Comments on: Permission granted for Europe’s biggest onshore windfarm

By: Smith

Smith — Sun, 30 Apr 2006 00:34:59 +0000

Last December when I drove through Wyoming, about a third of the 50 or so windmills I passed were either not moving or barely turning at all. Considering I was fighting a 40 mile-an-hour headwind for the whole length of the state, I find it disturbing that so much “free” energy was being wasted.

Golly, what possible motive could the power company have for not placing that extra power on the grid?

By: James

James — Sat, 29 Apr 2006 06:09:40 +0000

Here in America, ethanol requires more energy to produce than the gasoline it saves; nuclear energy is too dangerous; geothermal & wind energy is too expensive and unreliable. Isn’t it interesting that what’s impossible in America is standard proceedure abroad??

By: joshua

joshua — Sat, 29 Apr 2006 02:15:40 +0000

AB CD….because the placement of the wind turbines caused interferance on the radars. They also paid to give more height to the air traffic controller tower at Glasgow airport.

If private business wants to build something that makes money but causes various problems, then they should be willing to pony up whats needed to correct the problems they will create.

By: stalinvlad

stalinvlad — Sat, 29 Apr 2006 00:35:10 +0000

In Iran I belive they try to use what will work
NU CLEAR ENR…AH THE LIGHT SO BRIGH…

By: AB CD

AB CD — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 23:53:37 +0000

Why’d they have to agree to build a radar station to get it done? THis is extortion.

By: Me

Me — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 21:50:33 +0000

I want a personal turbine. You strap in on your ass and eat a lot of beans…

By: site admin

site admin — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 21:19:13 +0000

SN, you make it clear we commonly attack the left too, but they are so helpless that we can’t over-do it.

By: Don

Don — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 20:20:42 +0000

Lotta wind in Scotland. You think those bagpipes inflate themselves?

By: joshua

joshua — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 19:42:18 +0000

This is great…..finally it went through. The groups still opposing it are mainly those who claim it will wreak the local enviroment and scenic view. The Greens and most of the national enviro groups backed this plan.

Now, if they could just get the other farms in the north going and the off shore ones, Scotland will meet it’s emissions decrease goals long before the rest of Britain.

If the U.S. were to put one just outside the halls of congress they could power the entire country east of the Mississippi from just one session of congress.

By: Graeme Nimmo

Graeme Nimmo — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 19:20:18 +0000

I am glad that we are finally getting the wind farm built, this has been in the pipeline for a long time.

I was kind of concerned that Jack McConnell (Our first minister) would buckle under pressure and not give it the go-ahead. It is bizarre, but minorities seem to have more power than the majority in Scotland.

Labour have finally managed to gain a little respect from me, don’t get me wrong however, I am not a Tory or a Lib Dem fan, they are all equally guff in my opinion. Nimmo for El Presidente!

I have seen too many good ideas go into the Scottish Parliament get bashed about and come out completely rubbish.

By: Herbert

Herbert — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 19:19:21 +0000

>
Great. At least they have winds there abundant, without the need to import Limbaugh and/or O’Reilly.
How are they going to achieve their “climate change targets”? Catalysts for farting cows?

By: gquaglia

gquaglia — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 17:53:00 +0000

True

By: SN

SN — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 17:37:25 +0000

I’m sorry gquaglia, but if we don’t launch meaningless and random attacks against the Right on this Blog regular users will get confused and stop reading.

By: gquaglia

gquaglia — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 17:34:47 +0000

SN, I guess you are, what does the article have to do with either of those two or conservative in general?

By: SN

SN — Fri, 28 Apr 2006 16:21:01 +0000

So who’s going to supply the wind: Limbaugh or O’Reilly?