Poole Bay wind farm could cost 500 jobs (From Bournemouth Echo)
When news happens text pix and video to 80360. Start your message with BE then leave a space.
Poole Bay wind farm could cost 500 jobs
10:30am Monday 6th February 2012 in News
THE wind farm proposed off the coast of Bournemouth and Poole could cost 500 jobs in Dorset’s tourism sector.
Mark Smith, head of tourism for Bournemouth, gave the figure on Friday as councillors took evidence on the effect of the turbines on visitors.
Mr Smith said research in Scotland showed 2-3 per cent of visitors would not return to an area with a wind farm.
He said: “If you are considering an industry which employs in Dorset something like 18,000 people, that is equivalent to more than 500 jobs.”
Bournemouth East MP Tobias Elwood, who was giving evidence to the councillors, said it would be an important and strong argument for the council to make to the government.
Eneco wants to build a wind farm in Poole Bay called Navitus with a projected opening date in 2019.
There would be 180-250 wind turbines about 10 miles from Bournemouth and Poole.
The firm is holding ongoing public consultations for residents along the coast from Swanage to Lymington.
Comments(21)
Ferndown Steve
says...
10:57am Mon 6 Feb 12
Put it in front of Brighton beach/pier, I sure they wont mind !!
wonderway
says...
11:11am Mon 6 Feb 12
that would be a boost for local tourisum
stephenbraggster
says...
11:15am Mon 6 Feb 12
BourneRed
says...
11:15am Mon 6 Feb 12
The proposal looks like it will have minimal positives for the local people of Bournemouth and Poole and will be left with all the negative knock on effects such as a reduction in tourism due to the stunning views being scarred by monsterous 700ft windmills.
The plans seriously need to be thought through without just the short term views represented.
BmthNewshound
says...
11:18am Mon 6 Feb 12
.
The mis-mangement of the towns tourism industry and the inability and general incompetence of the Council to show any leadership in tourism has had and will continue to have a far greater negative impact on the towns tourism industry than any offshore structures will ever have.
MattGillett
says...
11:28am Mon 6 Feb 12
Freddie The Fish
says...
11:56am Mon 6 Feb 12
stephenbraggster wrote:Prat.
I view the wind turbines as a sign from the lord looking out over us - protecting our coast. View them as I do - as simple crucifix's. The body of Christ the saviour protecting the lords children, giving energy, sustaining and bringing new life.
John T
says...
11:57am Mon 6 Feb 12
PokesdownMark
says...
12:00pm Mon 6 Feb 12
John T
says...
12:10pm Mon 6 Feb 12
bobbins
says...
12:51pm Mon 6 Feb 12
MARodger
says...
1:01pm Mon 6 Feb 12
http://www.bournemou
thecho.co.uk/yoursay
/letterstotheeditor/
9508581.Councillor_s
hould_read_tourist_r
eport/
- sending another one probably won't get read either so they will remain in ignorance of the error they make.
The report they talk of is linked below & page 16-17 provides the summary conclusions with no mention of any jobs being lost, (not even one or 2). What to folk say "You cannot get the staff any more"?
http://www.scotland.
gov.uk/Resource/Doc/
214910/0057316.pdf
MattGillett
says...
1:24pm Mon 6 Feb 12
PokesdownMark wrote:Upon reading the report one discover's that our tourist chief hasn't even reliably extracted the data. Apparently if they built a wind farm on near the top of Ben Nevis existing visitors would be 3% less likely to visit, but expenditure would only go down by 1.74%. The idea that you can equate reduced turnover with job losses on a 1 for 1 basis is absurd, but this data extraction goes beyond beggaring beleif.
Before the Scottish research is simply assumed to be a reliable indicator I think it should be carefully examined. I would be very surprised if a mere survey could reliably measure 2 or 3% of anything like as complex as stated future human intent. Think about it, the claim is that 2 or 3 out of every hundred people would not return due to the wind farm. Not because there are so many other places to visit and life is short. Not because there were not enough local restaurants. Or too many Scottish midges. Or the weather was poor. Or indeed the weather was great. The hotel was fabulous. We didn't have time to visit all the cheap gourmet restaurants. But because of the wind farm we are not coming back! Well I call BS and I wish we had an MP with the common sense and critical thinking skills to do the same. (maybe we do but he can't rock the boat?!)
Bob49
says...
1:42pm Mon 6 Feb 12
The report being refered to actually stated -
"Under all circumstances, the vast majority (93-99%) of those who had seen a
wind farm suggested that the experience would not have any effect. Indeed
there were some tourists for whom the experience increased the likelihood of
return rather than decreasing it."
Which rather suggests the overwhelming majority were not that really bothered about it. The tiny minority that did state that any returning visit might be affected were not asked about any timescale. However very misleadingly Mark Smith and Tobias Elwood have lumped those projections into a very short time frame - thus distorting the overall picture.
Further distortion is done by their ludicrous misrepresentation of the consequences of any supposed loss of visitors. If a local pub/hotel/restuarant suffers a drop of 2-3% in vistors it cannot and does not reduce it's staff by 2-3%.
Irrespective of the rights and wrongs of locating windfarms offshore it is disturbing to see those who are paid to represent us appearing to be representing very narrow interests instead. Rather than those of their constituents. The public should be able to decide themselves from an informed position, not skewed 'facts' from a vested interest. What this matter does also raise is a concern about how trustworthy were previous facts and figures that were used to justify developments in our own town - which have subsequently failed and cost local taxpayers millions and millions in losses and needless expense ?
the report can be found here -
http://www.scotland.
gov.uk/Resource/Doc/
214910/0057316.pdf
Derf
says...
1:45pm Mon 6 Feb 12
Even allowing for the height of the turbines, you'd only just see them if you were on the shore 20 meters above sea level.
Hardly intrusive enough to effect tourism if you ask me
Glashen
says...
2:18pm Mon 6 Feb 12
http://www.challenge
navitus.org.uk/
PokesdownMark
says...
2:26pm Mon 6 Feb 12
They should model the Blackpool wind farm using same techniques to validate using a real world example.
ekimnoslen
says...
3:41pm Mon 6 Feb 12
TheDistrict
says...
4:20pm Mon 6 Feb 12
.
Tourism certainly has not dropped in Cornwall where there are many landside wind farms, some one does not see until virtually right on line with them.
.
As for offshore wind farms. Take in the distance, summer haze, their colour against the background. Visibility will be minimal from shore, IF ANYONE IS REALLY TAKING NOTICE, that is.
.
We need alternative energy regardless of how much it yeilds. And one of those answers is wind farms.
.
norfolkboy14
says...
6:21pm Mon 6 Feb 12
Please pass this message on to Councillors, members of your community and anyone else you know to persuade them to sign up too. If you are really concerned about wind turbines please write a letter promoting this petition to the Editors of your local newspapers.
The Renegade Master says...
10:53am Mon 6 Feb 12