The ArgusGreen group welcome plans for wind farm off the Sussex coast (From The Argus)

Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.

Friend of the Earth welcome Sussex windfarm project

The Argus: A 175-turbine offshore wind farm is to be built off the Sussex coast A 175-turbine offshore wind farm is to be built off the Sussex coast

A 175-TURBINE offshore wind farm which has been given the green light by the Government has been described as "fantastic" for Sussex.

German energy giant E.ON has the all clear to build the giant facility 13km off the Sussex coast – with construction expected to start next year.

The farm is estimated to support 750 jobs and bring in £2 billion in investment to the economy.

When complete the 700 megawatt facility will power 450,000 homes.

And Brenda Pollack, from Friends of the Earth, described the approval as “fantastic”.

She said: “The Rampion offshore wind farm will support hundreds of jobs, boost the economy and reduce our reliance on dirty fossil fuels.

“The UK’s huge wind potential could make a major contribution to our energy needs, and help Britain meet its climate change goals.”

The farm, which is the first on the south coast of England, will be located 13km to 20km off the Sussex coast between Worthing to the west and Seaford in the east.

It will be visible from the shore from Selsey Bill all the way to Beachy Head as well as from the Isle of Wight.

Each turbine will be between 180m and 210m tall and will cover a total area of 86 square miles.

An onshore substation will also be built around 1.5 miles south-west of Bolney with 16 miles of underground cabling connecting it.

When fully operational, which is expected in 2018, the farm is expected to produce enough energy to power two-thirds of the homes in Sussex.

E.ON has also promised the wind farm will boost the local economy with up to 85 full-time jobs and the use of local suppliers.

The company has also said Newhaven Port will be the facility’s maintenance base and added that a visitor centre could be built.

Michael Lewis, chief operating officer for E.ON, said work will begin on the project next year with its completion expected in 2018 or 2019.

He added: “This is a key milestone for the project and we firmly believe Rampion will play an important role in helping to ensure future security of supply and make a significant contribution towards meeting the UK's renewable energy targets.”

Chris Tomlinson, development manager for Rampion, added: "The wind farm will not only help generate jobs during both construction and operation, but also provide a boost to the port regeneration at Newhaven and the local economy.”

MP for Lewes Norman Baker said it is “great news for Newhaven”.

Comments (41)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:22am Thu 17 Jul 14

HJarrs says...

This is great news. It should have been done years ago and is only an early tentative step towards what is needed to decarbonise the economy.

However, it is a shame that our energy market, like pretty much all other markets you care to think of in this country, is geared to providing subsidiy for a multinational corporaton when it should be community owned. I note in Germany, communities are banding together to buy out suppliers and parts of the grid. We should do the same. Still, better Rampion is built than not.
This is great news. It should have been done years ago and is only an early tentative step towards what is needed to decarbonise the economy. However, it is a shame that our energy market, like pretty much all other markets you care to think of in this country, is geared to providing subsidiy for a multinational corporaton when it should be community owned. I note in Germany, communities are banding together to buy out suppliers and parts of the grid. We should do the same. Still, better Rampion is built than not. HJarrs
  • Score: -20

8:35am Thu 17 Jul 14

Kate234 says...

This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd.

How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group?

Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.
This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd. How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group? Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though. Kate234
  • Score: 22

9:01am Thu 17 Jul 14

her professional says...

Kate234 wrote:
This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd.

How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group?

Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.
......and all the other political parties are somehow self-financing and not beholden to anyone??
What's your point anyway? Would you sooner see more fracking, or perhaps a nice big nuclear power station on the coast, or are you planning to live without electricity?
[quote][p][bold]Kate234[/bold] wrote: This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd. How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group? Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.[/p][/quote]......and all the other political parties are somehow self-financing and not beholden to anyone?? What's your point anyway? Would you sooner see more fracking, or perhaps a nice big nuclear power station on the coast, or are you planning to live without electricity? her professional
  • Score: -8

9:10am Thu 17 Jul 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

Thank goodness there are no posh people living out at sea and no million pound homes otherwise we could see Eco activists and our Green Member flocking to the construction site claiming these turbines kills birds and damage the seabed and sealife.
Thank goodness there are no posh people living out at sea and no million pound homes otherwise we could see Eco activists and our Green Member flocking to the construction site claiming these turbines kills birds and damage the seabed and sealife. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 16

9:15am Thu 17 Jul 14

Morpheus says...

Off shore wind is one of the most expensive forms of energy. Expect an increase in energy bills. We will sill need to build other power stations to provide energy when the wind does not blow. A complete waste of time and money by our politicians.
Off shore wind is one of the most expensive forms of energy. Expect an increase in energy bills. We will sill need to build other power stations to provide energy when the wind does not blow. A complete waste of time and money by our politicians. Morpheus
  • Score: 20

9:15am Thu 17 Jul 14

Morpheus says...

Off shore wind is one of the most expensive forms of energy. Expect an increase in energy bills. We will sill need to build other power stations to provide energy when the wind does not blow. A complete waste of time and money by our politicians.
Off shore wind is one of the most expensive forms of energy. Expect an increase in energy bills. We will sill need to build other power stations to provide energy when the wind does not blow. A complete waste of time and money by our politicians. Morpheus
  • Score: 6

9:20am Thu 17 Jul 14

HJarrs says...

Kate234 wrote:
This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd.

How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group?

Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.
If you knew Dale Vince CEO of Ecotricity, then you would realise that he is passionate about environmental issues and climate change in particular, hence the motivation to set up Ecotricity. He is hardly going to donate money to LibLabCon given that they have almost completely ignored environmental matters since 2008 and have achieved little. It is hardly like the expose of a recent secretive Tory fundraiser packed with wealthy Russians and other financiers is it? What are they getting for their money?

B&H council only had a small say on this development. Eon will build and own Rampion and they are not known to donate to the Greens, but they may have "seconded" people to the Department of Energy and climate change.
[quote][p][bold]Kate234[/bold] wrote: This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd. How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group? Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.[/p][/quote]If you knew Dale Vince CEO of Ecotricity, then you would realise that he is passionate about environmental issues and climate change in particular, hence the motivation to set up Ecotricity. He is hardly going to donate money to LibLabCon given that they have almost completely ignored environmental matters since 2008 and have achieved little. It is hardly like the expose of a recent secretive Tory fundraiser packed with wealthy Russians and other financiers is it? What are they getting for their money? B&H council only had a small say on this development. Eon will build and own Rampion and they are not known to donate to the Greens, but they may have "seconded" people to the Department of Energy and climate change. HJarrs
  • Score: -6

9:23am Thu 17 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

"or are you planning to live without electricity?"

Switching to wind brings that a huge step closer.
"or are you planning to live without electricity?" Switching to wind brings that a huge step closer. stevo!!
  • Score: -3

9:32am Thu 17 Jul 14

Kate234 says...

her professional wrote:
Kate234 wrote:
This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd.

How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group?

Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.
......and all the other political parties are somehow self-financing and not beholden to anyone??
What's your point anyway? Would you sooner see more fracking, or perhaps a nice big nuclear power station on the coast, or are you planning to live without electricity?
Actually yes I would prefer to see more fracking and nuclear. Modern nuclear power technology is very clean and safe providing the construction standard is built to modern methods but this frankly is not what the debate is about.

