Comments on: Clifton turbines application early next year?

By: mark smith

mark smith — Sat, 24 Jul 2010 15:56:24 +0000

Whilst it is not possible, in a short post, to resolve the many conflicting issues regarding the best methods of sourcing of much needed energy,it seems clear to me, and to very many other local residents, that these proposals raise many areas of concern.
Virtually all of us accept that there has to be a radical approach to new forms of energy. Nevertheless, a large amount of us remain unpersuaded that wind power is the only real alternative.
In fact, many of us favour other souces,eg solar; hydro,and even nuclear power.
The arguments against wind power include cost; efficiency, noise and overall environmental impact in small communities.
No-one should be ashamed to admit that they find the construction of 80 metre high silent “chimneys” objectionable.
They are objectionable. They do affect the aesthetic values of people living close to them. They are, to my mind, very ugly,and they can be seen from a very long way. Quite why the Mease Valley should be targetted for these monstrocities is a mystery.
It beggars belief that so many local people to my knowledge, have to jump through ” hoops’ to get the chance to make the smallest changes to their homes, particularly in the Mease Valley, and yet something as radical as this project, seems to have been handled altogether more favourably.
I am sure that we can find many other more suitable sitings that do not affect local populations, as well as ” brownfield sites”.
Perhaps I am in the minority. However, as a democrat, I suggest that those living in the Mease Valley are allowed their say in a localised referendum. This has to be the fairest way to resolve this issue.

By: Peter Smith

Peter Smith — Tue, 13 Jul 2010 15:11:53 +0000

You may be interested in this youtube clip showing a test run of one of the lorries to be used to move turbine blades to a wind farm site in Powys Mid Wales. Not sure of the turbine size proposed but probably similar to the Haunton proposal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dv9c0cNek_Y&playnext_from=TL&videos=dIpkyLA7cDo&feature=sub
Of course the lorries moving the tower parts will be bigger!

By: Helen Reynolds

Helen Reynolds — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 21:05:07 +0000

I spent many happy years in the beautiful village of Harlaston where my parents still live and where I visit regularly. I am absolutely horrified to hear about this Wind Farm proposal in such a beautiful location…why cant this be placed out at sea and not in an area where people choose to live. It will not benefit the local community at all only those that are going to benefit financially i.e. the landowner/councillor. I have recently visited Gran Canaria where they are located on the coast. The turbines are noisy and unsightly and will spoil our very precious countryside and for what purpose except to line someones pocket!!!! Also what about the impact on local communities when heavy lorries are going to and from the site through our country lanes. It is also a disgrace that the planning permission was kept away from local residents I wonder why!!! I would think that there is something very underhand going on which has to be stopped. There is no need to have these horrible ugly things located in such tranquil and beautiful countryside when there are plenty of other locations to put them i.e. out at sea and there are plenty of other alternatives like solar energy so Matthew, together we have to stop these proposals for the sake of all of us who want to preserve our rare and precious countryside.

By: christine collloby

christine collloby — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 17:04:26 +0000

Global warming, despite some scientists adverse views, is a fact. Our planet is suffering from the effects of pollution and we need to find a source of cleaner energy. However, I do agree low level noise causes a strange sort of stress; these structures are not invincible, i.e. the one that was mysteriously damaged by unknown forces; and while there were once hundreds of windmills in Staffs alone, these are gargantuan. I think there are things we should be doing first, such as restarting the dormant hydro dams in Scotland that once provided water and electricity for a large part of that country. These could also be set up on estuaries. Outlying farms in the north and Scotland at which I`ve stayed, rely on solar energy, and its efficient, cheap and plentiful. Barns and outhouses are heated and powered by this source. There are alternatives to foisting on residents something they don`t feel easy about.

By: Martin and Margaret Browne

Martin and Margaret Browne — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 16:08:24 +0000

Proposed Wind Turbines

We would like to express our support for many of the excellent and critical points so well put by others.

We live in Clifton Campville, we do not overlook the proposed site, but we see the test mast whenever we drive out of the village. We appreciate the need to develop cleaner forms of energy generation, and are not strongly opposed to wind farms as such in appropriate places, though we do have real concerns about their cost-effectiveness and other issues.

Now the proposals for Hoggs Hill Wind farm have become public knowledge, there has in consequence been a public meeting and an exhibition by ProWind. We have been impressed by the great strength of local feeling against the proposals. A weak case for this development has been further weakened by the misleading pictures in the exhibition that did not truly represent the real visual intrusion of such turbines. How can existing pylons be made to appear taller and more prominent than the turbines? Why has St. Andrew’s church disappeared?

