UKC

Looks like we'll soon have a new view from Great Wanney - 20 120 metre high wind turbines. That's nearly 10 times the height of the crag!

Have a look at http://www.amec.com/uploadfiles/RayNTS.pdf - there is a photomontage of the what the view will be like from the crag on page 21. A bit more info is at http://www.amec.com/wind/2ndlevel.asp?pageid=8217

I take a pretty dim view of putting these things in areas like this. I wonder what kind of response they'd get if they tried that on the South Downs? Our access officer has been around the site with the agents for AMEC and they've agreed that the closest turbine to the crag is 'inappropriate', but gawd knows if that'll make any difference.

In reply to JDal: That's a bit poor. Can anything be done? Maybe a good idea to repost this with a title like "new windfarm for Northumberland" the title is a bit ambiguous.

at least someone is actually doing something positive to reduce carbon emissions, and potentially 25% of northumberland's housing stock will be supplied from non polluting renewable energy. most people who will complain about the 'terrible impact on the land' will each think nothing of making thousands of sub two mile car journeys during their lifetimes that spew pollution.

personally, i like wind turbines. if you don't then get rid of your car and walk or cycle everywhere, cease international air travel, recycle everything you can and wear an extra layer of clothing in the winter.

cheers!

In reply to martin k:
Are these a new kind of turbine then that will provide energy even when there is no wind, or too much wind? And that don't require conventional power stations to be running permanently to fill in the gaps?

Wind farms are little more than the subsidised (re-)industrialisation of the countryside, and it is disingenuous to suggest otherwise. At least to their credit many supporters of these things are quite open in admitting as much, as see it as a good thing, without pretending that they're in some way 'saving the planet'.

In reply to Chris Fryer:
There are boatloads of new windfarms planned for Northumberland, the theory is that the planners will only allow so many, and this is one they will tolerate. I think it is just about a fait accopmpli, unfortunately.

<rant>
What gets me is that I reckon you could cover the entire bloody country with turbines and we'd still end up needing nuclear power. In my view this is landowners, in this case the Ray Estate, getting money for land which is commercially useless and planners allowing it because of Government policies on carbon emissions. Not that I've ever seen proof that during the ENTIRE life of these things they actually reduce carbon emissions.

No one gives a flying fk about what happens up here, first the place got trashed with coalmines, then opencast and now these things. Gawd knows what the effect on tourism in the county will be when they've finished. Northumberland is renowned for big landscapes, these things will be visible for bloody miles. Best get all my landscape photos done asap
</rant>

In reply to JDal:

Sadly in the North we're blessed with lots of open space and frequent winds.

Whilst windfarms are visually intrusive, they do play an increasingly important part in the nations energy needs.

I would like to see the National Parks spared from largescale windfarm development, and have more emphasis on offshore wind farms.

There are many possible sites in relatively exposed locations that are not within the National Park that are equally suitable for development. They are also probably closer to connurbations, and as such the connections to the national grid would be shorter.

A lot of fuss is made about the visual impact of windfarms, yet new transmission lines stir up less antipathy, even though they affect a much larger area.

I am still to be persuaded that we can meet our energy needs in the forseaable future without a new generation of Nuclear stations, as burning more fossil fuels is not an option, and the whole of the countryside would have to be turned into one giant windgarm to satisfy the energy need.

In reply to Alan Stark:
Why do they need open space? They're 300 feet high. There is ample land in the South East of the county, already heavily industrial. It's as windy as an offshore farm would be. The siting of these things in the moorland areas (The Wanneys aren't in the National Park) is, IMO, primarily commercial.

Absolutely.

In reply to JDal:

They chuffing well should be! -- what an oversight!

I did a lot of my earliest climbing there, when the forest had just been planted and you could see the crag all the way up the forestry track from the road!

In reply to Alan Stark:


Yeah, me too, round about 62/63. Idiots Delight was my first lead, not as mad as it sounds because there was a peg in the cave. We used to camp by the wall. Aid Crag was a favourite haunt as well, a neglected spot if ever there was one. We did a little new route there a couple of years ago and the only belay at the top was 200 feet away, so I placed an iron ring peg a bit from the edge. I bet it's rusted away before anyone ever uses it again. There's a few big nebs waiting for enthusiasts and a stonking 7/8 metre arete.