Solar farm inquiry upsets residents

Steve Harcourt who is in favour of the solar farm plans with Wroughton Airfield in the distance

Steve Harcourt who is in favour of the solar farm plans with Wroughton Airfield in the distance

First published in News Swindon Advertiser: Photograph of the Author by , @Michael_Benke

NEWS that a proposed solar farm project will now go before a public hearing has been met with frustration by residents and politicians.

The Science Museum, in partnership with Swindon Commercial Services, wants to build a giant solar farm on the site of the former airfield just outside Wroughton.

Planning permission was granted for the 40MW farm, which would be one of the largest in the UK, but following objections from a number of groups, including the West Downs area of outstanding natural beauty, Natural England and English Heritage, the Secretary of State Eric Pickles has called for a public inquiry to be held to decide whether the farm should go ahead.

However, the decision has angered residents who supported the scheme for the benefits it could bring the area.

Resident Steve Harcourt said: “This is a very disappointing decision.

“At a public consultation held last spring about 300 people came along and the majority thought it was a good plan which will bring employment and investment to the area.

“On the Facebook page we held a poll in October and once again almost everyone was in favour.

“It flies in the face of so-called localism if a decision which is supported on a local level can be overturned by central Government.”

Much of the criticism has been levelled at the groups for objecting to the decision without taking into consideration local opinion on the issue, which could eventually have wider implications.

Coun Dale Heenan (Con, Covingham and Dorcan), the cabinet member for sustainability, said: “The decision to hold a public inquiry four months after the decision was made is incredibly frustrating.

“My fear now is that the democratic decision to approve is overturned by a planning inspector and that will have national policy implications for Planning, Localism and Energy.

“We need some perspective because it is about putting solar panels on a Tarmac airfield – an airfield which, along with most of Swindon, can already be seen in distant views from Barbury Castle.

“The AONB Board and Natural England were the only ones to raise objections and the Minister has decided to hold a public inquiry because of this since he believes there are planning issues of more than local importance involved.”

South Swindon MP Robert Buckland has said there needs to be a change of approach from AONB but what is most important now is that the public inquiry is held as soon as possible.

He said: “I find this incredibly frustrating. I can understand why the Secretary of State has taken this decision because of the objection and if it were ignored it might set a precedent.

“I think there needs to be change of culture with the AONB to consider more local issues.

“There should have been a consultation with the people of Wroughton, who have largely been in favour of the solar farm.

“I have spoken with the Secretary of State because the important thing now is for the inquiry to be held as quickly as possible.”

But Henry Oliver, the director of AONB, welcomed the decision.

He said: “As we have made clear, this proposal would have an unacceptable impact on this nationally protected landscape, and in particular on the setting of historic Barbury Castle, which is a country park popular with local people and a key point on the Ridgeway National Trail.

“We welcome the recognition of these issues and that the matter will receive proper consideration by the Secretary of State for the Environment.”

Comments (23)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:04am Fri 4 Apr 14

stfcdod says...

Is is the birth of a brand new phenomenon? Reverse nimbyism.
Is is the birth of a brand new phenomenon? Reverse nimbyism. stfcdod
  • Score: 2

9:31am Fri 4 Apr 14

matt89 says...

It really does beg the question whether they have other plans for this land in the coming years with large areas being developed around the town.
It really does beg the question whether they have other plans for this land in the coming years with large areas being developed around the town. matt89
  • Score: 2

9:37am Fri 4 Apr 14

Stantonlad says...

The danger is what may be o.k. With local people may not be o.k. With wider society. A public enquiry is the correct response. Look at Redlands Aiirfield , the people of Wanborough supported it, Swindon Borough Council permitted it and now the life's of residents around are blighted by noisy overflying of their homes every 20 minutes every weekend, all subsequent complaints have been brushed under the carpet by councillors and M.P.'s alike.
The danger is what may be o.k. With local people may not be o.k. With wider society. A public enquiry is the correct response. Look at Redlands Aiirfield , the people of Wanborough supported it, Swindon Borough Council permitted it and now the life's of residents around are blighted by noisy overflying of their homes every 20 minutes every weekend, all subsequent complaints have been brushed under the carpet by councillors and M.P.'s alike. Stantonlad
  • Score: -3

10:26am Fri 4 Apr 14

BCDR99 says...

