Plans to erect two 18 meter Wind turbines in the field by Ball Hill Lane, Okehampton. Do we really need these so close to a residential area when there are hundreds of square miles of opens moorland, away from residential properties? and what purpose will they serve? How many more will be added once the two have been up for a while.
What's you thoughts?

By schiemflug at 13:12 on 14/02/11

Re-post

Lets hope they do not whine too much. There is a big industry being built out of wind turbines and the like. No doubt there will be many more.

By pobox112 at 23:08 on 15/02/11
Report
Personally, I am for it. This may be because of my Engineering background, but I think we have to invest into alternative ways of harnessing energy. Unless we want the Nuclear Power Stations dotted around even sooner. Also, when I was little, I thought going to Cornwall and seeing them was the most amazing part of the journey!!

By sarotraves at 08:02 on 16/02/11
Report
We would need hundreds of thousands of other devices to harness energy compared to a couple of nuclear power stations. Its zero carbon and harnesses natural resources. Wind Turbines are blots on natural landscapes and also kill birds, produce noise and take much energy to start. To provide energy for a huge and growing population for the future, the only way is nuclear. There is a wind power industry who are either taking or making millions out of all this. They are certainly going to shout the loudest to protect that.

By pobox112 at 11:00 on 16/02/11
Report
I agree that we need alternative methods of harnessing energy and they really do fascinate me to a point that when I come across them, I have to photograph them, however, I DON'T believe they NEED to be built so close to residential areas, especially when there are so many alternative placements in the region. Perhaps we maybe able to live with ONE or TWO, but no one will convince me that it will end at one or two, just look at the fields of them in Cornwall. When you walk up to one of these fields of wind turbines, the noise is substantial from quite a distance from them, and that is during the day when we have other noise pollution from roads etc., that actually reduces the effect of the noise from the turbines, however, in the dead of night in rural locations its a totally different story. Have a generator running outside your house, during the day its hardly noticeable, but in the dead of night, when you are trying to sleep, try it by having some one sitting in a car with the engine running outside your home at night when you are trying to sleep, I wonder how long it would be before the complaints come rolling in. NOISE IS JUST ANOTHER FORM OF POLLUTION. Just my point of view.

By schiemflug at 11:05 on 16/02/11
Report
I would much rather the wind turbines were located on the edges of residential areas and would go so far as to say that 2 or 3 should be incorporated into any new housing development. Why damage the otherwise unspoiled areas of beautiful moorland and rural areas? I think the location at Ball Hill Lane is a good compromise. 2 turbines are not going to create a lot of noise, they are not going to have the same visual impact as vast fields of turbines and they are not going to damage the unspoilt countryside. As too the noise pollution, 2 turbines are not going to creat much noise, and those that are affected will get used to it. Try living in a large town or city with constant traffic noise and a railway line at the bottom of the garden. You become used to it and are able to sleep through the noise.

By supadibley at 09:33 on 18/02/11
Report
I lived in the city for many years and you DON'T get used to it, you just put up with it, thats ONE of the reasons for moving to a more rural area, peace and quiet. I would take a guess that supadibley doesn't live near the proposed location but lives in a location that runs little risk of having them erected near by. BTW, getting used to it does not mean you have like it. However, as I have already said, two wind turbines probably won't make to much of an impact on our lives but will it stop at two, how long before we have 22? See what's happening at Fullabrook Down near Barnstaple and closer to home at Den Brook near Crediton.

By schiemflug at 10:56 on 18/02/11
Report
I take it you have not looked at the plans for these turbine placements? You cannot compare this scheme to the ones at Fullabrook and Den Brook. The turbines proposed at Ball Hill are 18m in hight compared to 110m and 80m turbines at Fullabrook and Den Brook respectively. The turbines at Ball Hill are going to be used to reduce the electricity bill of Okehampton College. As the money for the college's energy costs comes from the tax payer, reducing the bill can only be a good thing. The placement of the Ball Hill turbines is 300 to 400 meters away from the nearest housing, and maybe if this works for the college they may wish to add another 2 or 3, who knows. But I am fairly sure they won't be doing that any time soon and they won't be creating a "wind farm".

In response to your guess - I live and work within 700m of the proposed turbines.

By supadibley at 16:41 on 18/02/11
Report
You can find out more about the wind turbine plans at http://tinyurl.com/6b644fm

By EddieGrundy at 11:06 on 21/02/11
Report
As the money for the college's energy costs comes from the tax payer, reducing the bill can only be a good thing - - Can you really see a rebate to the Tax Payer?

By pobox112 at 11:58 on 21/03/11
Report
@pobox - in reality no I don't see a rebate to the tax payer - thats just not how the system works. One school trying to save on their energy bill is a drop in the ocean in the grand scheme of things. But that does not mean they should not be trying to cut their costs.

By supadibley at 15:36 on 23/03/11
Report
I can't see a rebate to the tax Payer either. But what I can see is that the budget from the pubic purse to the College will have to be reduced with savings made.

By pobox112 at 23:57 on 23/03/11
Report