F.L.A.T. Discussion Board

Let us know what you have to say about the proposal for 26 wind turbines at Marshland St James.

Search Search Topics Search Posts Advanced Search

Quick Links New Posts Member List

Register

Are you for or against the wind farm project at Marshland St James? Log-in, or register, to vote
For		19	22%
Against		63	73%
Don't Know		1	1%
86 votes

Print E-mail

Page: 1 2 3

Posts on "Are you for or against the wind turbine project?"
PH44 New Group: Members Joined: 05 Jul, 2007 Location: Village Topics: 0 Posts: 1	Posted 05 Jul, 2007 - 09:04 PM: #26 The Marshland area is totally unsuitable for a wind farm. In other countries many wind turbines are sited on top of hills well away from homes. When I flew home from Portugal a month or so ago I saw in excess of 200 turbines on top of the hills between northern Portugal and Spain. At least there they are able to catch the wind whereas in Britain most wind turbines are very inefficient as cited by many reports.
sb0373 New Group: Members Joined: 11 Jul, 2007 Location: St James Topics: 0 Posts: 1	Posted 11 Jul, 2007 - 04:55 PM: #27 for
Isha New Group: Members Joined: 11 Jul, 2007 Location: village Topics: 0 Posts: 2	Posted 12 Jul, 2007 - 02:22 PM: #28 There is lots of information out there about wind turbines but I found the following link useful: http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/sources/renewables/r...
Dudders New Group: Members Joined: 01 Aug, 2007 Location: March Topics: 0 Posts: 1	Posted 01 Aug, 2007 - 03:15 PM: Subject: Anti Nimbies who care more about the pound in their pocket than the continuity of the earth. #29 Well I'm in favour of wind turbines, and renewable energies in general. I live within sight of the Coldham & Stags Holt wind farms, and very close to the Whitemoor turbine. Yes you can see them, big deal. They are graceful and serene, and great for telling which way the wind is blowing too (TIC). Contrary to popular myth, they are almost constantly turning - even if there is little wind at ground level, there is almost always wind to some degree at 100m height. Admittedly I have no way of gauging how much energy is being harvested as the turbines are constant velocity so them turning does not mean they are producing 100% capacity, but regardless they are almost always turning and therefore generating electricity to some extent without producing CO2. Yes they produce noise, but how many of you have been even within hearing distance of a turbine? I mean typical normal distance, not standing at the base of the tower. I live within 1/2 mile of the whitemoor turbine, If the wind is going at just the right speed, and direction and there is minimal other sound, you can just hear it. A gentle swishing noise as each blade passes the tower, normal conversation or a car going along the nearby road overpowers any noise from the turbine (hey let's all be anti cars 'cos they are more noisy than a wind tubines - at comparitive typical distances). I suffer far more noise pollution from the marshalling yards which are further away and which is a far more insidious mechanical clanking and crashing too. Inside my home you can't even hear the turbines, and I don't have double glazing!!!!! Whilst you all derogate so vociferously the 'proposed' wind farm, what about the alternatives, Nuclear - dare I say Chenobyl, then there is the permanent issue of the radioactive waste for millenia of the human race to look after (or maybe chuck at each other in the next dirty war). Oil / Gas / Coal - depleting already short and finite suppplies, producing CO2 and waste products. Have any of you been near a coal fueled power station and seen the blot that they are on the landscape, or indeed the symbiotic blot of the mines needed to produce the coal for them. No I though not, most of it is shipped in from China nowadays anyway using vast amounts of fuel just to get it here. The noise and contast ever lasting environmental pollution from 'conventional' sources is far less diserable than any renewable. and what of renewables other than wind - Photovoltaic - yup free energy, more reliable than wind, more costly per watt, and woefully inefficient. PV farms would render the land unsuitable for farming and to reap a similar amount of power to wind turbines, would