Stantonlad wrote:
The danger is what may be o.k. With local people may not be o.k. With wider society. A public enquiry is the correct response. Look at Redlands Aiirfield , the people of Wanborough supported it, Swindon Borough Council permitted it and now the life's of residents around are blighted by noisy overflying of their homes every 20 minutes every weekend, all subsequent complaints have been brushed under the carpet by councillors and M.P.'s alike.
The people that live next door to the A419 are complaining about a few light aircraft? It's parachute jumps and motorised hang-gliders (weather permitting) a few days a week, in daylight hours only, not Heathrow Airport.
[quote][p][bold]Stantonlad[/bold] wrote: The danger is what may be o.k. With local people may not be o.k. With wider society. A public enquiry is the correct response. Look at Redlands Aiirfield , the people of Wanborough supported it, Swindon Borough Council permitted it and now the life's of residents around are blighted by noisy overflying of their homes every 20 minutes every weekend, all subsequent complaints have been brushed under the carpet by councillors and M.P.'s alike.[/p][/quote]The people that live next door to the A419 are complaining about a few light aircraft? It's parachute jumps and motorised hang-gliders (weather permitting) a few days a week, in daylight hours only, not Heathrow Airport. BCDR99
  • Score: 13

10:43am Fri 4 Apr 14

candid friend says...

The need for energy conflicts with the views of the environmentalists, and the project is supported by the local residents and the Council.
The country needs green energy, and the objectors should told so.
If all these objectors were listened to we would have no Motorways or Power stations.
This is the 21st Century and we need to keep up to date.
The need for energy conflicts with the views of the environmentalists, and the project is supported by the local residents and the Council. The country needs green energy, and the objectors should told so. If all these objectors were listened to we would have no Motorways or Power stations. This is the 21st Century and we need to keep up to date. candid friend
  • Score: -2

10:54am Fri 4 Apr 14

matt89 says...

The solar farm would not cause any environmental damage. The panels would most likely be secured in the ground on coil spikes, meaning no concrete, plus the land could also be used at the same time for grazing or turned in to a meadow. After 25 years the panels could be removed and the land used for other purposes with no problems at all.
The solar farm would not cause any environmental damage. The panels would most likely be secured in the ground on coil spikes, meaning no concrete, plus the land could also be used at the same time for grazing or turned in to a meadow. After 25 years the panels could be removed and the land used for other purposes with no problems at all. matt89
  • Score: 7

11:38am Fri 4 Apr 14

LordAshOfTheBrake says...

Stantonlad wrote:
The danger is what may be o.k. With local people may not be o.k. With wider society. A public enquiry is the correct response. Look at Redlands Aiirfield , the people of Wanborough supported it, Swindon Borough Council permitted it and now the life's of residents around are blighted by noisy overflying of their homes every 20 minutes every weekend, all subsequent complaints have been brushed under the carpet by councillors and M.P.'s alike.
You'll probably find those making the most noise against the air field are those that moved after it was permitted as they thought they were moving to a quiet peaceful village when the reality is they didn't do their homework and check the area out properly. Have friends that live there and they are not bothered by the noise at all.
[quote][p][bold]Stantonlad[/bold] wrote: The danger is what may be o.k. With local people may not be o.k. With wider society. A public enquiry is the correct response. Look at Redlands Aiirfield , the people of Wanborough supported it, Swindon Borough Council permitted it and now the life's of residents around are blighted by noisy overflying of their homes every 20 minutes every weekend, all subsequent complaints have been brushed under the carpet by councillors and M.P.'s alike.[/p][/quote]You'll probably find those making the most noise against the air field are those that moved after it was permitted as they thought they were moving to a quiet peaceful village when the reality is they didn't do their homework and check the area out properly. Have friends that live there and they are not bothered by the noise at all. LordAshOfTheBrake
  • Score: 3

11:40am Fri 4 Apr 14

LordAshOfTheBrake says...

matt89 wrote:
The solar farm would not cause any environmental damage. The panels would most likely be secured in the ground on coil spikes, meaning no concrete, plus the land could also be used at the same time for grazing or turned in to a meadow. After 25 years the panels could be removed and the land used for other purposes with no problems at all.
I thought the concrete was already there as they were putting the panels on the old runways. I could be wrong though.
[quote][p][bold]matt89[/bold] wrote: The solar farm would not cause any environmental damage. The panels would most likely be secured in the ground on coil spikes, meaning no concrete, plus the land could also be used at the same time for grazing or turned in to a meadow. After 25 years the panels could be removed and the land used for other purposes with no problems at all.[/p][/quote]I thought the concrete was already there as they were putting the panels on the old runways. I could be wrong though. LordAshOfTheBrake
  • Score: 0

11:48am Fri 4 Apr 14

matt89 says...

