The wind farm debate rolls on. The Examiner seems to be having a pro wind turbine week. We are assured that the negative reports are not true. Fine. There is one simply solution to this. We introduce liability into government spending. Either the wind farm installation and the investment (who IS making a killing from wind turbines btw?) is a complete success or all monies are refunded. (Although the aesthetic issue can’t really be ignored).
This can hardly be described as unreasonable. IRIS, Energy from Waste plant, power station etc etc. Who has been held responsible for inadequacies and wasted public money? No-one as far as I’m aware. Demand accountability and guarantees. Simples.
It’s worth checking out Ron Stephens on the lack of scientific reasoning behind the push for wind farms and his references to a one-world religion – Gaia worship?
free as thy sweet mountain air 
You are complicating this issue.
IOM government sees an opportunity to raise revenue by allowing a company to develop an off- shore wind farm in our coastal waters. The investment comes from private finance and we presumably get a licence fee.
The electricity generated is sold by the company on the open market via our inter-connector.
Simples!
We need to support this initiative – it will make us money. I only hope that DED can pull it off.
I suppose it comes down to trusting others and my aversion to globalist issues and those who seek to impose things on us. Do we have any reliable sources of information on this? The Steam Packet is now asking for discussion on the matter as it will increase crossing times. Is it really win/win? As mentioned above, the aesthetics issue cannot be ignored. How visible would it be? Without all the details it remains suspect as far as I’m concerned. How much would we really make from this and what costs are involved? And for how long would we be tied into it? Could we remove them if we were unhappy with the results?
The non-environmentally-friendly construction methods and the plight of birds can’t even be mentioned, it seems….
Again complicating the issue.
Have we lost £170 million of revenue per annum?
Yes.
We need therefore to generate replacement revenue.
One way is from one of our resources, in this case the seabed.
If a company is willing to invest £millions in erecting wind turbines to generate electricity for it to sell to its customers and for iom to get licence revenue as a result then it is win, win.
Of course we will need to know more detail, but please keep an open mind and remember the objective – to raise cash! Go with it.
This is an IOM problem which needs sorting, and decisions need to be made without procrastination.
Cash is king? We now need to revise planning laws to avoid restrictions on money makers – even if very little profit from the business remains on the island? Grab the offer of wind turbines because government didn’t handle the VAT issue very well? (What really went on there?) There are still many questions to be answered about the proposal – especially the question of maintenance which appears to be an issue with present offshore wind farms.
If this really is the answer to all our financial problems and we are sure of no unknown costly factors then perhaps we should consider it. However, the devil is in the detail and this is where we seem to slip up. Bring in the costly consultants. Take their advice (is there a choice?) and then discover things aren’t quite what they seemed to be but no-one is ever held responsible for the results.
The bottom line seems to be that this has little to do with the environment, it’s about cash.
PS Sorry but the minced birds issue is still of concern to me.
Wind farms are generally regarded as a con trick. The electricity generated is never as much as the design suggests and the timing of the wind being on means you need to balance the power generated with other methods of power producing methods. This should mean that we only turn on our washing machines and dishwashers when the wind is blowing ……but……people are too lazy and ignorant to take responsibility, better still have one on every house then people will get it.
Back to wind farms, secret contracts with minimum fees for this and that. I am not psychic but can you tell me there will not be a requirement for iom to buy some of the electricity generated at a price at a time convenient to the wind. This load will then have to be compensated for by other generating methods again at our expense. A wind farm will eventually be subsidised by the manx taxpayer, they just haven’t told you yet and you have yet to get the bill.
Daniel – your first paragraph is just nonsense.
As for your second paragraph, please read my earlier posts.
okay let me use an anecdote, there was a show of grand designs where a guy designed an eco house.
lots of glass facing south to suck up the sun’s rays – fine
lots of insulation to stop heating the atmosphere – fine
big water tank to collect rainwater off the roof – fine
great big wind turbine in the drive costing £30k and generating 2 tenths of f*** all electric – c***
if you had a hunk of junk in your drive you might catch on the wind farms are a con.
do not say you have not been warned.
iris was fundamentally flawed at the design stage, people knew but govt did it anyway.
the water rates bill should be about half – think about that
electricty should cost considerably less because of the power station and the efw
do not be naive wrt, it is not win win
Sorry Daniel, expletives do not add strengh to your comment. I’d like to continue on the wind turbine thread, but only via rational argument from us both. You decide.