cover vast land areas. Would you prefer that in your back yard? Thought not? Solar thermal - sorry, wrong latitude for electricity production. Wave - too far away (from Fenland). Yes it costs to ship electricity too, losses in energy along long cable runs etc etc. What are any of you doing about your energy consumption? Are you all hyper energy efficient? Are you all doing your bit for the environment, I don't mean a few plastic bottles in your recycling bin. I mean a serious and holistic approach. I suppose many of you buy your electricity from the cheapest source without a care about how it is produced? How many of you have a solar panel of your roofs, or a small turbine in your back yard? How many still use GLS (traditional) light bulbs? How many waste electricity / fossil fuels? I'm not just talking switching things off, I'm talking at taking a significant look at your electricity usage? Making serious efforts to reduce what you use. If everyone reduced their energy consumption then the immediate need for wind would be far diminished - ergo no wind farm in your beloved back yard. Just try it, go without your beloved TV or PC for an evening or a week. Try it you might like it. Turn your heating down a notch or three. Turn off the air-con. Change all of your light bulbs to energy saving, not just the porch light (that is left on all night) or the little loo, but all of them. And how many seriously spend time sitting in their garden looking at the scenery? Doing nothing else but looking at the scenery. time that would be 'ruined' by a few slender wind turbines. Yes I know it's over 30. but how many will be able to see all of them in one vista over your 6ft garden fences. How many spend any time actually looking in the direction of the turbines? just looking for the sake of looking? There is nothing to see execpt maybe the horizon, or the odd tree, or overhead power lines. Are these turbines really going to make that much difference to the scenery you actually look at and admire, or just what you perceive? Or know is there but dopn't really look at. And your major argument - house prices. I can see most of the stags holt and coldham wind farms from my front windows. As i'm doing the washing up, I can watch them turning serenely in the foreground. Has it affected my house value - not one jot. Everyone that visits says how nice it is to see the turbines. Have you studied other sites, has the addition of wind turbines affected house prices. No I don't know either. So you berate the land owners for renting their land to the turbine owners and making a few quid profit, you berate the turbine owners for making some money selling the electricity from the turbines, and your primary worry is the notional value of your property. Are you not then as equally capitialistic as they are? And to the value of your homes, lets say no more turbine are built, the UK continues to rely in the worlds rapidly twindling reserves of fossil fuels. That are optimistically estimated to last another 20 years, at current usage - usage which is constantly increasing. As supplies fail the cost of living will sky-rocket, the cost of everything will go up, including the value of your home, but then pop the ecomony will not withstand consistant high inflation. The whole infrastructure will fail, not nationally, but globally, no transport, no goods getting from a to b. nothing, everything will be equally priceless and worthless at the same time. Your home will only be of value to you as a roof over your head, but no-one will be able to buy it, or indeed want to, getting food will be a far higher priority. Yes I'm extreme in my views and my opinions, and my outlook. But only equal and opposite to the views and opinions to those against the turbines.
Pete @ Customs and Excise	0 of 1 people found this post helpful Posted 08 Aug, 2007 - 03:07 PM: #30 I am keeping an eye on happenings and I am interested to see FLAT claim in their press statements and the info on their website, that the Parish Council knew of a wind turbine proposal in Marshland St James 18/24 months ago. Philip Wag, an active member of your group, was the Chairman of Marshland St James Parish council at that time. If the Parish Council knew, why did the Chairman not raise his concerns then?