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
matt89 wrote:
The solar farm would not cause any environmental damage. The panels would most likely be secured in the ground on coil spikes, meaning no concrete, plus the land could also be used at the same time for grazing or turned in to a meadow. After 25 years the panels could be removed and the land used for other purposes with no problems at all.
I thought the concrete was already there as they were putting the panels on the old runways. I could be wrong though.
There will be come concrete that some panels will be able to be placed upon, but when putting then the panels fields wont require more concrete.
[quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]matt89[/bold] wrote: The solar farm would not cause any environmental damage. The panels would most likely be secured in the ground on coil spikes, meaning no concrete, plus the land could also be used at the same time for grazing or turned in to a meadow. After 25 years the panels could be removed and the land used for other purposes with no problems at all.[/p][/quote]I thought the concrete was already there as they were putting the panels on the old runways. I could be wrong though.[/p][/quote]There will be come concrete that some panels will be able to be placed upon, but when putting then the panels fields wont require more concrete. matt89
  • Score: -1

11:48am Fri 4 Apr 14

matt89 says...

matt89 wrote:
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
matt89 wrote:
The solar farm would not cause any environmental damage. The panels would most likely be secured in the ground on coil spikes, meaning no concrete, plus the land could also be used at the same time for grazing or turned in to a meadow. After 25 years the panels could be removed and the land used for other purposes with no problems at all.
I thought the concrete was already there as they were putting the panels on the old runways. I could be wrong though.
There will be come concrete that some panels will be able to be placed upon, but when putting then the panels fields wont require more concrete.
Some*
[quote][p][bold]matt89[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]matt89[/bold] wrote: The solar farm would not cause any environmental damage. The panels would most likely be secured in the ground on coil spikes, meaning no concrete, plus the land could also be used at the same time for grazing or turned in to a meadow. After 25 years the panels could be removed and the land used for other purposes with no problems at all.[/p][/quote]I thought the concrete was already there as they were putting the panels on the old runways. I could be wrong though.[/p][/quote]There will be come concrete that some panels will be able to be placed upon, but when putting then the panels fields wont require more concrete.[/p][/quote]Some* matt89
  • Score: 1

12:27pm Fri 4 Apr 14

toyota777 says...

I would think anyone born and brought up in the area is shuddering at the thought of it. Only outsiders who have no love of the area would think of ruining it to make money.
I would think anyone born and brought up in the area is shuddering at the thought of it. Only outsiders who have no love of the area would think of ruining it to make money. toyota777
  • Score: -4

12:29pm Fri 4 Apr 14

matt89 says...

toyota777 wrote:
I would think anyone born and brought up in the area is shuddering at the thought of it. Only outsiders who have no love of the area would think of ruining it to make money.
The site could be protected from housing developers if a clean renewable energy resource is put there. Your statement is very general and does not account for everyone that was born and brought up in the area.
[quote][p][bold]toyota777[/bold] wrote: I would think anyone born and brought up in the area is shuddering at the thought of it. Only outsiders who have no love of the area would think of ruining it to make money.[/p][/quote]The site could be protected from housing developers if a clean renewable energy resource is put there. Your statement is very general and does not account for everyone that was born and brought up in the area. matt89
  • Score: 2

12:34pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Oik1 says...

With a little luck the whole solar farm idea on Wroughton Airfield will be kicked into touch, from a personal point of view I find them a blight on the landscape along with wind turbines, all this piecemeal 'doing the right thing' and 'green energy' feel good power comes at a price that few can afford,hence the recently cut levys on green power, no matter what spin is put on it.
If you want plentiful and cheap power then go down the greenest route and lets build more nuclear power stations and be done with it.
With a little luck the whole solar farm idea on Wroughton Airfield will be kicked into touch, from a personal point of view I find them a blight on the landscape along with wind turbines, all this piecemeal 'doing the right thing' and 'green energy' feel good power comes at a price that few can afford,hence the recently cut levys on green power, no matter what spin is put on it. If you want plentiful and cheap power then go down the greenest route and lets build more nuclear power stations and be done with it. Oik1
  • Score: 2

12:40pm Fri 4 Apr 14

matt89 says...