My point regardless is not that the Greens are dirtier than other parties in terms of where their money comes from or that they are dirty at all. I am however saying that if you accept a very large donation from organisations with a vested interest in a certain outcome any normal person would wonder if you can be entirely impartial to the facts. It is like accepting money from the tobacco lobby and then saying that you are looking rationally and impartially at the debate on cigarette packaging.

Commercial organisations rarely donate money of this size to organisations unless they are expecting something back. This came from a ltd company and the CEO has a responsibility to manage the money in it for shareholders. If it came out of his personal future grandkids school fee fund that is a different question.
[quote][p][bold]her professional[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kate234[/bold] wrote: This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd. How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group? Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.[/p][/quote]......and all the other political parties are somehow self-financing and not beholden to anyone?? What's your point anyway? Would you sooner see more fracking, or perhaps a nice big nuclear power station on the coast, or are you planning to live without electricity?[/p][/quote]Actually yes I would prefer to see more fracking and nuclear. Modern nuclear power technology is very clean and safe providing the construction standard is built to modern methods but this frankly is not what the debate is about. My point regardless is not that the Greens are dirtier than other parties in terms of where their money comes from or that they are dirty at all. I am however saying that if you accept a very large donation from organisations with a vested interest in a certain outcome any normal person would wonder if you can be entirely impartial to the facts. It is like accepting money from the tobacco lobby and then saying that you are looking rationally and impartially at the debate on cigarette packaging. Commercial organisations rarely donate money of this size to organisations unless they are expecting something back. This came from a ltd company and the CEO has a responsibility to manage the money in it for shareholders. If it came out of his personal future grandkids school fee fund that is a different question. Kate234
  • Score: 11

9:58am Thu 17 Jul 14

Max Ripple says...

EON - a German company who will make the profits from this and take that money abroad.
Wind turbines made in Scandanavia and not in this country as we had the foresight to close down another of our factories that made then on the Isle of Wight. Again, profits going elsewhere. When are we going to start investing in British companies so that our country reaps the benefit?
EON - a German company who will make the profits from this and take that money abroad. Wind turbines made in Scandanavia and not in this country as we had the foresight to close down another of our factories that made then on the Isle of Wight. Again, profits going elsewhere. When are we going to start investing in British companies so that our country reaps the benefit? Max Ripple
  • Score: 22

10:03am Thu 17 Jul 14

PracticeNotTheories says...

'Green' wind energy is not actually that green. The amount of energy required to melt 200 tonnes of steel to create the structure (and don't forget there are 175 of these things... that's 35000 tonnes of metal) is pretty significant. And I'm pretty sure they won't be wind-powered furnaces.
Today the Times has a story on the frequency of failure of these turbines - so maintenance is pretty significant. And whenever I go past any group of turbines, I generally seeing a number of them idle (A Green Party trait perhaps?).
And of course, the blight on the landscape. A beautiful set of spinning props on the horizon will make for a lovely view, for all the people of Brighton.
Couldn't they have planned this with Boris, and setup a wind farm where his famous dead-duck airport is planned to be? Apparently nobody lives there or cares about an airport, so a bunch of spinny wind generators won't worry anyone.
'Green' wind energy is not actually that green. The amount of energy required to melt 200 tonnes of steel to create the structure (and don't forget there are 175 of these things... that's 35000 tonnes of metal) is pretty significant. And I'm pretty sure they won't be wind-powered furnaces. Today the Times has a story on the frequency of failure of these turbines - so maintenance is pretty significant. And whenever I go past any group of turbines, I generally seeing a number of them idle (A Green Party trait perhaps?). And of course, the blight on the landscape. A beautiful set of spinning props on the horizon will make for a lovely view, for all the people of Brighton. Couldn't they have planned this with Boris, and setup a wind farm where his famous dead-duck airport is planned to be? Apparently nobody lives there or cares about an airport, so a bunch of spinny wind generators won't worry anyone. PracticeNotTheories
  • Score: 13

10:17am Thu 17 Jul 14

Caute3 says...

This is great news unless you're a bird. In which case, prepare to die.
This is great news unless you're a bird. In which case, prepare to die. Caute3
  • Score: 7

10:32am Thu 17 Jul 14

s_james says...

Kate234 wrote:
This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd.

How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group?

Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.
I don’t understand how you keep thinking the Green Party in Brighton made this decision. The ‘Green Group’ in the headline refers to Friends of the Earth. The wind farm is just as visible from Lewes District, Adur, Eastbourne etc – local authorities up and down the coast, none of which have a Green Council. The wind farm is not in Brighton, and the only influence Brighton Council had on the decision making was to be consulted by the Planning Inspectorate.
[quote][p][bold]Kate234[/bold] wrote: This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd. How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group? Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.[/p][/quote]I don’t understand how you keep thinking the Green Party in Brighton made this decision. The ‘Green Group’ in the headline refers to Friends of the Earth. The wind farm is just as visible from Lewes District, Adur, Eastbourne etc – local authorities up and down the coast, none of which have a Green Council. The wind farm is not in Brighton, and the only influence Brighton Council had on the decision making was to be consulted by the Planning Inspectorate. s_james
  • Score: 7

10:45am Thu 17 Jul 14

We love Red Billy says...

Kate234 wrote:
This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd.

How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group?

Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.
Has anyone looked into Jason Kitcat's directorship of Coast To Capital, the company that pushed for the i360? Leder of the council and working for a company that is encouraging the council to borrow money. I don't know about you but that smells like a conflict of interest. No wonder he is standing down at the next election to spend more time with his family. @gzunder
[quote][p][bold]Kate234[/bold] wrote: This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd. How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group? Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.[/p][/quote]Has anyone looked into Jason Kitcat's directorship of Coast To Capital, the company that pushed for the i360? Leder of the council and working for a company that is encouraging the council to borrow money. I don't know about you but that smells like a conflict of interest. No wonder he is standing down at the next election to spend more time with his family. @gzunder We love Red Billy
  • Score: 9

10:47am Thu 17 Jul 14

We love Red Billy says...

Kate234 wrote:
This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd.

How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group?

Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.
Looks similar to Jason Kitcat's directorship of Coast To Capital, the company that pushed for the i360? Leader of the council and working for a company that is encouraging the council to borrow money. I don't know about you but that smells like a conflict of interest. No wonder he is standing down at the next election to spend more time with his family. @gzunder
[quote][p][bold]Kate234[/bold] wrote: This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd. How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group? Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.[/p][/quote]Looks similar to Jason Kitcat's directorship of Coast To Capital, the company that pushed for the i360? Leader of the council and working for a company that is encouraging the council to borrow money. I don't know about you but that smells like a conflict of interest. No wonder he is standing down at the next election to spend more time with his family. @gzunder We love Red Billy
  • Score: 2

10:49am Thu 17 Jul 14

Nikski says...

