packed! The empty seats on the right are probably empty because they were at the far end to the entrance and lots of people arrived late.[/p][/quote]I have been informed it was at the Tregonwell Hall which has a seating capacity of 1159, attendance was 630 something hardly packed wouldn't you say,or is my info incorrect[/p][/quote]It was Tregonwell not Forego well unfortunately autocorrect doesn't recognise Tregonwell on my phone! About 300 - 400 of those seats would be on the balcony which wasn't utilised for this meeting at all (except by press) so the floor that was used was quite packed. Space for maybe 100 more although the figure of 630 doesn't include the numerous speakers and their entourage, just residents. Whilst they may not count for the figures they still take up space![/p][/quote]Nice spin,doctor or matron,carry on lol[/p][/quote]She must have given you a mighty tap on the shoulder to come back in this fighting mood.[/p][/quote]Nearly took my head off :) retry69
  • Score: 0

12:44pm Sun 11 May 14

retry69 says...

retry69 wrote:
Lord Spring wrote:
Sir Retry69 wrote:
rozmister wrote:
Sir Retry69 wrote:
rozmister wrote:
Sir Retry69 wrote:
A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)
The photos taken from above the meeting. Forego well hall has seating running underneath the balcony this was shot from, all of which was packed! The empty seats on the right are probably empty because they were at the far end to the entrance and lots of people arrived late.
I have been informed it was at the Tregonwell Hall which has a seating capacity of 1159, attendance was 630 something hardly packed wouldn't you say,or is my info incorrect
It was Tregonwell not Forego well unfortunately autocorrect doesn't recognise Tregonwell on my phone!

About 300 - 400 of those seats would be on the balcony which wasn't utilised for this meeting at all (except by press) so the floor that was used was quite packed. Space for maybe 100 more although the figure of 630 doesn't include the numerous speakers and their entourage, just residents. Whilst they may not count for the figures they still take up space!
Nice spin,doctor or matron,carry on lol
She must have given you a mighty tap on the shoulder to come back in this fighting mood.
Nearly took my head off :)
Oh dear !! Didn't last long :(
[quote][p][bold]retry69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lord Spring[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sir Retry69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rozmister[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sir Retry69[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rozmister[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sir Retry69[/bold] wrote: A lot of empty seats at that packed meeting ffs, what a laugh a minute,the whole topic and coverage is like a carry on film,highly entertaining though lol :)[/p][/quote]The photos taken from above the meeting. Forego well hall has seating running underneath the balcony this was shot from, all of which was packed! The empty seats on the right are probably empty because they were at the far end to the entrance and lots of people arrived late.[/p][/quote]I have been informed it was at the Tregonwell Hall which has a seating capacity of 1159, attendance was 630 something hardly packed wouldn't you say,or is my info incorrect[/p][/quote]It was Tregonwell not Forego well unfortunately autocorrect doesn't recognise Tregonwell on my phone! About 300 - 400 of those seats would be on the balcony which wasn't utilised for this meeting at all (except by press) so the floor that was used was quite packed. Space for maybe 100 more although the figure of 630 doesn't include the numerous speakers and their entourage, just residents. Whilst they may not count for the figures they still take up space![/p][/quote]Nice spin,doctor or matron,carry on lol[/p][/quote]She must have given you a mighty tap on the shoulder to come back in this fighting mood.[/p][/quote]Nearly took my head off :)[/p][/quote]Oh dear !! Didn't last long :( retry69
  • Score: 0

2:19pm Sun 11 May 14

Stop Press says...

It's a human trait to resent change without tangible benefit, the older you get the more changes have been absorbed over a lifetime (bus station, Pier Approach Baths, trolley buses if you like) and the more likely you are to resist, nothing wrong with that it's nature.
A wind turbine may (may not?) be thought of as aesthetic, a bit like the power station in Didcot, nice curves, however, the natural un-spoilt and beautiful view out into and around Poole Bay deserves better consideration than the attention of money grabbing multi-nationals who were it not for incredibly generous subsidies (which you and I will be paying) would doubtless focus there attention elsewhere.
The nuclear power stations will still have to be built to maximum capacity to cope for the occasional days and weeks when the wind doesn't blow, which defines the Navitus Bay project as a £3billion folly.
Navitus Bay project director Mike Unsworth says his team, "Remain committed to engaging with local groups and interested individuals including local councils." When push comes to shove is there any doubt that he will follow the inevitable instructions of his leaders and do whatever it takes to get the consumer subsidised cash cow built?
It's a human trait to resent change without tangible benefit, the older you get the more changes have been absorbed over a lifetime (bus station, Pier Approach Baths, trolley buses if you like) and the more likely you are to resist, nothing wrong with that it's nature. A wind turbine may (may not?) be thought of as aesthetic, a bit like the power station in Didcot, nice curves, however, the natural un-spoilt and beautiful view out into and around Poole Bay deserves better consideration than the attention of money grabbing multi-nationals who were it not for incredibly generous subsidies (which you and I will be paying) would doubtless focus there attention elsewhere. The nuclear power stations will still have to be built to maximum capacity to cope for the occasional days and weeks when the wind doesn't blow, which defines the Navitus Bay project as a £3billion folly. Navitus Bay project director Mike Unsworth says his team, "Remain committed to engaging with local groups and interested individuals including local councils." When push comes to shove is there any doubt that he will follow the inevitable instructions of his leaders and do whatever it takes to get the consumer subsidised cash cow built? Stop Press
  • Score: 3

2:50pm Sun 11 May 14

rozmister says...