Oik1 wrote:
With a little luck the whole solar farm idea on Wroughton Airfield will be kicked into touch, from a personal point of view I find them a blight on the landscape along with wind turbines, all this piecemeal 'doing the right thing' and 'green energy' feel good power comes at a price that few can afford,hence the recently cut levys on green power, no matter what spin is put on it.
If you want plentiful and cheap power then go down the greenest route and lets build more nuclear power stations and be done with it.
Do you know how long it takes to build a nuclear power station? and do you know the carbon and greenhouse gas implications of extracting uranium out of the ground? And where would we store the waste. I do agree we need nuclear energy but it has to be with a mix of other carbon free technologies.
[quote][p][bold]Oik1[/bold] wrote: With a little luck the whole solar farm idea on Wroughton Airfield will be kicked into touch, from a personal point of view I find them a blight on the landscape along with wind turbines, all this piecemeal 'doing the right thing' and 'green energy' feel good power comes at a price that few can afford,hence the recently cut levys on green power, no matter what spin is put on it. If you want plentiful and cheap power then go down the greenest route and lets build more nuclear power stations and be done with it.[/p][/quote]Do you know how long it takes to build a nuclear power station? and do you know the carbon and greenhouse gas implications of extracting uranium out of the ground? And where would we store the waste. I do agree we need nuclear energy but it has to be with a mix of other carbon free technologies. matt89
  • Score: 7

12:43pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Ollie Dognacky says...

The runways at Wroughton are layed out in a star pattern.
With solar panels covering them they will look like a giant christmas decoration.
That will be magnificent to see
The runways at Wroughton are layed out in a star pattern. With solar panels covering them they will look like a giant christmas decoration. That will be magnificent to see Ollie Dognacky
  • Score: 1

2:18pm Fri 4 Apr 14

PJC says...

toyota777 wrote:
I would think anyone born and brought up in the area is shuddering at the thought of it. Only outsiders who have no love of the area would think of ruining it to make money.
Any ideas where we should get energy from then? Maybe you could hook up a bicycle to a dynamo, and use your own energy to keep your lights on?
[quote][p][bold]toyota777[/bold] wrote: I would think anyone born and brought up in the area is shuddering at the thought of it. Only outsiders who have no love of the area would think of ruining it to make money.[/p][/quote]Any ideas where we should get energy from then? Maybe you could hook up a bicycle to a dynamo, and use your own energy to keep your lights on? PJC
  • Score: 0

2:44pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Oik1 says...

matt89 wrote:
Oik1 wrote:
With a little luck the whole solar farm idea on Wroughton Airfield will be kicked into touch, from a personal point of view I find them a blight on the landscape along with wind turbines, all this piecemeal 'doing the right thing' and 'green energy' feel good power comes at a price that few can afford,hence the recently cut levys on green power, no matter what spin is put on it.
If you want plentiful and cheap power then go down the greenest route and lets build more nuclear power stations and be done with it.
Do you know how long it takes to build a nuclear power station? and do you know the carbon and greenhouse gas implications of extracting uranium out of the ground? And where would we store the waste. I do agree we need nuclear energy but it has to be with a mix of other carbon free technologies.
Then the sooner we get started on building these nuclear power stations the better, our future depends on a long term, clean, efficient power supply that's always there when we need it and when it's in place, we make sure we are totaly self sufficient
As for extracting and storage, we do exactely the same as we are already doing now, nuclear power can replace all our energy needs and there is no earthly reason why it has to be mixed with 'feel good power', it can stand alone.
[quote][p][bold]matt89[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Oik1[/bold] wrote: With a little luck the whole solar farm idea on Wroughton Airfield will be kicked into touch, from a personal point of view I find them a blight on the landscape along with wind turbines, all this piecemeal 'doing the right thing' and 'green energy' feel good power comes at a price that few can afford,hence the recently cut levys on green power, no matter what spin is put on it. If you want plentiful and cheap power then go down the greenest route and lets build more nuclear power stations and be done with it.[/p][/quote]Do you know how long it takes to build a nuclear power station? and do you know the carbon and greenhouse gas implications of extracting uranium out of the ground? And where would we store the waste. I do agree we need nuclear energy but it has to be with a mix of other carbon free technologies.[/p][/quote]Then the sooner we get started on building these nuclear power stations the better, our future depends on a long term, clean, efficient power supply that's always there when we need it and when it's in place, we make sure we are totaly self sufficient As for extracting and storage, we do exactely the same as we are already doing now, nuclear power can replace all our energy needs and there is no earthly reason why it has to be mixed with 'feel good power', it can stand alone. Oik1
  • Score: 5

3:15pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Stantonlad says...