There appear to be a growing number of reasons why this scheme should go no further.
The scheme poses a number of threats:
a) to people – especially in Haunton and Harlaston – who will live within sight and sound of it (recent research confirms that constant low level noise is a major cause of stress and related health problems)
b) to wildlife, both in the air and on the ground
c) to an area of sensitive and unexplored archaeology, with former mine workings
d) to an essentially rural area where in a more sensible past the power of wind and water was harnessed but on a human scale
e) to the visual amenity – industrial-scale moving turbines dwarfing Grade I-listed St Andrew’s Church. The current test mast is visible from a considerable distance – Cannock Chase, Barr Beacon, Lichfield and Charnwood Forest etc
f) to our rural roads – already prone to flooding

We have yet to hear a convincing argument why a scheme so detrimental to life in this area should go ahead. It would appear that the only benefits will be to the company, the landowner in question, and as a token act towards “green” credentials of the Local Authority.

If it does proceed, it will be a symbol of the breakdown of local democracy, with the worrying prospect of acts of civil disobedience. We suspect that future generations will have cause to regret the current trend to pepper the countryside with noisy, intrusive and inefficient turbines. Such plans are best left to gather dust, with the decade just past.

By: Chris - Mease Valley

Chris - Mease Valley — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 22:14:00 +0000

Matthew,
Excellent work on this website. Exceptionally informative. Until I saw your size comparison illustration I’d no idea just how big these windturbines are. The ones for Haunton seem much bigger than ones I’ve seen in the past and I’d no idea the visual damage would be as big as this. People in Lichfield and Tamworth towns will surely see these they are so enormous!

By: Ian Martin

Ian Martin — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 13:46:19 +0000

I too went to the exhibition at Haunton but unlike some I was not reassured, in fact quite the reverse. On questioning the Prowind representatives I got the distinct impression of being them being programmed particularly with regards to noise and the visual impact on the area. Noise they said met the strict guidelines of ETSU-R-97, this apparently is for wind turbines up to 32m to hub height not 80m, and as we all now know the government suppressed the findings of the review by Hayes Mckenzie Partnership prior to the publication which recommended lower noise levels. On a visual point of view it would decimate the area, just visit a wind farm and judge for yourselfs and like those who live by them, like ourselves if this goes ahead, wished they could have prevented this madness. I will be actively opposing the application.

By: Sally

Sally — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 11:27:29 +0000

I’ve spent some time searching the internet for opinions on these things. As far as I’m concerned a pattern is forming in my mind which suggests to me that the information in advance of these type of developments doesn’t always fit the actual experience afterwards.

There are dozens of websites with first hand experience on them and as far as I can see if you live more than a mile and a half from wind turbines then the only real issue is the visual look of them to an area.

However, this talk of 500metres (less than a third of a mile) doesn’t seem to ring true as there are many examples where residents have felt some impact from them from as far away as a mile and a quarter or about 2000 metres. So that’s four times this magical 500 metres!

People talk of ‘temporary nuisance’. That appears to mean nuisance based on time of day, wind direction, position of the sun and various anomolies. The common examples are tiredness and general low mood which are thought to be caused by the blade thump as they turn and hedaches because of something called light flicker which is caused when the sun is behind the turbine blades.

The above are perceived to be a problem from far more than 500 metres away but because they are only an issue for part of the day and at unpredictable times they are dimissed under planning rules. It is also suggested the seriousness of the effects varies from one person to another depending on individual health and biological make up.

I was fairly neutral to this proposal originally but I’ve now satisfied myself, after hours and hours of research, that there are risks that I do not want to subject my family to. I’m very much a supporter of renewable energy and of wind energy as part of that but I’m now very clear in my mind that the place where these wind turbines are built should be very much further away from people than the magic 500 metres talked about. I’m not totally convinced Hoggs Hill is the right place visually but may just have put up with that.

However, with everything else taken into account I’m now entirely opposed to the application here and will actively oppose it.

By: john

john — Thu, 24 Dec 2009 21:29:33 +0000

Interesting article in times on line
http://www.times on line.co.uk/to/news/environment/article6954565.ece

By: Angela in Harlaston

Angela in Harlaston — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 14:46:40 +0000

Like most, I am disgusted at the thought of a wind farm being built in such a beautiful residential area. From reading the relevant research, it would appear that wind turbines are not actually the clean, reliable, efficient source of energy that some supporters believe them to be. Although they are promoted as an environmentally friendly way of producing electicity the amount of energy produced is negligibe. This development will have a significant and undesirable impact on the surrounding villages- although no doubt will make one local landowner very wealthy!!