Wind farms - debate

[Ardemax]

Wind farms - great things in my honest opinion. Produce no CO2 and if you take them down they leave nothing behind unlike nuclear.

There's one problem, most CONSERVATIVE run councils aren't going to put up wind farms.

I want your opinions on the matter - are wind farms good? Or are they just a 10 year olds imagination gone too far?

Happy to hear from ya'll :)

[FlyingJesus]

http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=216336

Ancient thread but I knew it had happened somewhere and had to find it :P lovin' how bad Oli and Dan abused the shift key back then too

Basically I think it's an expensive and temporary measure that won't be able to keep up with increasing energy demands and requires more space than would ever possibly be needed for nuclear power (which as it goes is not nearly as dangerous as people seem to think)

[Immenseman]

Where I live and I think the South West in general seems to have quite a lot of Wind Farms. I'm not opposed to them as such but it's just a shame where they have to be situated. To get the best out of them they have to be high up and in areas which aren't overly populated for obvious reasons.

They're quite often placed on beauty spots and are merely an eye sore. However, I don't mind that if they were efficient and made good financial sense. They meet neither of those criteria.

[Ardemax]

ive seen them on mountain and they look quite nice :3

[LuketheDuke]

as it goes i think their quite pretty but i think someone said about them only being a temporary solution which they are in the scheme of things.

until technology develops Im fine to use them so long as they dont cause other environmental harms; dead birds and the likes.

read something quite interesting about alternatives to green technology like creating artificial clouds or deflecting sunlight out of our atmosphere, maybe we should have a bash at that.

[Immenseman]

they're ugly. both wrong. soz.

[RandomManJay]

I don't really mind them, although they many not contribute as much to energy as some other sources, at least they're producing some and causing no long term damage to the earth.

[Ardemax]

ye them funny reflector things look kinda funny

even though it won't provide us with power

[UKIP]

They have been proven not to work, they are barely on due to wind not being there/being too strong, they cost a lot of money, the maintaining of them is incredibly costly, they provide little power, are unreliable and have a short life of around 15 years along with the fact they take up too much room and are an eyesore.

We're heading for an energy crisis in the United Kingdom, the population is growing too fast, old nuclear power plants are coming to the end of their lives, gas & oil usage means we are relying on the Russian Federation and the Middle East which means we're playing into the hands of backward countries such as Libya.

The most obvious, and simple solution is to convert entirely to nuclear power & hydro power, both of which mean we are energy independant and both are very reliable.

[Ardemax]

ye because nuclear is green! no.

nuclear altough provides a lot of power, wrecks the landscape, you can't clean up after a nuclear plant has been there, it leaves gases behind.

very nasty

[Mathew]

Wind farms look quite nice imo. Even if people didn't like what they look like, why don't they throw some more way out at sea?

[Recursion]

Because wind farms could never even power 1/4 of the UK and they wreck the UK's countryside. Nuclear is clean apart from the waste and is really the best thing we could do right about now.

When the wind stops, we have to revert back to tradition oil, coal etc, and the power stations have to be kept running even with the wind farms, power stations cannot be physically started up instantly, so really, it's a waste of time, money and effort.

[Caution]

ye because nuclear is green! no.

nuclear altough provides a lot of power, wrecks the landscape, you can't clean up after a nuclear plant has been there, it leaves gases behind.

very nasty
I think we should use nuclear as well tbh, and it only leaves a low amount of gases behind. One nuclear plant can produce much more electricity than a load of wind farms, it makes more sense.

[syko2006]

They have been proven not to work, they are barely on due to wind not being there/being too strong, they cost a lot of money, the maintaining of them is incredibly costly, they provide little power, are unreliable and have a short life of around 15 years along with the fact they take up too much room and are an eyesore.

We're heading for an energy crisis in the United Kingdom, the population is growing too fast, old nuclear power plants are coming to the end of their lives, gas & oil usage means we are relying on the Russian Federation and the Middle East which means we're playing into the hands of backward countries such as Libya.

The most obvious, and simple solution is to convert entirely to nuclear power & hydro power, both of which mean we are energy independant and both are very reliable.


