Climate change and the environment
#TheFutureIsYours Leading the way for a more sustainable future
Improve protection of nature, environment, biodiversity and people when developping industrial wind power plantsin Europe
Industrial wind power relies on huge machines which can have important impacts on the environment, on the biodiversity, on the human beings and on the landscapes.
Wind turbines kill birds, bats, insects, cows, etc.
They make people and breeding sick
They require a huge amount of surface, materials and rare earths
They generate waste (blades) and pollution (oil, concrete in the ground, pollutants in the sea for offshore wind turbines, etc.)
They produce randomly and require fossil backup
They cost a lot and are associated to corruption
Europe must give priority to ecology and biodiversity and preservation of nature, over the develoment of an industry which is destryoing those.
Europe must also ensure that populations are accepting those projects in their living environment and that they are not built without a plain consensus.
Europe must support the development of alternatives. Even wind energy can be extracted with smaller machines on roofs, in cities, where grounds have already been artificiliazed.
If people prefer to destroy nature and biodioversity and put industrial wind power plants everywhere, fine for them, but I don't want to live in a place where industrials plants have replaced nature.
Related Events
Floods and storms. What is Europe doing? What consequences for our portfolio?
Sustainable Development Meetings
Meeting “A route from Italy for Europe — The Manifesto of Assisi” — Cycle of meetings “The Green Deal is us”
Conference on the Geopolitics of the European Green Deal
The Environmental Transition
Restoring biodiversity and reducing pollution: Cyprus’ actions and the European Green Deal
Related media
Endorsed by
Account deleted by user
Account deleted by user
and 33 more people (see more) (see less)
Account deleted by user
Account deleted by user
and 34 more people (see more) (see less)
Fingerprint
The piece of text below is a shortened, hashed representation of this content. It's useful to ensure the content hasn't been tampered with, as a single modification would result in a totally different value.
Value:
a034584a32d9b9b0dac43907be038b716b776181fc5bbcdfe3934da877180748
Source:
{"body":{"en":"Industrial wind power relies on huge machines which can have important impacts on the environment, on the biodiversity, on the human beings and on the landscapes.\n\nWind turbines kill birds, bats, insects, cows, etc.\nThey make people and breeding sick\nThey require a huge amount of surface, materials and rare earths\nThey generate waste (blades) and pollution (oil, concrete in the ground, pollutants in the sea for offshore wind turbines, etc.)\nThey produce randomly and require fossil backup\nThey cost a lot and are associated to corruption\n\nEurope must give priority to ecology and biodiversity and preservation of nature, over the develoment of an industry which is destryoing those.\n\nEurope must also ensure that populations are accepting those projects in their living environment and that they are not built without a plain consensus.\n\nEurope must support the development of alternatives. Even wind energy can be extracted with smaller machines on roofs, in cities, where grounds have already been artificiliazed.