rephily New Group: Members Joined: 28 May, 2007 Location: Marshland St James Topics: 0 Posts: 3	Posted 08 Aug, 2007 - 04:12 PM: #31 Just to put the record straight, I am posting this on Philip Wagg's behalf - he resigned from the Parish Council whilst he was Chairman in January 2006 at which time there was categorically no knowledge within the Parish Council of a windfarm proposal. Edited by rephily on 08 Aug, 2007 - 08:35 PM. Reason: clarification of information
rephily New Group: Members Joined: 28 May, 2007 Location: Marshland St James Topics: 0 Posts: 3	Posted 08 Aug, 2007 - 04:45 PM: #32 Further to previous post, I have just looked at the planning application for the 'installing of a temporary 85m high tubular steel wind monitoring mast with sensors at various heights, data logger and guys. Mast will be on site for no more than two years' (information freely available on the Borough Council website) which was received by the Borough Council on 30 May 2006. On the Borough Council Planning Officer Report dated 20 July 2006 it states under the consultation section - 'Town/Parish Council: No response at time of writing' (Information also obtained from the Borough Council site)
Guest	Posted 09 Aug, 2007 - 05:06 PM: #33 Your letter to councillor Woolner states (see copy on this site)that the members of the Parish Council have known about the proposal for "at least 2 years" so therefore the date of the planning application for the mast is irrelevant. Mr Wagg was chair 2 years ago. I believe he did not know about the plans but then neither did other members of the parish council - yet they are all being tarred with the same brush. You can not have it both ways. The planning application had no comment on it as there was not a quorum at the meeting - so no comment could be made. It is not a sinister reason but just that not enough councillors turned up for an extra meeting.
rephily New Group: Members Joined: 28 May, 2007 Location: Marshland St James Topics: 0 Posts: 3	Posted 09 Aug, 2007 - 06:15 PM: #34 The letter was not 'my letter' At no time have Philip or I been consulted before any action is taken by Flat. We both attend public meetings arranged by Flat and public Parish Council meetings but are not members of the Committee.We have also attended fund raising events. I think there must be many others who have been 'active' at this level only. I state again neither of us have had any input into website content, press releases from Flat or any decision making undertaken by Flat. I think we feel that we are doing all we can on a private level alongside the bigger campaign that is 'Flat'!
Guest	Posted 09 Aug, 2007 - 06:37 PM: #35 Apology to Mrs Wagg I did not mean to imply that the letter was from her or Mr Wagg - I was merely pointing out the anomoly between what is being said by FLAT - that the parish council have known about this for 2 years or more and the reality - what other facts have FLAT got wrong?
Pete	Posted 10 Aug, 2007 - 11:31 AM: #36 Thanks for clarifying the date of Mr Wagg's resignation and categorically confirming that in January 2006, the Parish Council of Marshland St James had no knowledge of a wind farm proposal. That confirms that FLAT's constant claims that the Parish Council of Marshland St James knew about the wind turbines prior to 2006 (over 2 years - see letter to Councillor Woolner, see statement dated 26th July 2007 (forthcoming events), see press release dated 26th July 2007) are without foundation. Perhaps now FLAT would like to admit that this constantly repeated statement is in fact untrue?
Another guest	Posted 11 Aug, 2007 - 06:47 AM: Subject: Facts #37 I understand your concerns but please get your facts correct before running down all Parish Councillors.
jam0108 New Group: Members Joined: 30 Apr, 2007 Location: Marshland St James Topics: 0 Posts: 2	Posted 14 Aug, 2007 - 02:45 PM: Subject: FLAT's response to above posts #38 Unlike the current Parish Council and the consortium, we at FLAT are quite prepared to correct or modify our actions in the light of the most up to date information! Therefore further to the above posts we at FLAT accept that the whole Parish Council did not know about this development before th Extra Ordinary General meeting at 7.30 on the 26th of June 2006, although it seems very likely that at least two members of the Parish Council knew about it well before June 2006!!! We do however feel that the posts on the website are largely irrelevant because the fact still remains that the Parish Council knew about this proposal since at least June 2006 and 14 months later are still refusing to even put it on the agenda of the Parish Council meetings, let alone hold a public meeting to discuss it. As soon as most other Parish Councils have received so much as a hint that such a development is a possibility they have consulted the parishioners (that elected them) via a number of different routes such as a public meeting, parish poll, electronic poll etc. It is the total lack of such consultation by our Parish Council that has so incensed many parishioners including both past and a present