Caute3 wrote:
This is great news unless you're a bird. In which case, prepare to die.
How many birds are killed by power lines and pollution? Far more than death by wind turbines! You green energy haters sound just like the pro-fox hunting lot when they knew they had lost the argument; increasingly desperate and ill-informed logic used to support your views. What about future generations they wouldn't thank you for your nuclear/fracking legacy....or are you unable to think about anyone other than yourselves?!
[quote][p][bold]Caute3[/bold] wrote: This is great news unless you're a bird. In which case, prepare to die.[/p][/quote]How many birds are killed by power lines and pollution? Far more than death by wind turbines! You green energy haters sound just like the pro-fox hunting lot when they knew they had lost the argument; increasingly desperate and ill-informed logic used to support your views. What about future generations they wouldn't thank you for your nuclear/fracking legacy....or are you unable to think about anyone other than yourselves?! Nikski
  • Score: 0

10:56am Thu 17 Jul 14

s_james says...

We love Red Billy wrote:
Kate234 wrote:
This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd.

How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group?

Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.
Looks similar to Jason Kitcat's directorship of Coast To Capital, the company that pushed for the i360? Leader of the council and working for a company that is encouraging the council to borrow money. I don't know about you but that smells like a conflict of interest. No wonder he is standing down at the next election to spend more time with his family. @gzunder
Coast to Capital is not a company. It is a ‘Local Enterprise Partnership’ – which is a government funded body. Kitcat, as leader of one of the largest local authorities in the LEP’s area naturally sits on the board, along with the leaders of Surrey CC, Mid Sussex DC, West Sussex CC and Croydon LBC, seven representatives of private sector businesses and two from higher education.
[quote][p][bold]We love Red Billy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kate234[/bold] wrote: This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd. How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group? Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.[/p][/quote]Looks similar to Jason Kitcat's directorship of Coast To Capital, the company that pushed for the i360? Leader of the council and working for a company that is encouraging the council to borrow money. I don't know about you but that smells like a conflict of interest. No wonder he is standing down at the next election to spend more time with his family. @gzunder[/p][/quote]Coast to Capital is not a company. It is a ‘Local Enterprise Partnership’ – which is a government funded body. Kitcat, as leader of one of the largest local authorities in the LEP’s area naturally sits on the board, along with the leaders of Surrey CC, Mid Sussex DC, West Sussex CC and Croydon LBC, seven representatives of private sector businesses and two from higher education. s_james
  • Score: 5

11:14am Thu 17 Jul 14

Bugzy84 says...

Caute3 wrote:
This is great news unless you're a bird. In which case, prepare to die.
They don't spin round like a airplane blades, how thick can someone be!!!
Birds actually have better eyesight to movement than humans so this rubbish about hundreds of birds getting killed by turbines is nonsense NIMBY propaganda.
[quote][p][bold]Caute3[/bold] wrote: This is great news unless you're a bird. In which case, prepare to die.[/p][/quote]They don't spin round like a airplane blades, how thick can someone be!!! Birds actually have better eyesight to movement than humans so this rubbish about hundreds of birds getting killed by turbines is nonsense NIMBY propaganda. Bugzy84
  • Score: -6

11:37am Thu 17 Jul 14

downbythesea says...

Morpheus wrote:
Off shore wind is one of the most expensive forms of energy. Expect an increase in energy bills. We will sill need to build other power stations to provide energy when the wind does not blow. A complete waste of time and money by our politicians.
Your point being? Just like the complete waste of energy generated by Oil/Gas/Coal power stations with nobody to use it at night, so a pretty moot point don't you think?

Also existing technologies already allow the storage of wind generated power in batteries, CAES (compressed air energy storage), amongst many others, look it up!

Any new technology WILL be expensive until competition reduces prices, just like LCD TV's used to cost £3000 for large screens, now you get them for £299 or so!

But hey, lets just burn a resource that's rapidly dwindling, 50 years max.
[quote][p][bold]Morpheus[/bold] wrote: Off shore wind is one of the most expensive forms of energy. Expect an increase in energy bills. We will sill need to build other power stations to provide energy when the wind does not blow. A complete waste of time and money by our politicians.[/p][/quote]Your point being? Just like the complete waste of energy generated by Oil/Gas/Coal power stations with nobody to use it at night, so a pretty moot point don't you think? Also existing technologies already allow the storage of wind generated power in batteries, CAES (compressed air energy storage), amongst many others, look it up! Any new technology WILL be expensive until competition reduces prices, just like LCD TV's used to cost £3000 for large screens, now you get them for £299 or so! But hey, lets just burn a resource that's rapidly dwindling, 50 years max. downbythesea
  • Score: 2

11:58am Thu 17 Jul 14

We love Red Billy says...

Bugzy84 wrote:
Caute3 wrote:
This is great news unless you're a bird. In which case, prepare to die.
They don't spin round like a airplane blades, how thick can someone be!!!
Birds actually have better eyesight to movement than humans so this rubbish about hundreds of birds getting killed by turbines is nonsense NIMBY propaganda.
Er............http:/
/www.eastcountymagaz
ine.org/sites/eastco
untymagazine.org/fil
es/eagle,%20dead%20a
t%20wind%20turbine_1
.jpg
[quote][p][bold]Bugzy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caute3[/bold] wrote: This is great news unless you're a bird. In which case, prepare to die.[/p][/quote]They don't spin round like a airplane blades, how thick can someone be!!! Birds actually have better eyesight to movement than humans so this rubbish about hundreds of birds getting killed by turbines is nonsense NIMBY propaganda.[/p][/quote]Er............http:/ /www.eastcountymagaz ine.org/sites/eastco untymagazine.org/fil es/eagle,%20dead%20a t%20wind%20turbine_1 .jpg We love Red Billy
  • Score: 5

12:04pm Thu 17 Jul 14

We love Red Billy says...

s_james wrote:
We love Red Billy wrote:
Kate234 wrote:
This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd.

How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group?

Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.
Looks similar to Jason Kitcat's directorship of Coast To Capital, the company that pushed for the i360? Leader of the council and working for a company that is encouraging the council to borrow money. I don't know about you but that smells like a conflict of interest. No wonder he is standing down at the next election to spend more time with his family. @gzunder
Coast to Capital is not a company. It is a ‘Local Enterprise Partnership’ – which is a government funded body. Kitcat, as leader of one of the largest local authorities in the LEP’s area naturally sits on the board, along with the leaders of Surrey CC, Mid Sussex DC, West Sussex CC and Croydon LBC, seven representatives of private sector businesses and two from higher education.
It is registerd as a Ltd company and Jason is one of its directors. Why does he naturaly sit on the board? His position is compromised in being a member of anything other than the council. Not only ethical but seen to be ethical. Will he be resigning his directorship when he leaves office? Sorry Green PR snouter we are on to you @gzunder
[quote][p][bold]s_james[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]We love Red Billy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kate234[/bold] wrote: This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd. How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group? Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.[/p][/quote]Looks similar to Jason Kitcat's directorship of Coast To Capital, the company that pushed for the i360? Leader of the council and working for a company that is encouraging the council to borrow money. I don't know about you but that smells like a conflict of interest. No wonder he is standing down at the next election to spend more time with his family. @gzunder[/p][/quote]Coast to Capital is not a company. It is a ‘Local Enterprise Partnership’ – which is a government funded body. Kitcat, as leader of one of the largest local authorities in the LEP’s area naturally sits on the board, along with the leaders of Surrey CC, Mid Sussex DC, West Sussex CC and Croydon LBC, seven representatives of private sector businesses and two from higher education.[/p][/quote]It is registerd as a Ltd company and Jason is one of its directors. Why does he naturaly sit on the board? His position is compromised in being a member of anything other than the council. Not only ethical but seen to be ethical. Will he be resigning his directorship when he leaves office? Sorry Green PR snouter we are on to you @gzunder We love Red Billy
  • Score: 0

12:12pm Thu 17 Jul 14

michaelr says...