BCDR99 wrote:
Stantonlad wrote:
The danger is what may be o.k. With local people may not be o.k. With wider society. A public enquiry is the correct response. Look at Redlands Aiirfield , the people of Wanborough supported it, Swindon Borough Council permitted it and now the life's of residents around are blighted by noisy overflying of their homes every 20 minutes every weekend, all subsequent complaints have been brushed under the carpet by councillors and M.P.'s alike.
The people that live next door to the A419 are complaining about a few light aircraft? It's parachute jumps and motorised hang-gliders (weather permitting) a few days a week, in daylight hours only, not Heathrow Airport.
Bcdr99 rather than assuming, try the ability to think it will help you understand the other persons point of view
[quote][p][bold]BCDR99[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stantonlad[/bold] wrote: The danger is what may be o.k. With local people may not be o.k. With wider society. A public enquiry is the correct response. Look at Redlands Aiirfield , the people of Wanborough supported it, Swindon Borough Council permitted it and now the life's of residents around are blighted by noisy overflying of their homes every 20 minutes every weekend, all subsequent complaints have been brushed under the carpet by councillors and M.P.'s alike.[/p][/quote]The people that live next door to the A419 are complaining about a few light aircraft? It's parachute jumps and motorised hang-gliders (weather permitting) a few days a week, in daylight hours only, not Heathrow Airport.[/p][/quote]Bcdr99 rather than assuming, try the ability to think it will help you understand the other persons point of view Stantonlad
  • Score: 1

3:20pm Fri 4 Apr 14

Stantonlad says...

LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
Stantonlad wrote:
The danger is what may be o.k. With local people may not be o.k. With wider society. A public enquiry is the correct response. Look at Redlands Aiirfield , the people of Wanborough supported it, Swindon Borough Council permitted it and now the life's of residents around are blighted by noisy overflying of their homes every 20 minutes every weekend, all subsequent complaints have been brushed under the carpet by councillors and M.P.'s alike.
You'll probably find those making the most noise against the air field are those that moved after it was permitted as they thought they were moving to a quiet peaceful village when the reality is they didn't do their homework and check the area out properly. Have friends that live there and they are not bothered by the noise at all.
Lord ash of the brake? Rather than assuming which is what you have done try the ability to think it will help you understand other peoples point of view. In regards to your friends who "live near there" ? I am really pleased that they are not affected, but if they were you might attempt to empathise with them? Some how reading your tone I think not.
[quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stantonlad[/bold] wrote: The danger is what may be o.k. With local people may not be o.k. With wider society. A public enquiry is the correct response. Look at Redlands Aiirfield , the people of Wanborough supported it, Swindon Borough Council permitted it and now the life's of residents around are blighted by noisy overflying of their homes every 20 minutes every weekend, all subsequent complaints have been brushed under the carpet by councillors and M.P.'s alike.[/p][/quote]You'll probably find those making the most noise against the air field are those that moved after it was permitted as they thought they were moving to a quiet peaceful village when the reality is they didn't do their homework and check the area out properly. Have friends that live there and they are not bothered by the noise at all.[/p][/quote]Lord ash of the brake? Rather than assuming which is what you have done try the ability to think it will help you understand other peoples point of view. In regards to your friends who "live near there" ? I am really pleased that they are not affected, but if they were you might attempt to empathise with them? Some how reading your tone I think not. Stantonlad
  • Score: 1

3:52pm Fri 4 Apr 14

PJC says...