\n\nIf people prefer to destroy nature and biodioversity and put industrial wind power plants everywhere, fine for them, but I don't want to live in a place where industrials plants have replaced nature.","machine_translations":{"bg":"Промишлената вятърна енергия разчита на огромни машини, които могат да окажат значително въздействие върху околната среда, биологичното разнообразие, хората и ландшафта. Вятърните турбини убиват птици, прилепи, насекоми, крави и т.н. Те правят хората и се разболеят. Те се нуждаят от огромно количество повърхност, материали и редкоземни метали Те генерират отпадъци (бладове) и замърсяване (нефт, бетон в почвата, замърсители в морето за вятърни турбини в морето и т.н.). Те произвеждат на случаен принцип и се нуждаят от изкопаеми горива. Те струват много и са свързани с корупцията, Европа трябва да даде приоритет на екологията и биологичното разнообразие, както и на опазването на природата, пред развлекателната промишленост. Европа трябва също така да гарантира, че населението приема тези проекти в своята жизнена среда и че те не се изграждат без ясен консенсус. Европа трябва да подкрепя разработването на алтернативи. Дори вятърната енергия може да се добива с по-малки машини на покривите в градовете, където вече има изкуство. Ако хората предпочитат да унищожат природата и биологичното обособяване и навсякъде да залагат промишлени вятърни централи, те ще бъдат глобени, но не искам да живея на място, където промишлените предприятия са заменили природата.","cs":"Průmyslová větrná energie závisí na obrovských strojích, které mohou mít významný dopad na životní prostředí, biologickou rozmanitost, lidské bytosti a krajinu. Větrné turbíny zabíjejí ptáky, netopýry, hmyz, krávy atd. Mají lidi a chov nemocné. Vyžadují obrovské množství povrchu, materiálů a vzácných zemin. Produkují velké množství odpadu (blade) a znečištění (ropa, beton v zemi, znečišťující látky v moři pro větrné turbíny na moři atd.) Produkují náhodně a vyžadují velké množství fosilních zdrojů. Produkují se hodně a jsou spojeny s korupcí, Evropa musí upřednostňovat ekologii a biologickou rozmanitost a zachování přírody, což je před průmyslem. Evropa musí rovněž zajistit, aby obyvatelstvo tyto projekty přijímalo ve svém životním prostředí a aby nebyly budovány bez jasného konsenzu. Evropa musí podporovat rozvoj alternativ. Dokonce i větrnou energii lze těžit menšími stroji na střechách, ve městech, kde již byly artiliazovány. Pokud lidé raději ničí přírodu a biologickou rozmanitost a rozdělují průmyslové větrné elektrárny všude, nechci za ně žít v místě, kde nahradily průmyslové závody přírodu.","da":"Industriel vindkraft er afhængig af enorme maskiner, som kan have stor indvirkning på miljøet, biodiversiteten, mennesket og landskaberne. Vindmøller dræber fugle, flagermus, insekter, køer osv. De gør mennesker og yngler syge. De har brug for en enorm mængde overflade-, materiale- og sjældne jordarter. De genererer affald (blade) og forurening (olie, beton i jorden, forurenende stoffer i havet til havvindmøller osv.) De producerer tilfældigt og kræver fossilt backup. De koster meget og er forbundet med korruption i Europa skal prioritere økologi, biodiversitet og naturbevarelse frem for den delikate industri. Europa skal også sikre, at befolkningerne accepterer disse projekter i deres boligmiljø, og at de ikke bygges uden en klar konsensus. Europa skal støtte udviklingen af alternativer. Selv vindenergi kan udvindes med mindre maskiner på tage, i byer, hvor grundene allerede er blevet udnyttet. Hvis folk foretrækker at ødelægge naturen og biodioxiden og sætte industrielle vindmøller overalt, vil jeg ikke bo et sted, hvor