MrPitiful wrote:
So approximately 600 or so people from a conurbation with a population of over 400 thousand turn up on a Saturday afternoon to discuss something which they will ultimately have little - or any - control over.

Moaning about spoilt views is a weak argument. This was the main moan about the Imax. How many of those who whinged have actually been there and enjoyed the view since its demolition? - I reckon not many - after all it is the same type of people who claim the town centre is too dangerous to enter these days.

This wind farm is just another example of progression in the town. Another step away from the ice-cream parlours, town centre bus station and all the other golden-oldie features of yesteryear Bournemouth that anyone under the age of 40 doesn't really give a monkey's hoot about.

Time to move on and embrace these things - some will work out and benefit the town and some won't.

The simple answer is this - if you don't like it, either use your vote and get rid of those who have been in local power for far too long or quite simply move away to somewhere you consider better.
The meeting was run by Bournemouth Borough Council for Bournemouth residents only. So more like 180,000 people although I agree its a small proportion. I guess it says a lot about how many people care either way!
[quote][p][bold]MrPitiful[/bold] wrote: So approximately 600 or so people from a conurbation with a population of over 400 thousand turn up on a Saturday afternoon to discuss something which they will ultimately have little - or any - control over. Moaning about spoilt views is a weak argument. This was the main moan about the Imax. How many of those who whinged have actually been there and enjoyed the view since its demolition? - I reckon not many - after all it is the same type of people who claim the town centre is too dangerous to enter these days. This wind farm is just another example of progression in the town. Another step away from the ice-cream parlours, town centre bus station and all the other golden-oldie features of yesteryear Bournemouth that anyone under the age of 40 doesn't really give a monkey's hoot about. Time to move on and embrace these things - some will work out and benefit the town and some won't. The simple answer is this - if you don't like it, either use your vote and get rid of those who have been in local power for far too long or quite simply move away to somewhere you consider better.[/p][/quote]The meeting was run by Bournemouth Borough Council for Bournemouth residents only. So more like 180,000 people although I agree its a small proportion. I guess it says a lot about how many people care either way! rozmister
  • Score: -3

4:51pm Sun 11 May 14

Sir Beachy Head says...

Wind. It's not Mustard gas. Why be afraid of it.
Wind. It's not Mustard gas. Why be afraid of it. Sir Beachy Head
  • Score: -2

6:14pm Sun 11 May 14

KLH says...

I have seen some in the countryside around Cherbourg and they look horrid. Really ruin a beautiful view!!
I have seen some in the countryside around Cherbourg and they look horrid. Really ruin a beautiful view!! KLH
  • Score: 1

7:48pm Sun 11 May 14

dylexic bobert says...

KLH wrote:
I have seen some in the countryside around Cherbourg and they look horrid. Really ruin a beautiful view!!
And the alternative is???
[quote][p][bold]KLH[/bold] wrote: I have seen some in the countryside around Cherbourg and they look horrid. Really ruin a beautiful view!![/p][/quote]And the alternative is??? dylexic bobert
  • Score: 1

8:28pm Sun 11 May 14

a.g.o.g. says...

mooninpisces wrote:
It is hardly surprising that the age profile at the BIC meeting was so imbalanced. Opponents of any development are always more likely than supporters to attend meetings of this nature, and the latest DECC survey of UK public attitudes to onshore wind, carried out in March, shows a clear age difference. Less than 5% of 16-44 year olds were opposed to onshore wind. The proportions rose to 9% for 45-54 year olds, 18% for 15-64 year olds, and 25% for those 65 and over. (Opposition to offshore wind was not recorded, but would be lower)
So we live and learn - some of us..................
[quote][p][bold]mooninpisces[/bold] wrote: It is hardly surprising that the age profile at the BIC meeting was so imbalanced. Opponents of any development are always more likely than supporters to attend meetings of this nature, and the latest DECC survey of UK public attitudes to onshore wind, carried out in March, shows a clear age difference. Less than 5% of 16-44 year olds were opposed to onshore wind. The proportions rose to 9% for 45-54 year olds, 18% for 15-64 year olds, and 25% for those 65 and over. (Opposition to offshore wind was not recorded, but would be lower)[/p][/quote]So we live and learn - some of us.................. a.g.o.g.
  • Score: 0

8:30pm Sun 11 May 14

a.g.o.g. says...

dylexic bobert wrote:
KLH wrote:
I have seen some in the countryside around Cherbourg and they look horrid. Really ruin a beautiful view!!
And the alternative is???
N-U-C-L-E-A-R bobert.............
[quote][p][bold]dylexic bobert[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KLH[/bold] wrote: I have seen some in the countryside around Cherbourg and they look horrid. Really ruin a beautiful view!![/p][/quote]And the alternative is???[/p][/quote]N-U-C-L-E-A-R bobert............. a.g.o.g.
  • Score: 2

9:12pm Sun 11 May 14

fireflier says...

If they build this mass of windmills ...just wait a few years until they start having technical problems...or they don't prove as effective as the Xspurts told us they would be. Then when anyone questions the abhorrent cost of these 'oliphant blanc' will probably get the standard answer. 'We are extremely sorry..but we had no EVIDENCE to prove this would be a disaster!

I reckon HS2 could well join these in the 'WHY has it been such a collosal waste of money catagory?'
If they build this mass of windmills ...just wait a few years until they start having technical problems...or they don't prove as effective as the Xspurts told us they would be. Then when anyone questions the abhorrent cost of these 'oliphant blanc' will probably get the standard answer. 'We are extremely sorry..but we had no EVIDENCE to prove this would be a disaster! I reckon HS2 could well join these in the 'WHY has it been such a collosal waste of money catagory?' fireflier
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

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