member of the Council. We are very pleased that the new Chairman of the Parish Council has now publicly stated that he will hold a public meeting as soon as there is a formal plannning application but there is a feeling that this is too little too late to restore parishioners faith in the current Parish Council (especially after the fiasco of the last Parish Council meeting). This may well be relected in the outcome of a Parish Poll that will be organised by concerned parishioners in the near future. It is also interesting to note that in June 2006 a member of the original consortium was the Chairman of the Parish Council and the fact that she and the other member of the consortium had to declare an interest was the only reason that there was not a Quorum and therefore no comment about the test mast planning application could be made! We would also like to remind the Parish Council that it only needs TWO councillors to call for a public meeting (or the Chairman - but there seems to be very little chance of this happening) and one (Councillor Woolner) has already requested such a meeting!! We will issue a press release shortly about the Parish Poll and other issues! The FLAT Committee
Ashleigh Junior Member Group: Members Joined: 30 May, 2007 Location: Tilney Fen End Topics: 2 Posts: 13	Posted 22 Aug, 2007 - 02:07 PM: Subject: NO NO NO! #39 Quite frankly I have never laughed so hard and been so amused by the arguments for these wind turbines..... ha ha ha ha Anyone who thinks being rather near them won't affect their house price is at best delusional My house is going to be near at least seven on these monster's, horrible nasty inefficient white elephant's. I wont be able to sleep think straight (which yes I am more than able to do) my life will be a living hell and torturous! My horses will not be able to live at home with me, the light flicker alone will scare the living day lights out of them. Let alone the sudden movement when they decide to start which NO ONE knows when. British Horse Society agrees with me here so go see. I am already very energy efficient thank you very much but have always been so, not just when it became trendy and anyone who thinks that those of us who are against Wind Turbines are not against anti pollution and not energy efficient are hugely mistaken. Do not assume anything that is what the whole problem of the pro turbine people are so tunnel visioned there way is the right way and dam everyone else.......what utter complete rubbish. I DO NOT WANT THESE TURBINES! My road is designated for all the building access for poor Mr Herbert and his sorry consortium to bring all the building supplies etc down. How very nice of the consortium to wreck my life. I DO NOT WANT 26,000 Tonnes of concrete aggreagte etc plus plus plus plus hurtling down my little road my 200 year old cottage will be reduced to rubble, we are single track road and for a whole year will be a living hell as contractors roar up and down and this is even before all the turbines turn up! Oh so wont my life be so much fun, oh how wonderful why not have more of them and I can sit and shake in the corner reduced to a nervous wreck. Aren't turbrines so wonderful all for the greater good, oh yeah, not for the massive subsidies then! I wonder would the consortium do this and give the community all the profit, there you go. Go ask them. BIG FAT NO THERE THEN. AS FOR IT WONT AFFECT HOUSE PRICES YES IT WILL. as I would never in my wildest dreams have any property near wind turbines. Nor would alot of people especially those with horses.Spoke to two very reputable Equestrian Estate agents and they said expect at least 30% reduction and it will take alot longer to sell. So another myth smashed to pieces These wonderful landownders are only doing it for the greater good of course nothing to do with massive profit and nothing being to do with the fact 25 years time they become brownfield sites. Hmmm how much energy will they use building all their new homes! Hmmmm! suddenly not so eco friendly. BUT HEY thats ok man lets be for the turbine yeah groovy lets all jump on the propoganda band wagon trendy man yeah man lets all be so for turbines so lets make the farmers who couldnt give a cows arse about the parish and its inhabitants lets have them make their millions and wreck my life man yeah groovy. I have read the utter garbage written by wind farms and its so misleading its glosses over all the problems and go see those poor people who have been forced out of their home, god their story is gut wrenching BUT TRUE! As for OOOHHH the turbines are never not turning, utter rubbish I have to see the god forsaken ones at Friday Bridge lets just say they have never been all working and the other none of them were working at ALL. One thing for you climate change band wagon yogurt knitters, ICE AGE was that caused by industry erm.....NO. Did industry and man phase out dinosaurs erm NO Big Fat NO. Carbon footprint come near with that and I will plant my muddy footprint. Never have I heard so much rubbish uttered in favour of these monsters....you are all barking mad.