industrianlæg har erstattet naturen.","de":"Die industrielle Windkraft stützt sich auf riesige Maschinen, die erhebliche Auswirkungen auf die Umwelt, die biologische Vielfalt, den Menschen und die Landschaft haben können. Windturbinen töten Vögel, Fledermäuse, Insekten, Kühe usw. Sie machen Menschen und Zucht krank. Sie benötigen eine enorme Menge an Oberfläche, Materialien und seltenen Erden. Sie verursachen Abfälle (Blätter) und Umweltverschmutzung (Öl, Beton im Boden, Schadstoffe im Meer für Offshore-Windkraftanlagen usw.). Sie produzieren zufällig und benötigen fossile Reserven. Sie kostet viel und steht in Verbindung mit der Korruption in Europa und muss der Ökologie, der biologischen Vielfalt und der Erhaltung der Natur Vorrang vor der Entwicklung einer solchen Industrie geben. Europa muss auch dafür sorgen, dass die Bevölkerung diese Projekte in ihrem Lebensumfeld akzeptiert und dass sie nicht ohne einen klaren Konsens gebaut werden. Europa muss die Entwicklung von Alternativen unterstützen. Selbst Windenergie kann mit kleineren Maschinen auf Dächern in Städten gefördert werden, in denen bereits Gelände künstlich genutzt wurden. Wenn Menschen die Natur und die Biodioversität zerstören und überall Windkraftanlagen für Industrieanlagen einsetzen wollen, möchte ich nicht an einem Ort leben, an dem Industrieanlagen die Natur ersetzt haben.","el":"Η βιομηχανική αιολική ενέργεια βασίζεται σε τεράστια μηχανήματα που μπορούν να έχουν σημαντικές επιπτώσεις στο περιβάλλον, στη βιοποικιλότητα, στους ανθρώπους και στα τοπία. Οι ανεμογεννήτριες σκοτώνουν τα πουλιά, τις νυχτερίδες, τα έντομα, τις αγελάδες κ.λπ. Οι ανεμογεννήτριες καθιστούν τους ανθρώπους και αναρρωρώνουν τεράστιο αριθμό επιφανειών, υλικών και σπάνιων γαιών που παράγουν απόβλητα (πτερύγια) και ρύπανση (πετρέλαιο, σκυρόδεμα στο έδαφος, ρύποι στη θάλασσα για τις υπεράκτιες ανεμογεννήτριες κ.λπ.) παράγουν τυχαία και απαιτούν ορυκτά εφεδρικά αντίγραφα. Οι ανεμογεννήτριες κοστίζουν πολύ και συνδέονται με τη διαφθορά, η Ευρώπη πρέπει να δώσει προτεραιότητα στην οικολογία, τη βιοποικιλότητα και τη διατήρηση της φύσης, πέρα από την ανάπτυξη μιας βιομηχανίας που καταστρέφεται. Η Ευρώπη πρέπει επίσης να διασφαλίσει ότι οι πληθυσμοί αποδέχονται τα έργα αυτά στο περιβάλλον διαβίωσής τους και ότι δεν οικοδομούνται χωρίς πλήρη συναίνεση. Η Ευρώπη πρέπει να στηρίξει την ανάπτυξη εναλλακτικών λύσεων. Ακόμη και η αιολική ενέργεια μπορεί να εξορύσσεται με μικρότερα μηχανήματα σε στέγες, σε πόλεις όπου υπάρχουν ήδη τεχνητοί χώροι. Αν οι άνθρωποι προτιμούν να καταστρέφουν τη φύση και τη βιοδιόγκωση και να τοποθετούν τους βιομηχανικούς αιολικούς σταθμούς παντού, λεπτά για αυτούς, αλλά δεν θέλω να ζω σε έναν τόπο όπου τα βιομηχανικά φυτά έχουν αντικαταστήσει τη φύση.","en":"Industrial wind power links on huge machines which are bad for the environment, bad for the biodiversity, bad for the human beings, bad for the landscape. Wind turbines kill birds, bats, insects, cows, etc. They make people and breeding sick They require a quantity of surface, materials and rare Earths They generate waste (blades) and pollution (oil, concrete in the ground, pollutants in the sea for offshore wind turbines, etc.) They produce randomly and require fossil back They cost a lot and associated to corruption Europe must put up the maximum biodiversity, biodiversity priority. No are alternatives. Even wind energy can be extracted with smaller machines on roofs, in cities. I want to live in a place where industry has relocated nature, everywhere.","es":"La