Your Say - Friday 02 November

Beauty spot: Parlick which could get a wind turbine, Chipping is pictured in the valley
Beauty spot: Parlick which could get a wind turbine, Chipping is pictured in the valley
Share this article
Have your say

Plan could blow open floodgates

I fully understand the threat of turbine proliferation in the Bowland that the application for a wind turbine at Chipping poses and the visual impact of a 40 metre turbine. We have seen this happen in the beautiful Yorkshire Wolds.

This proposal which will desecrate The Bowland Area Of Outstanding Natural Beauty at Chipping, one of its most popular villages and where the National Tourist Board Award Winning Gibbon Bridge Hotel and Restaurant is situated and the Bowland Country Park at Beacon Fell where so much work has been put in by Lancashire County Council.

The English Tourist Board gave several grants to Gibbon Bridge in the 1980s to develop high quality facilities because of its location within the beautiful AONB and the attraction of Chipping and the surrounding viewpoints from Jeffrey Hill and Beacon Fell Country Park should not be jeopardised for profit making for individuals at the expense of the landscape for everyone.

A 40 metre turbine will dominate the AONB landscape and village not only with its height, but width of turbine head and blades.

It is the first application for a commercial turbine within the AONB and these applications are not about reducing farm costs - it’s about making vast profits from feed back tariffs. As a former assistant tourism development manager at the North West Tourist Board I know how important the Bowland is to attracting people to the region to stay, visit and spend in the local economy. People don’t visit the Bowland to see spinning industrial structures and they will be highly sensitive to their visual intrusion. I now live in the Yorkshire Wolds, painted by international artist David Hockney, and they made the mistake of allowing one and now there is so much attempted proliferation even the MOD radar is being affected. Farm turbines are now being applied for at a minimum 40 metres and up to 85 metres. This is madness. It started off with a couple of 19 metre turbines.

The Bowland area and those who love to visit it and those Lancastrians who are proud of their countryside should rise up and stop this.

David Hinde, Yorkshire Wolds, 
East Yorkshire

Turbines always need back up

I would like to reply to the Friends of the Earth (letters October 24), especially as it is targeted at the recent three applications for commercial turbines in the Green Belt – Land Character Areas in the Western parishes which were all refused, on planning criteria. It is the duty of an energy supplier to ensure it can meet varying load demands 24/7 and supply energy at commercial costs without the need for large subsidies, which add considerable cost to our electricity bills.

Wind turbines fail to meet this basic requirement.

Their letter states the “load factor” for power stations averages 50%, so what is the load factor for the 50 kwh wind turbines in question? Using the turbine manufacturer’s graph for energy generated for the average wind speed of the area, and a 70% on line time, the “load factor” calculates at 25.6%. The reality is that in the power station network, some stations take the “base load” and operate for long periods at high load factors whilst others operate on lower out puts, waiting to quickly respond to changes in demand.

This system ensures an online availability of 100%.

It is no use asking the wind turbines to carry out that function, as the wind conditions cannot be guaranteed.

You can have 1m wind turbines and if the wind does not blow you have nothing.

Tom Sutton, Walmer Bridge

Parish wrong on controversial plan

I wish to join the growing numbers of residents opposing plans for a wind turbine in an AONB at the base of Parlick. The parish council’s unwillingness to oppose the development on the grounds that the village plan is in support of renewable energy would suggest they have not given full consideration to the impact a wind turbine will have on the environment and way of life. It is also disturbing to learn their policy would appear to be to consider any further applications on their individual merits, thus giving rise to the possibility of a totally unco-ordinated approach to what happens in the future. The suggestion the farmer making the application could generate surplus energy to be sold into the National Grid is in itself a not unreasonable aspiration on his part. I wish him well but urge rejection of this, and any other application of its kind in Chipping.

Gordon Garment, Chipping