Oik1 wrote:
matt89 wrote:
Oik1 wrote:
With a little luck the whole solar farm idea on Wroughton Airfield will be kicked into touch, from a personal point of view I find them a blight on the landscape along with wind turbines, all this piecemeal 'doing the right thing' and 'green energy' feel good power comes at a price that few can afford,hence the recently cut levys on green power, no matter what spin is put on it.
If you want plentiful and cheap power then go down the greenest route and lets build more nuclear power stations and be done with it.
Do you know how long it takes to build a nuclear power station? and do you know the carbon and greenhouse gas implications of extracting uranium out of the ground? And where would we store the waste. I do agree we need nuclear energy but it has to be with a mix of other carbon free technologies.
Then the sooner we get started on building these nuclear power stations the better, our future depends on a long term, clean, efficient power supply that's always there when we need it and when it's in place, we make sure we are totaly self sufficient
As for extracting and storage, we do exactely the same as we are already doing now, nuclear power can replace all our energy needs and there is no earthly reason why it has to be mixed with 'feel good power', it can stand alone.
By what possible stretch of the imagination is nuclear power 'clean'?
[quote][p][bold]Oik1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]matt89[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Oik1[/bold] wrote: With a little luck the whole solar farm idea on Wroughton Airfield will be kicked into touch, from a personal point of view I find them a blight on the landscape along with wind turbines, all this piecemeal 'doing the right thing' and 'green energy' feel good power comes at a price that few can afford,hence the recently cut levys on green power, no matter what spin is put on it. If you want plentiful and cheap power then go down the greenest route and lets build more nuclear power stations and be done with it.[/p][/quote]Do you know how long it takes to build a nuclear power station? and do you know the carbon and greenhouse gas implications of extracting uranium out of the ground? And where would we store the waste. I do agree we need nuclear energy but it has to be with a mix of other carbon free technologies.[/p][/quote]Then the sooner we get started on building these nuclear power stations the better, our future depends on a long term, clean, efficient power supply that's always there when we need it and when it's in place, we make sure we are totaly self sufficient As for extracting and storage, we do exactely the same as we are already doing now, nuclear power can replace all our energy needs and there is no earthly reason why it has to be mixed with 'feel good power', it can stand alone.[/p][/quote]By what possible stretch of the imagination is nuclear power 'clean'? PJC
  • Score: -1

4:01pm Fri 4 Apr 14

matt89 says...

Oik1 wrote:
matt89 wrote:
Oik1 wrote:
With a little luck the whole solar farm idea on Wroughton Airfield will be kicked into touch, from a personal point of view I find them a blight on the landscape along with wind turbines, all this piecemeal 'doing the right thing' and 'green energy' feel good power comes at a price that few can afford,hence the recently cut levys on green power, no matter what spin is put on it.
If you want plentiful and cheap power then go down the greenest route and lets build more nuclear power stations and be done with it.
Do you know how long it takes to build a nuclear power station? and do you know the carbon and greenhouse gas implications of extracting uranium out of the ground? And where would we store the waste. I do agree we need nuclear energy but it has to be with a mix of other carbon free technologies.
Then the sooner we get started on building these nuclear power stations the better, our future depends on a long term, clean, efficient power supply that's always there when we need it and when it's in place, we make sure we are totaly self sufficient
As for extracting and storage, we do exactely the same as we are already doing now, nuclear power can replace all our energy needs and there is no earthly reason why it has to be mixed with 'feel good power', it can stand alone.
We can start as soon quickly as possible to build nuclear power station however it will take around 20 years to get them online and generating electricity. I do agree with you that we need to be self-sufficient however just nuclear is not the answer to the problem. If you were to do some research in to the UKs energy demand you would learn that we have a very variable energy demand that nuclear power could not solve, once you have a nuclear power station on you can just turn it off when you don’t need the power its producing! Storage is nowhere near the capacity that we need it to be and we are limited on the options. Hydro pumped storage is one but our country has already used all the pump storage sites in the UK. There is currently no other forms of storage suitable for the amount we would produce just using nuclear energy. What you would suggest then is to put a nuclear power station on the airfield instead? Or would that be aesthetically unpleasing? I think the real problem you have is that it may not look nice!
[quote][p][bold]Oik1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]matt89[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Oik1[/bold] wrote: With a little luck the whole solar farm idea on Wroughton Airfield will be kicked into touch, from a personal point of view I find them a blight on the landscape along with wind turbines, all this piecemeal 'doing the right thing' and 'green energy' feel good power comes at a price that few can afford,hence the recently cut levys on green power, no matter what spin is put on it. If you want plentiful and cheap power then go down the greenest route and lets build more nuclear power stations and be done with it.[/p][/quote]Do you know how long it takes to build a nuclear power station? and do you know the carbon and greenhouse gas implications of extracting uranium out of the ground? And where would we store the waste. I do agree we need nuclear energy but it has to be with a mix of other carbon free technologies.[/p][/quote]Then the sooner we get started on building these nuclear power stations the better, our future depends on a long term, clean, efficient power supply that's always there when we need it and when it's in place, we make sure we are totaly self sufficient As for extracting and storage, we do exactely the same as we are already doing now, nuclear power can replace all our energy needs and there is no earthly reason why it has to be mixed with 'feel good power', it can stand alone.[/p][/quote]We can start as soon quickly as possible to build nuclear power station however it will take around 20 years to get them online and generating electricity. I do agree with you that we need to be self-sufficient however just nuclear is not the answer to the problem. If you were to do some research in to the UKs energy demand you would learn that we have a very variable energy demand that nuclear power could not solve, once you have a nuclear power station on you can just turn it off when you don’t need the power its producing! Storage is nowhere near the capacity that we need it to be and we are limited on the options. Hydro pumped storage is one but our country has already used all the pump storage sites in the UK. There is currently no other forms of storage suitable for the amount we would produce just using nuclear energy. What you would suggest then is to put a nuclear power station on the airfield instead? Or would that be aesthetically unpleasing? I think the real problem you have is that it may not look nice! matt89
  • Score: 3