steve New Group: Members Joined: 24 Aug, 2007 Location: walpole highway Topics: 0 Posts: 1	Posted 24 Aug, 2007 - 01:47 PM: #40 We must all wake up to global warming, remeber we will be among the first to be flooded as sea levels rise. we have to find alternatives to burning foscel fuels, or stop using them. I am baffled why anyone could be opposed to turbins. people seemed concerned about landscapes and house prices, if we do nothing to takle global warming we will all be under sea level so it won't really matter.I have 4 children, I do not want to tell them and my grandchildren I did nothing to stop a catastrophy, even though we are being told what will happen.We will have to takle global warming one day and the longer we leave it the harder it will be. Please lets all stop worrying about small inconvienances now, and start taking action before its to late
terry New Group: Administrators Joined: 02 May, 2007 Location: Marshland St James Topics: 1 Posts: 2	Posted 24 Aug, 2007 - 04:46 PM: Subject: Getting it off my chest #41 I never usually feel the need to reply or respond to blogs as I always feel people are entitled to their opinions. I did feel however that the time has come for me say something. I am an energy conscious person and try to keep my energy consumption to a minimum - short of eating berries and burning turf. I moved to Marshland nearly 3 years ago as I was drawn to the beauty of the area and the piece and relative tranquillity. I gave up work in Peterborough to keep my petrol to a minimum and now work at home. The proposed turbines would start about 500 metres from my house and continue for many miles and wrap around my home. Whereas we have a duty to future generations, we also have a duty to ourselves and I for one don't want my tranquil home and life ruined with noise and vibration - and make no mistake, for there will be plenty, not only in the year long construction but also for the next 25+ years as these things rumble on in the name of global warming. My life is as important as any future generation and I'm quite frankly sick to death of this constant guilt trip which is being forced down my throat. If it isn't newly invented and infinitely profitable 'Global Warming', it's the slave trade; world famine or how Britain should apologise for ruining the world with one thing or another. Do you see any other country behave like us with such a heavy burden? No! It seems to me that as soon as there is a band wagon, Britain feels the need to jump on it and ruin the lives of it's citizens, whilst the rest of the world sails on blythely with its a la carte approach - if it suits a country it will adopt protocols and laws, if it doesn't, then it ignores them! We in Britain, are probably the only country to take things to heart, which shows our caring nature but on the other hand, it screws its citizens! If you want to look at turbines, then please look out of your window and you're sure to see fields full from nearby installations. I feel that the UK is doing more than its fair share to combat imaginary and real issues and this really is the straw that broke the camel's back. 30 years ago - when I was a boy - they were talking about a new ice age. How times change things! The global warming fraternity receives nearly all research grants offered by governments and hence they are prolifertaing at an alarming rate and forcing their ill-researched data down our necks. It's like the saying goes, say something often enough and everyone will think it's true. I do believe that there are issues to be tackled and our first port of call should be stopping forests being cut down - do you remember that 'issue' about 10 years ago that seems to have been forgotten about but is still as real as ever? - and start to look at how we consume so much. I don't believe is knee-jerk reactions to issues and wind turbines seem to be just that. Wave power and newer techonologies are coming to the fore but people want to jump on the gravy train whilst there's still money in the pot...and it's fast running out. Make no mistake, this turbine facility is about money, nothing more. Don't be fooled into thinking anyone will benefit apart from those one whose land they are going on. The consortium spokes people constantly whinge about being bullied, but it is they who are bullying local people into accepting a fait accompli and forcing us to have turbines around our homes, ruining our landscape and blighting our lives and those of our children. Greed is a powerful tool but we are proving to be a force to be reckoned with. Marshland St James and surrounding villages need stand up for their right to exist peacefully without the Sword of Damacles hanging threateningly over them.
Ashleigh Junior Member Group: Members Joined: 30 May, 2007 Location: Tilney Fen End Topics: 2 Posts: 13	Posted 24 Aug, 2007 - 05:38 PM: #42 How beautifully put here here......what a wonderful blog!