energía eólica industrial se basa en grandes máquinas que pueden tener importantes repercusiones en el medio ambiente, la biodiversidad, los seres humanos y los paisajes. Las turbinas eólicas matan aves, murciélagos, insectos, vacas, etc. Necesitan una enorme cantidad de superficie, materiales y tierras raras que generan residuos (álabes) y contaminación (petróleo, hormigón en el suelo, contaminantes en el mar para turbinas eólicas marinas, etc.). Las turbinas eólicas producen aleatoriamente y necesitan apoyo fósil. Europa también debe velar por que las poblaciones acepten estos proyectos en su entorno vital y por que no se construyan sin un consenso sencillo. Europa debe apoyar el desarrollo de alternativas. Incluso la energía eólica puede extraerse con máquinas más pequeñas en tejados, en ciudades donde ya se han artificial los terrenos. Si las personas prefieren destruir la naturaleza y la biodisosidad y poner a las centrales eólicas industriales en todas partes, penalizarlas, pero no quiero vivir en un lugar en el que las plantas industriales hayan sustituido a la naturaleza.","et":"Tööstuslik tuuleenergia sõltub tohututest masinatest, millel võib olla oluline mõju keskkonnale, bioloogilisele mitmekesisusele, inimestele ja maastikele. Tuuleturbiinid hävitavad linnud, nahkhiired, putukad, lehmad jne. Nad muudavad inimesed ja pesitsevad haigeks. Nad vajavad tohutul hulgal pinda, materjale ja haruldasi muldmetalle. Nad tekitavad jäätmeid (plaate) ja saastavad (muld, betoon maapinnal, mere saasteained avamere tuulegeneraatorite jaoks jne). Nad toodavad juhumeetodil ja vajavad fossiilset varu. Nad maksavad palju ning on seotud Euroopa korruptsiooniga. Nad peavad pidama esmatähtsaks ökoloogiat ja bioloogilist mitmekesisust ning looduse säilitamist. Samuti peab Euroopa tagama, et elanikud võtavad need projektid oma elukeskkonnas vastu ja et neid ei ehitata ilma selge konsensuseta. Euroopa peab toetama alternatiivide väljatöötamist. Isegi tuuleenergiat saab kaevandada väiksemate masinatega katustel linnades, kus alad on juba kunstlikud. Kui inimesed eelistavad looduse ja bioloogilise mitmekesisuse hävitamist ning tööstuslike tuuleelektrijaamade paigaldamist kõikjale, siis nende eest trahvida, kuid ma ei taha elada kohas, kus tööstusettevõtted on loodust asendanud.","fi":"Teollisuustuulivoima perustuu valtaviin koneisiin, joilla voi olla merkittäviä vaikutuksia ympäristöön, biologiseen monimuotoisuuteen, ihmisiin ja maisemaan. Tuuliturbiinit tappavat lintuja, lepakoita, hyönteisiä, lehmiä jne. Ne tekevät ihmisiä ja lisääntymissairaita. Ne tarvitsevat valtavan määrän pintaa, materiaalia ja harvinaisia maametalleja. Ne tuottavat jätettä (saarteita) ja saastumista (maaperässä oleva öljy, betoni, merituulivoimaloiden saasteet jne.). Ne tuottavat satunnaisesti ja vaativat fossiilisia varaosia. Ne ovat yhteydessä korruptioon, jonka vuoksi Euroopan on asetettava ekologian ja luonnon monimuotoisuuden eksekologian ja luonnon monimuotoisuuden säilyttämisen eekologian ja luonnon monimuotoisuuden edelle. Euroopan on myös varmistettava, että väestö hyväksyy nämä hankkeet elinympäristössään ja että niitä ei rakenneta ilman selkeää yksimielisyyttä. Euroopan on tuettava vaihtoehtojen kehittämistä. Myös tuulienergiaa voidaan hyödyntää pienemmillä koneilla katoilla kaupungeissa, joissa maaperää on jo rakennettu. Jos ihmiset mieluummin tuhoavat luonnon ja biologisen monimuotoisuuden ja sijoittavat teollisuustuulivoimalat kaikkialle alueelle, minä en halua elää paikassa, jossa teollisuuslaitokset