5:10pm Fri 4 Apr 14

LordAshOfTheBrake says...

Stantonlad wrote:
LordAshOfTheBrake wrote:
Stantonlad wrote:
The danger is what may be o.k. With local people may not be o.k. With wider society. A public enquiry is the correct response. Look at Redlands Aiirfield , the people of Wanborough supported it, Swindon Borough Council permitted it and now the life's of residents around are blighted by noisy overflying of their homes every 20 minutes every weekend, all subsequent complaints have been brushed under the carpet by councillors and M.P.'s alike.
You'll probably find those making the most noise against the air field are those that moved after it was permitted as they thought they were moving to a quiet peaceful village when the reality is they didn't do their homework and check the area out properly. Have friends that live there and they are not bothered by the noise at all.
Lord ash of the brake? Rather than assuming which is what you have done try the ability to think it will help you understand other peoples point of view. In regards to your friends who "live near there" ? I am really pleased that they are not affected, but if they were you might attempt to empathise with them? Some how reading your tone I think not.
So your saying that most of those complaining about the noise of the airfield are those that were living there before the airfield was granted permission.....?

The airfield has been there for 20 years.
[quote][p][bold]Stantonlad[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LordAshOfTheBrake[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stantonlad[/bold] wrote: The danger is what may be o.k. With local people may not be o.k. With wider society. A public enquiry is the correct response. Look at Redlands Aiirfield , the people of Wanborough supported it, Swindon Borough Council permitted it and now the life's of residents around are blighted by noisy overflying of their homes every 20 minutes every weekend, all subsequent complaints have been brushed under the carpet by councillors and M.P.'s alike.[/p][/quote]You'll probably find those making the most noise against the air field are those that moved after it was permitted as they thought they were moving to a quiet peaceful village when the reality is they didn't do their homework and check the area out properly. Have friends that live there and they are not bothered by the noise at all.[/p][/quote]Lord ash of the brake? Rather than assuming which is what you have done try the ability to think it will help you understand other peoples point of view. In regards to your friends who "live near there" ? I am really pleased that they are not affected, but if they were you might attempt to empathise with them? Some how reading your tone I think not.[/p][/quote]So your saying that most of those complaining about the noise of the airfield are those that were living there before the airfield was granted permission.....? The airfield has been there for 20 years. LordAshOfTheBrake
  • Score: 4

12:52am Sun 6 Apr 14

MrAngry says...

toyota777 wrote:
I would think anyone born and brought up in the area is shuddering at the thought of it. Only outsiders who have no love of the area would think of ruining it to make money.
I totally agree. A blot on one the nicest parts of the Swindon landscape.
[quote][p][bold]toyota777[/bold] wrote: I would think anyone born and brought up in the area is shuddering at the thought of it. Only outsiders who have no love of the area would think of ruining it to make money.[/p][/quote]I totally agree. A blot on one the nicest parts of the Swindon landscape. MrAngry
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree