MovieChat Forums > The Age of Stupid (2009) Discussion > wtf with the windfarm?

wtf with the windfarm?

posted 12 years ago by frogca
6 replies | jump to latest

On and on about the windfarm proposal in this film. Then dismissing those who object to it as concerned with "the view." That is so wrong, and no wonder with that lack of understanding that so many of these projects do not succeed. The proponents do not understand that it is about culture and quality of life, not about a view. A constantly turning windmill is an eye-irritant, like a flashing ad on a webpage. Personally, I can't think with that going on in front of me. Landscape is so much more than view. It is a sense of place, the experience of peaceful and healing enjoyment of nature. You can walk past a building or other structure, but not some machine in constant motion, and I haven't even gotten to the noise.

A 2011 Environmental Health journal article reviewing Health Effects and Turbines, ie the windpower literature, similarly misses the point by saying that something like 30% of people are bothered by the noise. (I'm simplifying - there was much more in the article.) Why should 30% of people have to suffer a new noise irritant that also has other quality of life impacts? I once thought windpower was interesting, before there was any around, and I thought about getting into is as an installer of the technology. Sure glad I didn't. Some people are insensitive to noise or just plain deaf. Lucky them. I can hear below the arbitrary threshold of sound (got tested recently) and so 40 decibels is a horror to me. You cannot fix this with earplugs, which only go up to 33 db attenuation. There would be no escape. And that doesn't even go into issues of vibration. Wake up windpower people - we don't want it.

Nuclear power makes a lot more sense. Ask James Lovelock. He's no dummy.

Some great footage in this movie, but it really didn't hang together well. The bits about the Indian airline developments, the French mountain guide and the young Nigerian who hoped to be a doctor were interesting and do relate to fossil fuel use, but the windfarm nonsense and typical scaremongering tone that would only scare a child really didn't touch me.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] frogca 12 years ago

> Stop spewing your "windmills make noise" myth. The WIND makes the noise, regardless whether there are any windmills there or not

Can't stop doing something I'm not doing.

You have no understanding that a peaceful environment is good for health and thought process. Flashing and pounding influences are not good. Wind makes lovely sounds. Rhythmic beating sounds are made by the windmills. NOt that you've ever experienced one, evidently.

And, plonk, since you are insulting.

[–] MaximusXXX 12 years ago

Having grown up 7 hours from Chernobyl. Nuclear energy should be safety first.

Those foolish enough to move from canada to america increase the average I.Q. of both countries

[–] melinda2001 9 years ago

You're right, windmills do make noise, and certainly there is a limit to how close anyone would want to live near one. I doubt the plan was to build them too close to residents. OTOH, I've been around a bunch of giant windmills and I think they look fantastic! I'd love to have a window with a view onto a field of windmills, so long as noise wasn't unpleasant, of course. I think people were just scared about the risk to their property values.

I was surprised that the project manager was so disappointed when he got to build half the windmills. That was an excellent result because if those first ones don't cause noise or other problems, it should be a piece of cake to approve the rest and more.

And finally there is the question of where our energy really should come from? In the right locations, wind is so clearly the right choice, and will become more-so with the more extreme climates expected. Property values in windy places will go up, by the way.

[–] bbagnall 12 years ago

It was surprising to me too that these wind turbines are obviously destructive to the landscape and environment, yet environmentalists are acting like they are better than say hydroelectric power or nuclear power. Have you ever walked up to one of these turbines? It's like a battle ship tilted on its side. There is just a massive amount of steel and concrete that goes into each one of these. Those materials are costly and environmentally polluting to create. Well multiply that x 50 for a wind farm, and the waste is just ridiculous compared to nuclear or hydro. Plus, it barely generates any electricity, especially on calm days.

The COST to build something is pretty reflective of how many resources it chews up. Nuclear and hydro chew up far fewer resources than wind power or solar, yet environmentalists are ass-backwards on the issue. It's crazy-land out there with these people.

The way the movie presents things is pretty typical for "progressives". They mischaracterize the argument of their opponents by not even allowing their opponents to give it. Instead, they give some sort of fun-house mirror view and pretend that is the argument. Straw-men really make debating easy because you don't have to take on any actual claims.

[–] frogca 12 years ago

I guess progressives and environmentalists are two groups that are not monolithic. I'd class myself in both categories, as I suppose would Lovelock himself, yet both I and he seem to see the value of place and peace and that windmills are not a real solution.