Six sheep with small wind turbines attached to them may travel to London in a bid to prevent thousands of wind turbine lorries travelling through a Mid Wales town.
It forms part of several protests planned by Welshpool Town Council. Robert Robinson, council clerk, said the demonstrations, which are expected to take place some time over the next few months, would give people a chance to get their voices heard.
It comes after a government inspector threw out plans for a windfarm near Market Drayton on Wednesday.
The Planning Inspectorate was called in after Nuon appealed against a decision by the former North Shropshire District Council to refuse permission for the turbines at Lower Farm, Bearstone, near Market Drayton.
Campaigners feared the turbines would have a detrimental effect on the landscape and would cause noise.
Mr Robinson said it was now up to residents and town councillors to do everything in their power to stop any turbine transportation going through the town.
He said: “The town council’s planning committee considered various ways of highlighting their objection to transport windfarms via Welshpool town centre.
“The committee felt I should arrange with councillors a number of protests to highlight the council and community concerns with regard to windfarm transport.
“I have recommended we should drive six sheep with small wind turbines attached to their collars over a London bridge.”
He said other recommendations, which will go before Welshpool Town Council’s full meeting on Wednesday, would include writing to every county councillor seeking support for a public inquiry.
He said: “I also think we should drive as many cars around the town centre at 5pm and each vehicle should have small wind farm models on each roof to demonstrate the effect. We are also planning to arrange a demonstration and march with all community councils over the next few months.”
He added: “We, as I’m sure many other community councils, are disturbed by the fact we have not been consulted more on windfarm applications which require extensive transport through the town of Welshpool.
“We find any transport of windfarm equipment going through our town centre is unacceptable because it will damage the fabric of the historic town centre.”
See Also:
16 Comments
Oh dear, looks like the windy nimbys are really running out of campaigning ideas ! Re noise from wind farms – how many of those who oppose applications have actually been to a wind farm to listen for themselves ? According to research carried out, over the last 15 years or so there have been on average about 16 complaints per year re wind farms noise in the UK, this compares with 300,000 formal noise complaints in general…
Report abuse
What idiots!! Would they prefer the planet to burn up???? We have to do something about the state of the world and using wind power has got to be a sensible way forward. And as for taking sheep with them, well I hope the RSPCA take and interest!
Report abuse
Yep! Nuclear power plant for Welshpool! That’s the ticket!
Lets have the National Centre for Nuclear Technology set up at Welshpool.
Report abuse
What a wooly story this is! Come on Shropshire Star, we said we want news not we need to snooze!
Get a new editor please!!!!!
Bored Witless
Report abuse
oh please..has anyone spent any time on a wind farm…they are QUIET and frequently turned off in heavy weather. Transporting sheep to London in this heat is cruel
Report abuse
I note that these posts are devoid of facts but curiously rich in vitriol.
Arguments re. nuclear or wind are empty as the French now have control of this and are to build a whole new generation of Nuclear power stations.
There isn’t much hope of advancing debate and understanding of the problem if the unfortunate term NIMBY is used. When you have run out of something to say then that’s the final word! It’s a catch all phrase that may be accurate in describing some folk but not the majority of dissenters.
The disturbing thing is that the voice of reason re. wind power is is being shouted down by a form of hysteria by doomsday merchants. It’s instructive to look at those people who increasingly oppose wind power. Quite often they are people who, like myself are environmentally aware and active and in fact many work in the field of environmental and widlife protection. The argument is not let’s have any renewable or we are doomed. It’s what is rational power generation with sensitivity to ecology and society. As the consensus seems to be increasingly wind is dubious, the irrational retorts and attacks against the dissentors grows stronger unsurprisingly. We should not be swayed by the headlines. Research the facts….please.
Report abuse
As anyone thought about the poor sheep having to travel this distance??
Report abuse
So Jonathan Lincoln, Chrissie, Matt, Bored witless and cp how do you answer the following statements made by the people you obviously support or should we say your employers the British Wind Association.
On the 22nd of April 2009 at 4:11pm Scottish Power said Britain needs backup for wind – ‘Thirty gigawatts of wind maybe requires 25GW of backup, said Rupert Steele, regulation director at the Scottish arm of Spain‘s Iberdrola, one of the worlds largest wind farm operators’- as reported by Reuters.
And also the statement made on the 10th January 2009 in SPIEGL ONLINE the following – ‘Despite Europe’s boom in solar and wind energy, CO2 emissions haven’t been reduced by even a single gram. Now, even the Green Party is taking a new look at the issue – as shown in e-mails obtained by SPIEGEL ONLINE.’