ovat korvanneet luontoa.","fr":"L’énergie éolienne industrielle repose sur d’énormes machines qui peuvent avoir des incidences importantes sur l’environnement, la biodiversité, les êtres humains et les paysages. Les éoliennes tuent des oiseaux, des chauves-souris, des insectes, des vaches, etc. Ils rendent les gens malades. Ils nécessitent énormément de surface, de matériaux et de terres rares. Ils génèrent des déchets (pales) et de pollution (pétrole, béton dans le sol, polluants dans la mer pour les éoliennes en mer, etc.). Ils produisent de manière aléatoire et nécessitent un soutien fossile. Ils coûtent beaucoup et sont associés à la corruption. L’Europe doit accorder la priorité à l’écologie et à la biodiversité et à la préservation de la nature par rapport au développement d’une industrie désespérée. L’Europe doit également veiller à ce que les populations acceptent ces projets dans leur environnement de vie et à ce qu’elles ne soient pas construites sans un consensus clair. L’Europe doit soutenir le développement de solutions de remplacement. Même l’énergie éolienne peut être extraite à l’aide de machines plus petites sur les toits, dans les villes où des motifs ont déjà été artificialisés. Si les gens préfèrent détruire la nature et la biodiabolité et mettre des centrales éoliennes industrielles partout dans le monde, je ne veux pas vivre dans un lieu où les plantes industrielles ont remplacé la nature.","ga":"Braitheann cumhacht na gaoithe tionsclaíche ar mheaisíní ollmhóra a d’fhéadfadh tionchar tábhachtach a imirt ar an gcomhshaol, ar an mbithéagsúlacht, ar dhaoine daonna agus ar na tírdhreacha. Tuirbíní gaoithe a mharú éin, sciatháin leathair, feithidí, ba, etc. a dhéanann siad daoine agus tinn Ní mór dóibh méid ollmhór de dhromchla, ábhair agus cré neamhchoitianta Gineann siad dramhaíl (lades) agus truailliú (ola, coincréit sa talamh, truailleáin san fharraige le haghaidh tuirbíní gaoithe amach ón gcósta, etc.) Táirgeann siad go randamach agus a cheangal ar cúltaca iontaise Tá siad costas go leor agus a bhaineann le éilliú Ní mór don Eoraip tosaíocht a thabhairt éiceolaíocht agus bithéagsúlacht agus caomhnú an dúlra, thar an díograis. Ní mór don Eoraip a chinntiú freisin go nglacann pobail leis na tionscadail sin ina dtimpeallacht maireachtála agus nach dtógtar iad gan chomhthoil. Ní mór don Eoraip tacú le forbairt na roghanna malartacha. Is féidir Fiú fuinneamh gaoithe a bhaintear le meaisíní níos lú ar dhíonta, i gcathracha, i gcás ina bhfuil forais artificiliazed cheana féin. Más fearr le daoine nádúr agus bithdhomhaltas a scriosadh agus a chur ar ghléasraí cumhachta gaoithe tionsclaíocha i ngach áit, fíneáil dóibh, ach níl mé ag iarraidh chun cónaí in áit ina bhfuil plandaí tionscail in ionad nádúr.","hr":"Industrijska energija vjetra oslanja se na velike strojeve koji mogu imati važan utjecaj na okoliš, bioraznolikost, ljude i krajolike. Vjetroturbine ubijaju ptice, šišmiše, insekte, krave itd. One čine ljude i oslabljene. Za njih je potrebna velika količina površinskih, materijalnih i rijetkih zemnih ležišta. One stvaraju otpad (biljke) i zagađenje (nafta, beton na tlu, onečišćujuće tvari u moru za odobalne vjetroturbine itd.) Proizvodi se nasumce i za njih je potrebna potpora iz fosilnih izvora. Europa također mora osigurati da stanovništvo prihvati te projekte u svojem životnom okruženju i da ne bude izgrađeno bez jasnog konsenzusa. Europa mora podupirati razvoj alternativa. Čak i energija vjetra može se vaditi s pomoću manjih strojeva na krovovima, u gradovima u kojima su terene već izražene. Ako ljudi žele uništiti prirodu i biodirryju i posvuda postaviti industrijske vjetroelektrane, kažnjeni su za njih, ali ne želim živjeti na mjestu gdje su industrijska postrojenja zamijenila prirodu.","hu":"Az ipari szélenergia hatalmas gépekre támaszkodik, amelyek jelentős hatást gyakorolhatnak a környezetre, a biológiai sokféleségre, az emberekre és a tájakra. A szélturbinák elpusztítják a madarakat, denevéreket, rovarokat, teheneket stb. Az embert és a tenyészetet rengeteg felszínre, anyagra és ritkaföldfémre használják fel. Ezek hulladékot (hólyagokat) és szennyezést (olaj, beton a talajban, tengeri szélturbinák szennyező anyagai stb.) termelnek. Szerepegetik a fosszilis tartalékokat. Sokba kerül a korrupció, és Európának elsőbbséget kell adnia az ökológiának, a biológiai sokféleségnek és a természet megőrzésének. Európának azt is biztosítania kell, hogy a lakosság a saját lakókörnyezetében fogadja el ezeket a projekteket, és hogy azok ne épüljenek fel egyszerű konszenzus nélkül. Európának támogatnia kell az alternatívák kifejlesztését. Még a szélenergiát is ki lehet nyerni kisebb gépek segítségével a tetőken, a városokban, ahol már művelt terület volt. Ha az emberek a természetet és a biológiai sokféleséget kívánják megsemmisíteni, és mindenütt ipari szélerőműveket helyeznek el rájuk, nem akarok olyan helyen élni, ahol az ipari létesítmények helyettesítették a természetet.","it":"L'energia eolica industriale si basa su enormi macchine che possono avere un impatto importante sull'ambiente, sulla biodiversità, sugli esseri umani e sui paesaggi. Le turbine eoliche uccidono uccelli, pipistrelli, insetti, mucche, ecc. Fanno persone e allevano malati. Esse richiedono una grande quantità di superficie, materiali e terre rare. Esse generano rifiuti (pale) e inquinano (petrolio, calcestruzzo nel suolo, inquinanti in mare per le turbine eoliche offshore, ecc.). Esse producono in modo casuale e necessitano di risorse fossili. Esse costano molto e sono associate alla corruzione. L'Europa deve dare la priorità all'ecologia e alla biodiversità e alla conservazione della natura, rispetto allo sviluppo di un'industria che fa peggio. L'Europa deve inoltre garantire che le popolazioni accettino tali progetti nel loro ambiente di vita e che non siano costruiti senza un chiaro consenso. L'Europa deve sostenere lo sviluppo di alternative. Anche l'energia eolica può essere estratta con macchine più piccole sui tetti, nelle città, dove i motivi sono già stati artificializzati. Se le persone preferiscono distruggere la natura e la biodioverità e mettere ovunque le centrali eoliche industriali, multano per loro, ma non voglio vivere in un luogo in cui gli impianti industriali hanno sostituito la natura.","lt":"Pramoninė vėjo energija priklauso nuo milžiniškų mašinų, kurios gali daryti didelį poveikį aplinkai, biologinei įvairovei, žmonėms ir kraštovaizdžiui. Dėl vėjo turbinų žūsta paukščiai, šikšnosparniai, vabzdžiai, karvės ir t. t. Jos žmonėms ir veisimuisi daro didžiulį kiekį paviršiaus, medžiagų ir retųjų žemių elementų. Dėl jų susidaro atliekų (blades) ir užteršiama (nafta, betonas žemėje, jūros vėjo jėgainių teršalai ir t. t.) jos gamina atsitiktine tvarka ir reikalauja daug iškastinio kuro atsarginių kopijų. Jos yra susijusios su korupcija Europoje pirmenybę teikiant ekologijai ir biologinei įvairovei bei gamtos išsaugojimui. Europa taip pat turi užtikrinti, kad gyventojai priimtų šiuos projektus savo gyvenamojoje aplinkoje ir kad jie nebūtų