A few Notes:

The Green Council once objected to the wind turbines.

When they wanted to put turbines on the outer Shoreham harbour wall around 20 years ago NIMBYs stopped it so they got a gas powered station instead.

Turbines at sea are good for fisheries since you can not fish around them so act as a haven for young fish.

Turbines used to built on the Isle of Wright until that council refused to allow turbines on their own land or at sea, so the company withdrew from the UK.

We still need a good way to store electricity to make the turbines truly useful power generators.
A few Notes: The Green Council once objected to the wind turbines. When they wanted to put turbines on the outer Shoreham harbour wall around 20 years ago NIMBYs stopped it so they got a gas powered station instead. Turbines at sea are good for fisheries since you can not fish around them so act as a haven for young fish. Turbines used to built on the Isle of Wright until that council refused to allow turbines on their own land or at sea, so the company withdrew from the UK. We still need a good way to store electricity to make the turbines truly useful power generators. michaelr
  • Score: 7

12:19pm Thu 17 Jul 14

s_james says...

We love Red Billy wrote:
s_james wrote:
We love Red Billy wrote:
Kate234 wrote:
This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd.

How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group?

Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.
Looks similar to Jason Kitcat's directorship of Coast To Capital, the company that pushed for the i360? Leader of the council and working for a company that is encouraging the council to borrow money. I don't know about you but that smells like a conflict of interest. No wonder he is standing down at the next election to spend more time with his family. @gzunder
Coast to Capital is not a company. It is a ‘Local Enterprise Partnership’ – which is a government funded body. Kitcat, as leader of one of the largest local authorities in the LEP’s area naturally sits on the board, along with the leaders of Surrey CC, Mid Sussex DC, West Sussex CC and Croydon LBC, seven representatives of private sector businesses and two from higher education.
It is registerd as a Ltd company and Jason is one of its directors. Why does he naturaly sit on the board? His position is compromised in being a member of anything other than the council. Not only ethical but seen to be ethical. Will he be resigning his directorship when he leaves office? Sorry Green PR snouter we are on to you @gzunder
Green PR snouter!! Love it. I just know what a LEP is. They are partnerships between local authorities and the business sector set up by the Government to replace regional assemblies. It would be very odd if Brighton & Hove City Council wasn’t represented on Coast to Capital, just as it would be odd if, say, Croydon wasn’t.
[quote][p][bold]We love Red Billy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]s_james[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]We love Red Billy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kate234[/bold] wrote: This is great news unless you like Brighton's sea view. The Green group would say this. How much money has the Green Group received from companies that support this kind of development. Lets see £20,000 in the Caroline Lucas's members interest register from a company called Ecotricity Ltd. How many other donations can be fished up in previous registers and to other members of this group? Perhaps someone has the time to look into this? In my experience no commercial company pays £20,000 to anyone unless they are expecting a good return on their investment. I notice they have a section supporting sea wind farms very strongly on their website. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps the CEO just fancies Caroline? Maybe they just wanted to donate to the Jason KitKat leaving present colection? I think we should be told though.[/p][/quote]Looks similar to Jason Kitcat's directorship of Coast To Capital, the company that pushed for the i360? Leader of the council and working for a company that is encouraging the council to borrow money. I don't know about you but that smells like a conflict of interest. No wonder he is standing down at the next election to spend more time with his family. @gzunder[/p][/quote]Coast to Capital is not a company. It is a ‘Local Enterprise Partnership’ – which is a government funded body. Kitcat, as leader of one of the largest local authorities in the LEP’s area naturally sits on the board, along with the leaders of Surrey CC, Mid Sussex DC, West Sussex CC and Croydon LBC, seven representatives of private sector businesses and two from higher education.[/p][/quote]It is registerd as a Ltd company and Jason is one of its directors. Why does he naturaly sit on the board? His position is compromised in being a member of anything other than the council. Not only ethical but seen to be ethical. Will he be resigning his directorship when he leaves office? Sorry Green PR snouter we are on to you @gzunder[/p][/quote]Green PR snouter!! Love it. I just know what a LEP is. They are partnerships between local authorities and the business sector set up by the Government to replace regional assemblies. It would be very odd if Brighton & Hove City Council wasn’t represented on Coast to Capital, just as it would be odd if, say, Croydon wasn’t. s_james
  • Score: 0

1:02pm Thu 17 Jul 14

rolivan says...

PracticeNotTheories wrote:
'Green' wind energy is not actually that green. The amount of energy required to melt 200 tonnes of steel to create the structure (and don't forget there are 175 of these things... that's 35000 tonnes of metal) is pretty significant. And I'm pretty sure they won't be wind-powered furnaces.
Today the Times has a story on the frequency of failure of these turbines - so maintenance is pretty significant. And whenever I go past any group of turbines, I generally seeing a number of them idle (A Green Party trait perhaps?).
And of course, the blight on the landscape. A beautiful set of spinning props on the horizon will make for a lovely view, for all the people of Brighton.
Couldn't they have planned this with Boris, and setup a wind farm where his famous dead-duck airport is planned to be? Apparently nobody lives there or cares about an airport, so a bunch of spinny wind generators won't worry anyone.
Where is it you see theses turbines laying idle,I live near at least 80 and they are never idle.
[quote][p][bold]PracticeNotTheories[/bold] wrote: 'Green' wind energy is not actually that green. The amount of energy required to melt 200 tonnes of steel to create the structure (and don't forget there are 175 of these things... that's 35000 tonnes of metal) is pretty significant. And I'm pretty sure they won't be wind-powered furnaces. Today the Times has a story on the frequency of failure of these turbines - so maintenance is pretty significant. And whenever I go past any group of turbines, I generally seeing a number of them idle (A Green Party trait perhaps?). And of course, the blight on the landscape. A beautiful set of spinning props on the horizon will make for a lovely view, for all the people of Brighton. Couldn't they have planned this with Boris, and setup a wind farm where his famous dead-duck airport is planned to be? Apparently nobody lives there or cares about an airport, so a bunch of spinny wind generators won't worry anyone.[/p][/quote]Where is it you see theses turbines laying idle,I live near at least 80 and they are never idle. rolivan
  • Score: 2

1:02pm Thu 17 Jul 14

rolivan says...

