GIVE wind a chance. I am sure almost all your readers will agree with this and, as one who cares greatly about the environment and the welfare of flora and fauna, I too am happy to support this.
It is thus very surprising to me that after much research I find myself against the Woolley Hill Wind Farm.
If the proposed Woolley Hill Wind Farm were to make a significant input to our national electric grid, with a meaningful reduction in CO2, there may be more of an argument for installing wind generators in this area. However, this isn’t the case, and the massive turbines will be disproportionately detrimental to the local flora and fauna, to say nothing of the local human population.
Don’t underestimate the size of these proposed turbines: 131 metres, similar to a 28-storey block of flats. Why so large? From national agreed wind-speed data they are being sited in what is recognised as a low wind-speed area.
Given the fact that onshore wind power in the UK will have very little impact on the UK total CO2 output, the prime reason for Woolley Hill Wind Farm is financial and to meet an EU directive. The financial aspect is even referred to by one of the pro-wind farm letter-writers. The contractors, land owner and the EU are the only winners.
It can be said that it is always easier to go with the apparent majority and be popular: being seen to be anti-wind farm is unpopular, but time has frequently shown that today’s unpopular views are tomorrow’s popular ones.
Have your readers really thought through what these massive constructions will do to our countryside and what benefit they will bring the national grid and reduction in total UK CO2? Don’t assume, research it, I know the unpopular answer they will find.