Ashleigh Junior Member Group: Members Joined: 30 May, 2007 Location: Tilney Fen End Topics: 2 Posts: 13	Posted 24 Aug, 2007 - 05:49 PM: #43 I just realised earlier in this post someone ranted about nucleur again, that is not an issue here no wants to put one on my door step so why keep banging on about Chernobyl.......er Russia not here, different kettle of big old fish altogether. Sea level shmee level fed up to back teeth, there is no evidence that will happen due to global warming. No amount of turbines in the Fens is going to stop the sea level rising. Go to Korea, China Russia, USA the list is endless put them to inconvenience and stopping taxing me to the hilt and depriving me. How will taxing my 4x4 stop me using them it wont it just another labour stealth tax money making scheme just like the turbines.
jules New Group: Members Joined: 28 Aug, 2007 Location: marshland smeeth Topics: 0 Posts: 1	Posted 28 Aug, 2007 - 07:26 PM: #44 Hi Every body, I am for the turbines, They should be built and more besides. The against lobby only think of themselves. I have worked in and around coal burning power stations delivering coal, and they are dirty place. Perhaps the Anti Turbines protesters would like an Atomic Power Station in the Fen? Once these turbines are up, no transport will be needed. Excellent news I say. I have been writting letters to papers with my views, and I dont intend to go over them all again here, for the simple reason that it will result in the back stabing that has gone on, continuing. Please can I have a Turbine in my garden. They are the only way forward. Can I suggest you take a look at www.se-alliance.org.uk
Soo New Group: Members Joined: 05 Nov, 2007 Location: Bradwell on Sea Topics: 0 Posts: 1	0 of 1 people found this post helpful Posted 05 Nov, 2007 - 10:12 AM: #45 I am somewhat amused by your correspondents who say "I'd rather have these than a nuclear station". As someone who has lived near a nuclear station for over 20 years, I would rather have a nuclear station than inefficient, pseudo-green wind energy. Yes, the wind is free, but the desecration of our precious landscape with tons of concrete, and huge waving towers, for such a pittance of energy is a tragedy. Many people say to me "well, we must have lots of turbines because otherwise we will get those nasty nuclear stations", but they have to understand that it is not a question of EITHER/OR - it will be both of them, as the wind turbines will never, ever be able to work without some conventional power station (be it coal, gas or nuclear) running as back up. Keep up the good work, FLAT !!!!
Smudge New Group: Members Joined: 25 Apr, 2007 Topics: 4 Posts: 7	Posted 10 Nov, 2007 - 10:04 AM: Subject: To SOO #46 Hello Thanks for your support word - I was starting to think the world had gone mad
Isha New Group: Members Joined: 11 Jul, 2007 Location: village Topics: 0 Posts: 2	Posted 28 Nov, 2007 - 01:24 PM: #47 Soo... TOnnes of concrete????? what you mean the small volume of concrete used for the foundations??? and that is better than millions of years of nuclear waste??? As it happens, turbines can be backed up with biomass so dont necessarily need non renewable energy as a back up... and still most of the emissions they displace will come from coal, oil and gas. Maybe some people should do some research instead of posting uninformed comments...
FenBeagle New Group: Members Joined: 03 Sep, 2008 Location: quadring Topics: 0 Posts: 2	Posted 04 Sep, 2008 - 07:12 AM: #48 Isha....Wind Turbines typically use gravity foundations, made of concrete. The amount of concrete varies. At Lamar Colo. for example, each Turbine stands on foundations of 1,250 tons. These foundations can require as much as 1,700 tons. The manufacture of cement produces large amounts of CO2. These are to support a wind Turbine rated at 2mw per hour. These Turbines typically require wind speeds of 30-40mph to operate properly. At 0 to 8mph or wind speeds above 56mph they produce no energy at all (although requiring electricity themselves, which they draw freely from the grid) (You choose to compare them to Nuclear Fission) Sizewell B Nuclear Fission Station produces 1,196 mw per hour, reliably, without emissions. You could not replace this with wind Turbines, because of the occassions when they produce no energy at all. But, if, over a year, a wind Turbine could produce 25% of its rated energy, you would need 2,392 Turbines. If they had foundations of 1,250 tons each, that would be 2,990,000 tons of concrete. ....did you say 'small volumes of concrete?'