PracticeNotTheories wrote:
'Green' wind energy is not actually that green. The amount of energy required to melt 200 tonnes of steel to create the structure (and don't forget there are 175 of these things... that's 35000 tonnes of metal) is pretty significant. And I'm pretty sure they won't be wind-powered furnaces.
Today the Times has a story on the frequency of failure of these turbines - so maintenance is pretty significant. And whenever I go past any group of turbines, I generally seeing a number of them idle (A Green Party trait perhaps?).
And of course, the blight on the landscape. A beautiful set of spinning props on the horizon will make for a lovely view, for all the people of Brighton.
Couldn't they have planned this with Boris, and setup a wind farm where his famous dead-duck airport is planned to be? Apparently nobody lives there or cares about an airport, so a bunch of spinny wind generators won't worry anyone.
Where is it you see theses turbines laying idle,I live near at least 80 and they are never idle.
[quote][p][bold]PracticeNotTheories[/bold] wrote: 'Green' wind energy is not actually that green. The amount of energy required to melt 200 tonnes of steel to create the structure (and don't forget there are 175 of these things... that's 35000 tonnes of metal) is pretty significant. And I'm pretty sure they won't be wind-powered furnaces. Today the Times has a story on the frequency of failure of these turbines - so maintenance is pretty significant. And whenever I go past any group of turbines, I generally seeing a number of them idle (A Green Party trait perhaps?). And of course, the blight on the landscape. A beautiful set of spinning props on the horizon will make for a lovely view, for all the people of Brighton. Couldn't they have planned this with Boris, and setup a wind farm where his famous dead-duck airport is planned to be? Apparently nobody lives there or cares about an airport, so a bunch of spinny wind generators won't worry anyone.[/p][/quote]Where is it you see theses turbines laying idle,I live near at least 80 and they are never idle. rolivan
  • Score: 0

1:08pm Thu 17 Jul 14

PracticeNotTheories says...

Bugzy84 - Erm, yeah... look at the picture at the top of this article. Those are ACTUAL wind turbines. The blades can be close to 50m long, and the tips of the blade can be travelling at 200mph or higher. If you're a seagull, you can find that very suddenly the clear air in front of you is no longer clear. Remember - in Brighton, the speed limit is 20mph, and people are still hit by cars. Supposedly people have more intelligence than the average seagull.

downbythesea - just as a pointer - Coal/ Oil/ Nuclear can produce on-demand power. When you need it - you turn other reactors/ turbines on. With wind - if there's no wind, you have no power. The storage for all this power takes up a load of space as well - and of course the generation of batteries, etc. is not very green normally either.
Bugzy84 - Erm, yeah... look at the picture at the top of this article. Those are ACTUAL wind turbines. The blades can be close to 50m long, and the tips of the blade can be travelling at 200mph or higher. If you're a seagull, you can find that very suddenly the clear air in front of you is no longer clear. Remember - in Brighton, the speed limit is 20mph, and people are still hit by cars. Supposedly people have more intelligence than the average seagull. downbythesea - just as a pointer - Coal/ Oil/ Nuclear can produce on-demand power. When you need it - you turn other reactors/ turbines on. With wind - if there's no wind, you have no power. The storage for all this power takes up a load of space as well - and of course the generation of batteries, etc. is not very green normally either. PracticeNotTheories
  • Score: 1

1:13pm Thu 17 Jul 14

PracticeNotTheories says...

Where is it you see theses turbines laying idle,I live near at least 80 and they are never idle.

http://www.dailymail
.co.uk/news/article-
2388417/Wind-farms-p
aid-30-million-year-
stand-idle-grid-cope
-energy-produce.html

And while that is the Mail - turbines in Reading, Harrow, Derby, etc. are reported regularly as not-generating.
[quote] Where is it you see theses turbines laying idle,I live near at least 80 and they are never idle. [/quote] http://www.dailymail .co.uk/news/article- 2388417/Wind-farms-p aid-30-million-year- stand-idle-grid-cope -energy-produce.html And while that is the Mail - turbines in Reading, Harrow, Derby, etc. are reported regularly as not-generating. PracticeNotTheories
  • Score: 2

1:29pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Tommy Flowers says...

rolivan wrote:
PracticeNotTheories wrote:
'Green' wind energy is not actually that green. The amount of energy required to melt 200 tonnes of steel to create the structure (and don't forget there are 175 of these things... that's 35000 tonnes of metal) is pretty significant. And I'm pretty sure they won't be wind-powered furnaces.
Today the Times has a story on the frequency of failure of these turbines - so maintenance is pretty significant. And whenever I go past any group of turbines, I generally seeing a number of them idle (A Green Party trait perhaps?).
And of course, the blight on the landscape. A beautiful set of spinning props on the horizon will make for a lovely view, for all the people of Brighton.
Couldn't they have planned this with Boris, and setup a wind farm where his famous dead-duck airport is planned to be? Apparently nobody lives there or cares about an airport, so a bunch of spinny wind generators won't worry anyone.
Where is it you see theses turbines laying idle,I live near at least 80 and they are never idle.
Never idle?
If they're moving when the wind isn't blowing then they are being spinned to stop uneven wear, drawing power from the grid to do this. Offshore turbines use an onboard diesel generator for this purpose and for startup.
Yes, you read ithat correctly, all offshore wind turbines have their own diesel engine.
[quote][p][bold]rolivan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]PracticeNotTheories[/bold] wrote: 'Green' wind energy is not actually that green. The amount of energy required to melt 200 tonnes of steel to create the structure (and don't forget there are 175 of these things... that's 35000 tonnes of metal) is pretty significant. And I'm pretty sure they won't be wind-powered furnaces. Today the Times has a story on the frequency of failure of these turbines - so maintenance is pretty significant. And whenever I go past any group of turbines, I generally seeing a number of them idle (A Green Party trait perhaps?). And of course, the blight on the landscape. A beautiful set of spinning props on the horizon will make for a lovely view, for all the people of Brighton. Couldn't they have planned this with Boris, and setup a wind farm where his famous dead-duck airport is planned to be? Apparently nobody lives there or cares about an airport, so a bunch of spinny wind generators won't worry anyone.[/p][/quote]Where is it you see theses turbines laying idle,I live near at least 80 and they are never idle.[/p][/quote]Never idle? If they're moving when the wind isn't blowing then they are being spinned to stop uneven wear, drawing power from the grid to do this. Offshore turbines use an onboard diesel generator for this purpose and for startup. Yes, you read ithat correctly, all offshore wind turbines have their own diesel engine. Tommy Flowers
  • Score: 5

1:42pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Mark63 says...

Hurrah! Progress! For too long, this place has sat on its past - time to look to the future! Next, extend the M23 from the Pier to the Mall .... Fast in / Fast out... please... and undersea parking. Time to be innovative!
Hurrah! Progress! For too long, this place has sat on its past - time to look to the future! Next, extend the M23 from the Pier to the Mall .... Fast in / Fast out... please... and undersea parking. Time to be innovative! Mark63
  • Score: 1

1:52pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Bugzy84 says...

