• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

RSPB and Ecotricity to build new wind turbine in green energy partnership (RSPB) (1 Viewer)

I think many members will be uncomfortably with the RSPB getting into bed with windfarm companies given the damage being done to much of our upland habitats by same. Indeed the whole thing smacks of a cheap gimmick given the likely output of a wind turbine in this location.
 
Jimmybirder said:
I think many members will be uncomfortably with the RSPB getting into bed with windfarm companies given the damage being done to much of our upland habitats by same. Indeed the whole thing smacks of a cheap gimmick given the likely output of a wind turbine in this location.
Click to expand...

Equally many members will be delighted to see a conservation group work sympathetically with an energy provider to help deliver low carbon energy and a sustainable future.
 
Scooby2 said:
Equally many members will be delighted to see a conservation group work sympathetically with an energy provider to help deliver low carbon energy and a sustainable future.
Click to expand...

Wind power has not replaced fossil fuels to any great extent across the economy as it is unreliable and needs constant conventional plant backup. It certainly doesn't justify the damage wind farms have done to much upland habitat in the UK
 
Was a member of RSPB for many years and YOC when at school. I am sorry to say that they have lost me totally with the link up with this company. I am far from alone I am sure in not wanting to pay money to an organisation that is supposed to be about protecting birds which has linked up with the wind industry.
The sight of one of these god awful things going up on the RSPB HQ illustrates that its no longer about birds but about the "green" lobby. We are all supposed to shut up and look the other way and go along with this agenda. I never thought it would come to this.What chance have birds, bats and other wildlife got when the landscape globally is being carpeted in these things? If the dead birds they cause were covered in oil there would be outrage, but put "green" and "eco" in front of it and you can destroy as many raptors and other birds as you like because, hey we are oh so green!
 
mike47ukhants said:
I never thought it would come to this.What chance have birds, bats and other wildlife got when the landscape globally is being carpeted in these things? If the dead birds they cause were covered in oil there would be outrage, but put "green" and "eco" in front of it and you can destroy as many raptors and other birds as you like because, hey we are oh so green!
Click to expand...



Assuming you recognise that climate change is also a threat to UK bird life, what mix of low carbon energy resources would you suggest are employed in the next few decades to meet our obligations under the COP21 agreement, if that doesn't include some (carefully sited) onshore wind turbines?

I personally think the RSPB's stance on this issue is sensible, science based and thoroughly responsible.
 
Scooby2 said:
Assuming you recognise that climate change is also a threat to UK bird life, what mix of low carbon energy resources would you suggest are employed in the next few decades to meet our obligations under the COP21 agreement, if that doesn't include some (carefully sited) onshore wind turbines?

I personally think the RSPB's stance on this issue is sensible, science based and thoroughly responsible.
Click to expand...
I agree with you completely and I fully support the RSPB in this.
Ian.
 
Scooby2 said:
I personally think the RSPB's stance on this issue is sensible, science based and thoroughly responsible.
Click to expand...

Is it?? - per head energy consumption is steadily falling due to increasing energy efficiency etc. Secondly a combination of gas and nuclear could eliminate coal fired generation but the vast amount of money blown on wind(and solar) means there is little money left to do this as UK energy bills are now among the highest in the EU. Sterilizing yet more upland habitats under wind farms will just make things worse on all fronts. Relying on wind power is utter folly in a modern economy as this autumn proved

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...downs-force-National-Grid-to-issue-alert.html
 
Jimmybirder said:
Is it?? - per head energy consumption is steadily falling due to increasing energy efficiency etc. Secondly a combination of gas and nuclear could eliminate coal fired generation but the vast amount of money blown on wind(and solar) means there is little money left to do this as UK energy bills are now among the highest in the EU. Sterilizing yet more upland habitats under wind farms will just make things worse on all fronts. Relying on wind power is utter folly in a modern economy as this autumn proved

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...downs-force-National-Grid-to-issue-alert.html
Click to expand...

Agreed. 100%.
 
Jimmybirder said:
Is it?? - per head energy consumption is steadily falling due to increasing energy efficiency etc. Secondly a combination of gas and nuclear could eliminate coal fired generation but the vast amount of money blown on wind(and solar) means there is little money left to do this as UK energy bills are now among the highest in the EU. Sterilizing yet more upland habitats under wind farms will just make things worse on all fronts. Relying on wind power is utter folly in a modern economy as this autumn proved

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...downs-force-National-Grid-to-issue-alert.html
Click to expand...

Ironically quite a lot of that per capita energy efficiency is probably down to warming winters.

I agree, a lot more can be done to reduce overall energy demand and should be an absolute priority of any government policy. (Currently it isn't)

Don't make the mistake of thinking that nuclear, gas and coal energy generation isn't also a direct threat to bird life and that a rapidly changing climate won't be the single biggest threat of all.

As for the rest, well there's not enough bandwidth (or appetite I suspect) to get into those kinds of slanging matches...I'd just say that I've yet to see an energy decarbonisation plan that doesn't include a significant element of onshore wind generation in the energy mix required; certainly in the next few decades.
 