And explain to us why E.ON Netz Wind Reprt 2005 stated – Germany has led the world with approx 20,000 MW of installed wind capacity but conventional power stations have to ‘back up’ over 90%
Fact – Wind is the most expensive way to fund carbon emission reductions £70 – £140 per tonne. (National Audit Office 2005)
Fact – Expensive, unpredictable power & saves little CO2
Fact – Windfarms degrade economically important landscapes
Fact – Squander scarce public funds that could be better used to combat climate change
Fact – Wind farms do not compare favourably with other generating systems because they are in addition not a replacement
Oh yes I forget, if you are in the pay of the wind energy lot, we out here as the public are actually paying your wages through the Renewable Obligation Certification scheme as we are already funding this very expensive way of generating hot air from yourselves.
Get a life you ill informed people.
Report abuse
We struggle to say the obvious with clarity, others have done it before us. To some of the commenters above, remove the subjective, read the new narrative…
Faith in the redemptive power of wind energy is not a substitute for analysis of its actual record.
— Eric Rosenbloom, Vt.
The subsidies for wind are a misuse of public money. The ‘benefits’ from industrial wind are a fantasy and an escape from our energy problems. For me, believing that industrial wind will solve our energy problems is a little like believing the Tooth Fairy will pay my heating bills this winter.
— Linda Bly, Vt.
Report abuse
young larry said oh please mr mayor do not send me to london. move along there young lamb said ernest the policeman. it’s disgraceful said mr growser. and larry and his friend denis the dachshund went quietly onto london.
good night children everywhere
tomorrows story is a about edward the blue engine
Report abuse
i like wind farms and they are very good for us all, i wish the nimbys would back off they are keeping shropshire in the dark ages
Report abuse
Jonathan Lincoln
1. Welcome, Jonathan. Hope everyone knows that you are paid by wind turbine developers to get signatures in support of wind turbine planning proposals.
2. Noise problems with c. 5% of turbine arrays is a very real problem when you consider that it is only recently that turbines have been built in proximity to settlements.
The wind turbine noise standard (ETSU-R-97) was formulated, “… to offer a reasonable degree of protection to wind farm neighbours, without placing unreasonable restrictions on wind farm development or adding unduly to the costs and administrative burdens on wind farm developers or planning authorities.” (ETSU-R-97 preamble).
This, because most turbine arrays would fail the usual standard for measuring noise emissions from industrial plant:
“The assessment compares the noise source with existing background noise. A background noise survey must be performed during the proposed operating hours. The worst hour during day time is measured, and the worst 10 minutes at night. Following analysis and corrections to the data in accordance with BS4142 the difference between the source and existing noise level is determined. A difference of +10dB is a positive indication that complaints are likely. A difference of -10dB is a positive indication that complaints are unlikely. (British Standard 4142).
Moreover, many wind turbine arrays would be issued with ASBO’s if they were not exempt from the 1996 Noise Act which sets a limit of 35DB(A) for noise nuisance from neighbours.
Report abuse
Aaaww! to my cudly counterparts above who curiously worry about the wee sheep. Hidden independent study by one of the major power companies has shown that insects and small animal species migrate away from large wind turbine complex. Not good for the ecology me thinks. Of course you won’t see that publicised by the lovely power companies. get them up and running before people know the truth!!!
If they work, I like others I’m sure would grudgingly accept the compromise for wider benefits but I sense that at no other time in history has green been so dirty. This do or die attitude about global disaster if we naughty deliquents don’t change our ways and acquiesce to the green agenda is the like the death rattle of democracy and level headedness. Or would I be too controversial to say – it’s the money stupid.
Report abuse
Look at the November 2008 ‘Open Europe’ Report into Climate Action and Renewable Energy
Package (CAREP)pushed on to us by Eurocrats (in other words big business)!
In the report the former head of policy at the Environment Agency has described the target for renewables as “reckless” because it “very heavily directs the response to climate change to some of the most expensive technological responses per tonne of carbon saved.”
The importance of fossil fuel backup is illustrated by Michael Laughton, Professor of Electrical Engineering at the University of London, who argues that because wind has a small capacity credit(the measure of how much ‘conventional’ power it can safely displace), installing 25GW of wind capacity would actually only allow about 5GW of conventional plant to be retired without compromising National Grid security of supply standards (UK generation capacity at the moment is about 75GW).
Paul Golby, chief executive of E.on
UK, believes that up to 90% of Britain’s wind power might need to be backed up with fossil fuel plants. This means that wind generation can only safely displace a very limited amount of conventional power.
Further in the report it states poigniantly that the UK is facing an “energy crunch”. This nation “will become highly focused on renewables such as wind”. I suspect it will not be ultimatley seen as a panacea. Quite the reverse.
Reality is about to bite on this issue.
Report abuse
i think wind turbines are beautiful
Report abuse
I think they are beautful too. But so are fur coats but there is a cost for different vanities. Indulgence of the prolific Westerners Sheila is at the cost of the developing world all too often and wind energy is no exception.
Beautiful is not enough!
Report abuse