We love Red Billy wrote:
Bugzy84 wrote:
Caute3 wrote:
This is great news unless you're a bird. In which case, prepare to die.
They don't spin round like a airplane blades, how thick can someone be!!!
Birds actually have better eyesight to movement than humans so this rubbish about hundreds of birds getting killed by turbines is nonsense NIMBY propaganda.
Er............http:/

/www.eastcountymagaz

ine.org/sites/eastco

untymagazine.org/fil

es/eagle,%20dead%20a

t%20wind%20turbine_1

.jpg
WOW i'm convinced, a picture of a conveniently placed dead eagle in front of a turbine, NO OTHER EXPLANATION CAN BE POSSIBLE!!!!!!!!
[quote][p][bold]We love Red Billy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bugzy84[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Caute3[/bold] wrote: This is great news unless you're a bird. In which case, prepare to die.[/p][/quote]They don't spin round like a airplane blades, how thick can someone be!!! Birds actually have better eyesight to movement than humans so this rubbish about hundreds of birds getting killed by turbines is nonsense NIMBY propaganda.[/p][/quote]Er............http:/ /www.eastcountymagaz ine.org/sites/eastco untymagazine.org/fil es/eagle,%20dead%20a t%20wind%20turbine_1 .jpg[/p][/quote]WOW i'm convinced, a picture of a conveniently placed dead eagle in front of a turbine, NO OTHER EXPLANATION CAN BE POSSIBLE!!!!!!!! Bugzy84
  • Score: 2

2:16pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Bugzy84 says...

PracticeNotTheories wrote:
Bugzy84 - Erm, yeah... look at the picture at the top of this article. Those are ACTUAL wind turbines. The blades can be close to 50m long, and the tips of the blade can be travelling at 200mph or higher. If you're a seagull, you can find that very suddenly the clear air in front of you is no longer clear. Remember - in Brighton, the speed limit is 20mph, and people are still hit by cars. Supposedly people have more intelligence than the average seagull.

downbythesea - just as a pointer - Coal/ Oil/ Nuclear can produce on-demand power. When you need it - you turn other reactors/ turbines on. With wind - if there's no wind, you have no power. The storage for all this power takes up a load of space as well - and of course the generation of batteries, etc. is not very green normally either.
Considering there are only 3 blades the chances of a bird hitting one is very rare and I would call it natural selection at work.
Brighton is not the only town in the country with 20mph speed limits, it's a national trend that councils have to implement regardless of what party runs it.
Coal/Oil/Nuclear does create on demand power, but what happens when it runs out and we are left with nothing but empty holes in the ground filled with depleted radioactive waste?
[quote][p][bold]PracticeNotTheories[/bold] wrote: Bugzy84 - Erm, yeah... look at the picture at the top of this article. Those are ACTUAL wind turbines. The blades can be close to 50m long, and the tips of the blade can be travelling at 200mph or higher. If you're a seagull, you can find that very suddenly the clear air in front of you is no longer clear. Remember - in Brighton, the speed limit is 20mph, and people are still hit by cars. Supposedly people have more intelligence than the average seagull. downbythesea - just as a pointer - Coal/ Oil/ Nuclear can produce on-demand power. When you need it - you turn other reactors/ turbines on. With wind - if there's no wind, you have no power. The storage for all this power takes up a load of space as well - and of course the generation of batteries, etc. is not very green normally either.[/p][/quote]Considering there are only 3 blades the chances of a bird hitting one is very rare and I would call it natural selection at work. Brighton is not the only town in the country with 20mph speed limits, it's a national trend that councils have to implement regardless of what party runs it. Coal/Oil/Nuclear does create on demand power, but what happens when it runs out and we are left with nothing but empty holes in the ground filled with depleted radioactive waste? Bugzy84
  • Score: -2

2:29pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Saffron says...

I accept that a nimby attitude can be counter productive but I have to confess that I will miss being able to see the horizon. I do believe that it is going to be a costly exercise, that bringing the power generated through Shoreham and then across Sussex to Bolney doesn't seem to make much sense.

Also I am very sceptical about the so called benefits for Sussex and Newhaven in particular. Whilst the Rampion Mast was being installed it was serviced by a craft based in Newhaven. But since then drilling vessels have always returned to Southampton for refuelling and supplies not to Newhaven.
I accept that a nimby attitude can be counter productive but I have to confess that I will miss being able to see the horizon. I do believe that it is going to be a costly exercise, that bringing the power generated through Shoreham and then across Sussex to Bolney doesn't seem to make much sense. Also I am very sceptical about the so called benefits for Sussex and Newhaven in particular. Whilst the Rampion Mast was being installed it was serviced by a craft based in Newhaven. But since then drilling vessels have always returned to Southampton for refuelling and supplies not to Newhaven. Saffron
  • Score: 3

2:52pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Nikski says...

Saffron wrote:
I accept that a nimby attitude can be counter productive but I have to confess that I will miss being able to see the horizon. I do believe that it is going to be a costly exercise, that bringing the power generated through Shoreham and then across Sussex to Bolney doesn't seem to make much sense.

Also I am very sceptical about the so called benefits for Sussex and Newhaven in particular. Whilst the Rampion Mast was being installed it was serviced by a craft based in Newhaven. But since then drilling vessels have always returned to Southampton for refuelling and supplies not to Newhaven.
You will still be able to see the horizon it's not going to blot everything out! How big do you think it's going to be? It will be 13-20kms out to see so will only be visible on a small part of the horizon and should appear fairly small itself. Don't worry
[quote][p][bold]Saffron[/bold] wrote: I accept that a nimby attitude can be counter productive but I have to confess that I will miss being able to see the horizon. I do believe that it is going to be a costly exercise, that bringing the power generated through Shoreham and then across Sussex to Bolney doesn't seem to make much sense. Also I am very sceptical about the so called benefits for Sussex and Newhaven in particular. Whilst the Rampion Mast was being installed it was serviced by a craft based in Newhaven. But since then drilling vessels have always returned to Southampton for refuelling and supplies not to Newhaven.[/p][/quote]You will still be able to see the horizon it's not going to blot everything out! How big do you think it's going to be? It will be 13-20kms out to see so will only be visible on a small part of the horizon and should appear fairly small itself. Don't worry Nikski
  • Score: 1

5:47pm Thu 17 Jul 14

HJarrs says...