Jimmybirder said:
Is it?? - per head energy consumption is steadily falling due to increasing energy efficiency etc. Secondly a combination of gas and nuclear could eliminate coal fired generation but the vast amount of money blown on wind(and solar) means there is little money left to do this as UK energy bills are now among the highest in the EU. Sterilizing yet more upland habitats under wind farms will just make things worse on all fronts. Relying on wind power is utter folly in a modern economy as this autumn proved

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...downs-force-National-Grid-to-issue-alert.html
Click to expand...

I agree, investing the money in Nuclear Fission or more speculatively geothermal, Fusion or Thorium would be better.
 
davholla said:
I agree, investing the money in Nuclear Fission or more speculatively geothermal, Fusion or Thorium would be better.
Click to expand...

The UK is having more than enough trouble getting its act together to finance and replace the nuclear plants that are being decommissioned.

Modular reactors (SMR's) will almost certainly play a role in a post fossil fuel energy mix ,but there's no getting away from the urgency of the situation we're in and the fact that wind turbines are relatively mature technologies that are already price competitive. How much of 'the money' would you be happy to invest in speculative technologies that are showing very little sign of becoming a commercial reality any time soon?

Had this kind of research work had been properly funded and really ambitiously pursued by successive governments over the last 40 years or so, then maybe we'd be closer to getting results but they haven't been and there's no realistic sign of getting there any time soon.

Everyone would love a magic bullet solution and maybe Jeb Bush's boffin in the garage will have a eureka moment...but for the time being, like it or not (and I understand why many don't), wind is cheap, deliverable and an important part of the near term future of low carbon energy generation.

I have 4 turbines being constructed on my local patch and I'm none too happy about it as the habitat they're being built right next to is (regionally) very rare and it hosts a large wintering population of hen harriers, short eared owls and great grey shrike. These turbines could have been built in a far less sensitive area (extensive agricultural landscapes) but without the kind of clout that an organisation such as the RSPB could have offered (the LPO aren't quite as influential) the planning authorities prioritised local aesthetic amenity over ecological sensitivity.

I think that the RSPB's stance on this issue is realistic and ultimately far more effective in protecting sensitive habitats than a blanket 'no' to all turbines or ignoring the low carbon energy issue entirely.
 
Wind is far from cheap, it is subsidised to the hilt and in many cases is shut down (whilst still getting the cash) more than it is on. Our landscapes and wildlife are quite literally under attack by the wind industry. We are being conned on an epic scale because some people have seen an opening to make lots of money by sticking a "green" tag on it. Sadly, the once great conservation organisations have now become an extension of the environmentalist Green Party lobby, who don't actually give a stuff about birds or wildlife, as long as these trendy new wind farms are getting lots of cash. The RSPB now has one of these monstrosities on a its HQ reserve. Personally I will be sending the money I would have sent in years past to the society to one of the many brave community groups up and down our great country who are battling to stop what is left of our landscapes and wildlife being forever decimated by these god awful things. Of course in the eyes of the so-called bird lovers in the echelons of the RSPB of 2016 this makes me a pariah.
 
mike47ukhants said:
Wind is far from cheap, it is subsidised to the hilt and in many cases is shut down (whilst still getting the cash) more than it is on.
Click to expand...

Not according to Bloomberg. In fact it's the cheapest of all.

To be perfectly honest with you, I rekon that comparing the costs even with this sort of LCOE analysis is by no means a fair comparison anyway because it doesn't account for the enormous 'costs' that are externalised by fossil fuel use ...but that's another argument.;)
 
If the "greens" were so concerned about birds and wildlife they would be up in arms about the carnage of wind farms. Each time there is an oil spill there is (rightly) outrage, but raptors diced in spinning blades are somehow less important. Last year I saw a kestrel get flicked by one of these damned things. When I got to the bottom I found it damaged beyond help and it died in my hands. So much for "giving nature a home".

Also, the RSPB is getting cash through its relationship with a wind farm company. To me, and I am sure many others, that simply sticks in the craw. Its like if a marine conservation group decided to link up with a japanese whaling fleet.
 
Scooby2 said:
Not according to Bloomberg. In fact it's the cheapest of all.

To be perfectly honest with you, I rekon that comparing the costs even with this sort of LCOE analysis is by no means a fair comparison anyway because it doesn't account for the enormous 'costs' that are externalised by fossil fuel use ...but that's another argument.;)
Click to expand...


Not according to this MIT study - the facts are that the more wind farms that are built, the more expensive energy bills become. That's why Germany and Denmark have the most expensive power in the EU.

http://www.economist.com/news/finan...-more-expensive-commonly-thought-sun-wind-and
 
Warning! This thread is more than 8 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

S
Africa’s Birds of Prey Are in Decline, a New Study Finds
Replies
4
Views
621
Andrew Whitehouse
Andrew Whitehouse
G
New March Drawing for Kowa Optics
Replies
12
Views
1K
gr8fuldoug
G
G
  • Article
GreenSand's 2023
Replies
3
Views
413
Stonefaction
Stonefaction
G
  • Article
Broken Biscuits Birdwatching
Replies
6
Views
559
Stonefaction
Stonefaction
G
Increases in the number of gulls nesting and fledging at South Walney Nature Reserve
Replies
0
Views
525
greer3
G

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top