''They don't work, but we'll put em' up anyway, cos' it'll piss off alot of people, why not?!?!?''

Can you back that up?

On topic: I think they are pretty cool peices of machinary, I like it when I'm in Great Yarmouth and all 30 of them are spinning at once, and they way that you wake up one morning, and they are pointing left, and the by the end of the night, they are pointing right. (Obviously cos' of wind direction change.)

They're a good way to make energy, and I like the idea of them being around.

[UKIP]

ye because nuclear is green! no.

nuclear altough provides a lot of power, wrecks the landscape, you can't clean up after a nuclear plant has been there, it leaves gases behind.

very nasty

I knew you wouldn't have much to say on it, i'll explain anyway. The waste from nuclear power plants is always captured and is put in containers, which are then put in secure storage and even in old mines which are thousands of feet under the ground where they can cause no harm, meaning we can wait until science moves on and finds a way to get rid of this waste.

If your talking about the land where a nuclear power plant has been, yes your right it can't be used again. However the equivilent amount on wind turbines needed to produce the same as a nuclear power plant does would take up miles upon miles upon miles of land.

They aren't the nicest looking things around, but they work well whereas wind farms dont, and they are reliable.


I think we should use nuclear as well tbh, and it only leaves a low amount of gases behind. One nuclear plant can produce much more electricity than a load of wind farms, it makes more sense.

They ignore this point and bring up something like Chernobyl, which anyone who knew anything about that issue would know it was a disaster because of its Soviet design, which were utter crap to be simple about it.


''They don't work, but we'll put em' up anyway, cos' it'll piss off alot of people, why not?!?!?''

Can you back that up?

On topic: I think they are pretty cool peices of machinary, I like it when I'm in Great Yarmouth and all 30 of them are spinning at once, and they way that you wake up one morning, and they are pointing left, and the by the end of the night, they are pointing right. (Obviously cos' of wind direction change.)

They're a good way to make energy, and I like the idea of them being around.

They dont work because;

When there is low wind they cannot turn.
When there is high wind they have to be switched off.
The maintainance costs are astonishing.
They produce very little power.
They take up a lot of land to produce very little power.
They ruin landscapes.
They have a lifespan of around 15 years.
That is why they dont work, and in 30 years or so everybody will see what a complete waste of money they were, along with what a complete scam global warming was.

[jacko2244]

They look pretty cool, and there helping the environment, so yeh i aint got nothing against them :)

[Black_Apalachi]

The only ones near me are out on the sea and across the Mersey towards Liverpool. I personally think the eye-sore argument is ********. They look fine and are doing a great thing. However if they are in fact not very effective due to lack of wind and various other reasons, then that's a different story.

[VirtualG]

I think wind farms are quite beautiful, a monument to human success and that we actually are trying to save nature rather then destroy it for personal benefit.

[UKIP]

I think wind farms are quite beautiful, a monument to human success and that we actually are trying to save nature rather then destroy it for personal benefit.

They are a monument to the vast sums of money this government has wasted on pathetic projects such as this, which as I explained above; produce very little power.

[Ardemax]

They are a monument to the vast sums of money this government has wasted on pathetic projects such as this, which as I explained above; produce very little power.


im sorry but no other government would let them be built!!!

[UKIP]

im sorry but no other government would let them be built!!!

I know they would, and when that time comes i'll criticise that government over this issue as much as I have attacked this government over it.

[syko2006]

They dont work because;

When there is low wind they cannot turn.
When there is high wind they have to be switched off.
The maintainance costs are astonishing.
They produce very little power.
They take up a lot of land to produce very little power.
They ruin landscapes.
They have a lifespan of around 15 years.

That is why they dont work, and in 30 years or so everybody will see what a complete waste of money they were, along with what a complete scam global warming was.

Fair points UKIP, but they must be helping a little, otherwise they wouldn't put them up.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Fair points UKIP, but they must be helping a little, otherwise they wouldn't put them up.

You'd think that wouldn't you, but this is Labour we're talking about. :P

[syko2006]

You'd think that wouldn't you, but this is Labour we're talking about. :P

Haha, another fair point! Lol. :)