PracticeNotTheories wrote:
'Green' wind energy is not actually that green. The amount of energy required to melt 200 tonnes of steel to create the structure (and don't forget there are 175 of these things... that's 35000 tonnes of metal) is pretty significant. And I'm pretty sure they won't be wind-powered furnaces.
Today the Times has a story on the frequency of failure of these turbines - so maintenance is pretty significant. And whenever I go past any group of turbines, I generally seeing a number of them idle (A Green Party trait perhaps?).
And of course, the blight on the landscape. A beautiful set of spinning props on the horizon will make for a lovely view, for all the people of Brighton.
Couldn't they have planned this with Boris, and setup a wind farm where his famous dead-duck airport is planned to be? Apparently nobody lives there or cares about an airport, so a bunch of spinny wind generators won't worry anyone.
You make a good point about the embodied CO2 for construction and operation. Using Bath University figures as per Wikipedia.
35000 tonnes of Steel gives 50000 tonnes Co2, don't forget concrete, copper (including Grid connection near Bolney) and Aluminium, so add another 100000 tonnes then double it to allow for construction and transportation, so 300000 tonnes co2 and then, what the hell! Double it again for the share of emissions for the factor's constructions, tooling shipping etc. 600000 tonnes to get Rampion built or in other words less than 6 months to recoup that CO2 by displacing coal (1.25 million tonnes saved pa). Whereas for gas, coal and oil, not only do you have to count the embodied CO2 of the plant, but they keep emitting vast quantities of CO2 till they close.
[quote][p][bold]PracticeNotTheories[/bold] wrote: 'Green' wind energy is not actually that green. The amount of energy required to melt 200 tonnes of steel to create the structure (and don't forget there are 175 of these things... that's 35000 tonnes of metal) is pretty significant. And I'm pretty sure they won't be wind-powered furnaces. Today the Times has a story on the frequency of failure of these turbines - so maintenance is pretty significant. And whenever I go past any group of turbines, I generally seeing a number of them idle (A Green Party trait perhaps?). And of course, the blight on the landscape. A beautiful set of spinning props on the horizon will make for a lovely view, for all the people of Brighton. Couldn't they have planned this with Boris, and setup a wind farm where his famous dead-duck airport is planned to be? Apparently nobody lives there or cares about an airport, so a bunch of spinny wind generators won't worry anyone.[/p][/quote]You make a good point about the embodied CO2 for construction and operation. Using Bath University figures as per Wikipedia. 35000 tonnes of Steel gives 50000 tonnes Co2, don't forget concrete, copper (including Grid connection near Bolney) and Aluminium, so add another 100000 tonnes then double it to allow for construction and transportation, so 300000 tonnes co2 and then, what the hell! Double it again for the share of emissions for the factor's constructions, tooling shipping etc. 600000 tonnes to get Rampion built or in other words less than 6 months to recoup that CO2 by displacing coal (1.25 million tonnes saved pa). Whereas for gas, coal and oil, not only do you have to count the embodied CO2 of the plant, but they keep emitting vast quantities of CO2 till they close. HJarrs
  • Score: -1

7:30pm Thu 17 Jul 14

Jagmanmc says...

Its going to be an eyesore and a misguided joke.
Enough to power 450,000 homes eh? Well maybe if the wind keeps blowing.

Just for comparison, the forthcoming nuclear power station at Hinckley Point in Somerset (Hinckley C), will provide power for 5 MILLION HOMES for decades to come!

When I visited the Dungeness Nuclear power station last year, apparently the local people were very disappointed that the new power station was not chosen to be built there as they provide lots of local jobs.
I wonder if this wind farm will still be providing 600 permanent jobs and producing power for the next 30 plus years?

Total waste of money, we need to plan for the longer future - not just the next 5 years.
Its going to be an eyesore and a misguided joke. Enough to power 450,000 homes eh? Well maybe if the wind keeps blowing. Just for comparison, the forthcoming nuclear power station at Hinckley Point in Somerset (Hinckley C), will provide power for 5 MILLION HOMES for decades to come! When I visited the Dungeness Nuclear power station last year, apparently the local people were very disappointed that the new power station was not chosen to be built there as they provide lots of local jobs. I wonder if this wind farm will still be providing 600 permanent jobs and producing power for the next 30 plus years? Total waste of money, we need to plan for the longer future - not just the next 5 years. Jagmanmc
  • Score: -1

8:04pm Thu 17 Jul 14

HJarrs says...

Jagmanmc wrote:
Its going to be an eyesore and a misguided joke.
Enough to power 450,000 homes eh? Well maybe if the wind keeps blowing.

Just for comparison, the forthcoming nuclear power station at Hinckley Point in Somerset (Hinckley C), will provide power for 5 MILLION HOMES for decades to come!

When I visited the Dungeness Nuclear power station last year, apparently the local people were very disappointed that the new power station was not chosen to be built there as they provide lots of local jobs.
I wonder if this wind farm will still be providing 600 permanent jobs and producing power for the next 30 plus years?

Total waste of money, we need to plan for the longer future - not just the next 5 years.
Hinckley Point C I note on Wikipedia is described as being "the most expensive powerstation in the world". EDF are guarenteed twice the price of the wholesale electricity price for 35 years after it is built (it is due to cost £16 billion and be finished in 2023, which means really no sooner than 2025 as these powerstations have a reputation for being delayed and over budget). It is the biggest corporate subsidy in the history of the UK and I fear it is a sign that the government aims to continue with consumptionist business as usual. By the time it is built it is likely that it will be the most expensive form of electricity generation.

The money invested in Hinckley Point C could have been invested in the biggest untapped source of Green energy, namely energy efficiency. It could have paid for millions of houses to be insulated, creating thousands of long term jobs, reducing fuel poverty and deaths in winter without the long term isses of all the super toxic radioactive substances to be disposed of.
[quote][p][bold]Jagmanmc[/bold] wrote: Its going to be an eyesore and a misguided joke. Enough to power 450,000 homes eh? Well maybe if the wind keeps blowing. Just for comparison, the forthcoming nuclear power station at Hinckley Point in Somerset (Hinckley C), will provide power for 5 MILLION HOMES for decades to come! When I visited the Dungeness Nuclear power station last year, apparently the local people were very disappointed that the new power station was not chosen to be built there as they provide lots of local jobs. I wonder if this wind farm will still be providing 600 permanent jobs and producing power for the next 30 plus years? Total waste of money, we need to plan for the longer future - not just the next 5 years.[/p][/quote]Hinckley Point C I note on Wikipedia is described as being "the most expensive powerstation in the world". EDF are guarenteed twice the price of the wholesale electricity price for 35 years after it is built (it is due to cost £16 billion and be finished in 2023, which means really no sooner than 2025 as these powerstations have a reputation for being delayed and over budget). It is the biggest corporate subsidy in the history of the UK and I fear it is a sign that the government aims to continue with consumptionist business as usual. By the time it is built it is likely that it will be the most expensive form of electricity generation. The money invested in Hinckley Point C could have been invested in the biggest untapped source of Green energy, namely energy efficiency. It could have paid for millions of houses to be insulated, creating thousands of long term jobs, reducing fuel poverty and deaths in winter without the long term isses of all the super toxic radioactive substances to be disposed of. HJarrs
  • Score: 0

10:10pm Thu 17 Jul 14

chrismilo says...

The Greens talk enough wind to Keep the turbines turning into the next millenium.
The Greens talk enough wind to Keep the turbines turning into the next millenium. chrismilo
  • Score: -1

12:09am Fri 18 Jul 14

wippasnapper says...