FenBeagle New Group: Members Joined: 03 Sep, 2008 Location: quadring Topics: 0 Posts: 2	Posted 04 Sep, 2008 - 05:39 PM: #49 Dudders....Like the environmentalists James Lovelock, and David Bellamy. I care a great deal about our environment, and, like them, I beleave that Wind Farms are having a negative effect on our environment, paticularly in Rural areas. Producing very little energy, in return, and being not able to replace power stations, because of their unreliability. They are being built, none the less, with Stealth subsidies, deducted from our electricity bills. If we did not have this to pay, we may, as individuals, be able to afford the Solar panels on our roofs that you suggest. Or possibly, as they do not have the environmental issues that Wind Turbines have,they should be recieving the subsidies instead? You maintain that fossil fuels will run out in 20 years time? This despite the Darmstadt Manifesto of Germany, that estimates world Coal reserves lasting for a thousand years. Is burning Coal 'Clean' though, well not exactly...unless, like the proposed coal power station, at Onllwyn South Wales, It converts the Coal to Hydrogen first, and cleanly runs the Turbines in that way (you do not mention Hydrogen transfer Technology, in your list of options for us at all!) The sun, every day, pours out more free energy than we, on this Earth, could dream of using. Most of it, fortunatly does not reach us, as we have an effective defence in our atmosphere. So much free energy, is there in Space, that defending against it is one of mans biggest problems, in Outer Space missions. This makes Solar Panels in space, very efficient. There is, of course, no shortage of Space, in Space, and so no limit on the size that Solar catchment stations in Space could be built. The sun also emits Helium 3, Which, it has been proved, will fuel Nuclear Fussion Reactors, Clean, Cheap energy for the future. Our atmosphere, unfortunatly, blocks Helium 3 from our planet, but smaller bodies in space (like our moon, for example) are covered in it. China, Japan, America, Russia, and Russia, are all planning moon missions at the moment!
jimmy03 New Group: Members Joined: 11 Nov, 2008 Location: NY Topics: 0 Posts: 1	Posted 11 Nov, 2008 - 07:06 AM: Subject: RE #50 These are to support a wind Turbine rated at 2mw per hour. These Turbines typically require wind speeds of 30-40mph to operate properly. At 0 to 8mph or wind speeds above 56mph they produce no energy at all _____________________ Generic viagra | Buy edegra | Kamagra | online generic levitra

Search thread for	Download thread as text
Previous Thread | Next Thread

Page: 1 2 3

You don't have permission to post replies.

Similar Topics
Subject	Author	Replies	Views	Rating	Last Post	Preview	Forum
WIND TURBINE POLICY	gwinear	0	4321		05/19/09 08:34:39 By gwinear	Application PA0900508/F for a wind turbine. Wind turbines are growing...	Discussion of Draft Proposal
Visit to turbine	Kim	0	2353		10/02/07 18:56:10 By Kim	Today I visited the turbines at Coldham. This is what I found at the base o...	Discussion of Draft Proposal
Another load of old turbine!	Kim	0	1899		04/06/08 12:58:28 By Kim	Knowing as you do my great affinity with nature you will not be in the leas...	Discussion of Draft Proposal
wind facts	wind	2	2063		11/16/08 23:46:49 By wind	hi im a local who has found another web site http://windfarmmarshlandstjame...	Discussion of Draft Proposal
Dispatches 16/07 @ 8pm - Wind Turbines	Smudge	0	1801		07/16/07 18:11:26 By Smudge	Programme on tonight channel 4 at 8pm re wind turbines.	Discussion of Draft Proposal