Being TURBINES have to be turned off in high winds and dote operate very well in low winds its just another blot on the landscape as they say and before long the hull of the British cost will be imprisoned by these TURBINES and we will still need other means to produce power But what about What the Energy Cartels Don’t Want Use to New if you could produce Energy that did not involve relying on Energy company’s supplying it to you, you would jump at it but Energy Cartels have over there years have tried to put these free energy idea’s from ever servicing but thanks to the weld wide web they can no longer pull the wool over our eyes its out there watch this video to see the truth behind the Energy Cartels Lies: https://www.youtube.
com/watch?v=0K2wm8tn
088 we no longer need expensive wind TURBINES or nuclear power stations ET, ET.
Being TURBINES have to be turned off in high winds and dote operate very well in low winds its just another blot on the landscape as they say and before long the hull of the British cost will be imprisoned by these TURBINES and we will still need other means to produce power But what about What the Energy Cartels Don’t Want Use to New if you could produce Energy that did not involve relying on Energy company’s supplying it to you, you would jump at it but Energy Cartels have over there years have tried to put these free energy idea’s from ever servicing but thanks to the weld wide web they can no longer pull the wool over our eyes its out there watch this video to see the truth behind the Energy Cartels Lies: https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=0K2wm8tn 088 we no longer need expensive wind TURBINES or nuclear power stations ET, ET. wippasnapper
  • Score: -1

8:51am Fri 18 Jul 14

HJarrs says...

wippasnapper wrote:
Being TURBINES have to be turned off in high winds and dote operate very well in low winds its just another blot on the landscape as they say and before long the hull of the British cost will be imprisoned by these TURBINES and we will still need other means to produce power But what about What the Energy Cartels Don’t Want Use to New if you could produce Energy that did not involve relying on Energy company’s supplying it to you, you would jump at it but Energy Cartels have over there years have tried to put these free energy idea’s from ever servicing but thanks to the weld wide web they can no longer pull the wool over our eyes its out there watch this video to see the truth behind the Energy Cartels Lies: https://www.youtube.

com/watch?v=0K2wm8tn

088 we no longer need expensive wind TURBINES or nuclear power stations ET, ET.
You are right to some extent about energy cartels and the Conservative and Labour governments have been happy in the energy sector, as across the economy and services, provide lashings of subsidy or what might be called corporate welfare. We all pay for this.

However, we need to quickly decarbonise (from fossil fuels) energy in the UK. Wind can play a very important role, but it needs to be backed up by storage for periods when the wind doesn't blow. Storage technology exisits and is being further developed, whether in the form of Hydrogen, methane, flow batteries, fly wheels, compressed air, cryogenic systems, pumped water storage etc, etc.

I did a little more research into pricing and it now appears that Hinkley Point C nuclear powerstation will be the most expensive form of electricity for the 35 years of its subsidy as renewables get strike prices for "only" 15 years (offshore wind being more expensive for 15 years).
[quote][p][bold]wippasnapper[/bold] wrote: Being TURBINES have to be turned off in high winds and dote operate very well in low winds its just another blot on the landscape as they say and before long the hull of the British cost will be imprisoned by these TURBINES and we will still need other means to produce power But what about What the Energy Cartels Don’t Want Use to New if you could produce Energy that did not involve relying on Energy company’s supplying it to you, you would jump at it but Energy Cartels have over there years have tried to put these free energy idea’s from ever servicing but thanks to the weld wide web they can no longer pull the wool over our eyes its out there watch this video to see the truth behind the Energy Cartels Lies: https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=0K2wm8tn 088 we no longer need expensive wind TURBINES or nuclear power stations ET, ET.[/p][/quote]You are right to some extent about energy cartels and the Conservative and Labour governments have been happy in the energy sector, as across the economy and services, provide lashings of subsidy or what might be called corporate welfare. We all pay for this. However, we need to quickly decarbonise (from fossil fuels) energy in the UK. Wind can play a very important role, but it needs to be backed up by storage for periods when the wind doesn't blow. Storage technology exisits and is being further developed, whether in the form of Hydrogen, methane, flow batteries, fly wheels, compressed air, cryogenic systems, pumped water storage etc, etc. I did a little more research into pricing and it now appears that Hinkley Point C nuclear powerstation will be the most expensive form of electricity for the 35 years of its subsidy as renewables get strike prices for "only" 15 years (offshore wind being more expensive for 15 years). HJarrs
  • Score: 0

12:17pm Sat 19 Jul 14

Saffron says...

Nikski wrote:
Saffron wrote:
I accept that a nimby attitude can be counter productive but I have to confess that I will miss being able to see the horizon. I do believe that it is going to be a costly exercise, that bringing the power generated through Shoreham and then across Sussex to Bolney doesn't seem to make much sense.

Also I am very sceptical about the so called benefits for Sussex and Newhaven in particular. Whilst the Rampion Mast was being installed it was serviced by a craft based in Newhaven. But since then drilling vessels have always returned to Southampton for refuelling and supplies not to Newhaven.
You will still be able to see the horizon it's not going to blot everything out! How big do you think it's going to be? It will be 13-20kms out to see so will only be visible on a small part of the horizon and should appear fairly small itself. Don't worry
I'm sorry I'm not convinced by your re-assurance. We will just have to wait. But bearing in mind the area concerned is from near Worthing to Newhaven, if situated on the seafront at Brighton I will be incredibly surprised if you will see beyond the windfarm and see vessels on the horizon. I hope I'm wrong.
[quote][p][bold]Nikski[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Saffron[/bold] wrote: I accept that a nimby attitude can be counter productive but I have to confess that I will miss being able to see the horizon. I do believe that it is going to be a costly exercise, that bringing the power generated through Shoreham and then across Sussex to Bolney doesn't seem to make much sense. Also I am very sceptical about the so called benefits for Sussex and Newhaven in particular. Whilst the Rampion Mast was being installed it was serviced by a craft based in Newhaven. But since then drilling vessels have always returned to Southampton for refuelling and supplies not to Newhaven.[/p][/quote]You will still be able to see the horizon it's not going to blot everything out! How big do you think it's going to be? It will be 13-20kms out to see so will only be visible on a small part of the horizon and should appear fairly small itself. Don't worry[/p][/quote]I'm sorry I'm not convinced by your re-assurance. We will just have to wait. But bearing in mind the area concerned is from near Worthing to Newhaven, if situated on the seafront at Brighton I will be incredibly surprised if you will see beyond the windfarm and see vessels on the horizon. I hope I'm wrong. Saffron
  • Score: 0

9:50pm Sat 19 Jul 14

Kate234 says...

Saffron wrote:
I accept that a nimby attitude can be counter productive but I have to confess that I will miss being able to see the horizon. I do believe that it is going to be a costly exercise, that bringing the power generated through Shoreham and then across Sussex to Bolney doesn't seem to make much sense.

Also I am very sceptical about the so called benefits for Sussex and Newhaven in particular. Whilst the Rampion Mast was being installed it was serviced by a craft based in Newhaven. But since then drilling vessels have always returned to Southampton for refuelling and supplies not to Newhaven.
If you read the report that approved this it acknowledges there will be minimal new jobs and a detriment to the environment and tourism.
[quote][p][bold]Saffron[/bold] wrote: I accept that a nimby attitude can be counter productive but I have to confess that I will miss being able to see the horizon. I do believe that it is going to be a costly exercise, that bringing the power generated through Shoreham and then across Sussex to Bolney doesn't seem to make much sense. Also I am very sceptical about the so called benefits for Sussex and Newhaven in particular. Whilst the Rampion Mast was being installed it was serviced by a craft based in Newhaven. But since then drilling vessels have always returned to Southampton for refuelling and supplies not to Newhaven.[/p][/quote]If you read the report that approved this it acknowledges there will be minimal new jobs and a detriment to the environment and tourism. Kate234
  • Score: 0
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

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