statomi be bendro sutarimo. Europa turi remti alternatyvų kūrimą. Net vėjo energiją galima išgauti naudojant mažesnes mašinas ant stogų, miestuose, kur žemės jau yra praturtintos. Jei žmonės norėtų sunaikinti gamtą ir biologinį tankumą ir visur statyti pramonines vėjo jėgaines, jiems bus skiriama bauda, tačiau nenoriu gyventi vietoje, kurioje pramonės įmonės pakeitė gamtą.","lv":"Rūpnieciskā vēja enerģija ir atkarīga no milzīgām iekārtām, kas var būtiski ietekmēt vidi, bioloģisko daudzveidību, cilvēkus un ainavas. Vējturbīnas nonāvē putnus, sikspārņus, kukaiņus, govis u. c. Tās padara cilvēkus un audzēju slimus. Tās prasa lielu daudzumu virsmas, materiālu un retzemju. Tās rada atkritumus (blādi) un piesārņojumu (nafta, zemes betons, jūras piesārņojums atkrastes vējturbīnās u. c.). Tie rada nejaušu ražošanu un nepieciešamību pēc fosilās rezerves. Eiropai ir arī jānodrošina, ka iedzīvotāji pieņem šos projektus savā dzīves vidē un ka tie netiek būvēti bez vienkāršas vienprātības. Eiropai jāatbalsta alternatīvu risinājumu izstrāde. Pat vēja enerģiju var iegūt, izmantojot mazākas iekārtas uz jumtiem, pilsētās, kur jau ir attīstīts pamatojums. Ja cilvēki labprātāk iznīcinās dabu un biodaudzveidību un visur ielikšu rūpnieciskās vēja spēkstacijas, par tām maksāju, bet es negribu dzīvot vietā, kur industriālās rūpnīcas ir aizstājušas dabu.","mt":"L-enerġija mir-riħ industrijali tiddependi fuq magni enormi li jista’ jkollhom impatti importanti fuq l-ambjent, fuq il-bijodiversità, fuq il-bnedmin u fuq il-pajsaġġi. It-turbini tar-riħ joqtlu l-għasafar, il-friefet il-lejl, l-insetti, il-baqar, eċċ. Dawn jagħmlu n-nies u jreddgħu morda. Huma jeħtieġu ammont kbir ta’ superfiċje, materjali u elementi terrestri rari. Huma jiġġeneraw skart (xfafar) u tniġġis (żejt, konkrit fl-art, sustanzi niġġiesa fil-baħar għal turbini tar-riħ lil hinn mill-kosta, eċċ.) Jipproduċu b’mod aleatorju u jirrikjedu backup tal-fossili. Huma jiswew ħafna flus u huma assoċjati mal-korruzzjoni, l-Ewropa għandha tagħti prijorità lill-ekoloġija u lill-bijodiversità u lill-preservazzjoni tan-natura, u dawn jipproduċu b’mod aleatorju u jeħtieġu backup fossili. Huma jiswew ħafna u huma assoċjati mal-korruzzjoni, li l-Ewropa għandha tagħti prijorità lill-ekoloġija u lill-bijodiversità u lid-desreservazzjoni tan-natura, li jeħtieġu appoġġ fossili. L-Ewropa trid tiżgura wkoll li l-popolazzjonijiet jaċċettaw dawk il-proġetti fl-ambjent tal-għajxien tagħhom u li ma jinbnewx mingħajr kunsens ċar. L-Ewropa għandha tappoġġja l-iżvilupp ta’ alternattivi. Anke l-enerġija mir-riħ tista’ tiġi estratta b’magni iżgħar fuq il-bjut, fl-ibliet, fejn diġà ġew artifiċjalizzati. Jekk in-nies jippreferu jeqirdu n-natura u l-bijodioversità u jpoġġu l-impjanti tal-enerġija mir-riħ industrijali kullimkien, fina għalihom, iżda ma rridx ngħix f’post fejn l-impjanti industrijali ħadu post in-natura.","nl":"Industriële windenergie is afhankelijk van enorme machines die belangrijke gevolgen kunnen hebben voor het milieu, de biodiversiteit, de mens en het landschap. Windturbines doden vogels, vleermuizen, insecten, koeien, enz. Zij maken mensen en veeteelt ziek. Zij hebben een enorme hoeveelheid oppervlakte, materialen en zeldzame aardmetalen nodig. Zij veroorzaken afval (blades) en vervuiling (olie, beton in de bodem, verontreinigende stoffen in zee voor offshore-windturbines, enz.). Ze produceren aselect en hebben een grote behoefte aan fossiele back-up. Zij hebben veel kosten en zijn in verband gebracht met corruptie. Europa moet er ook voor zorgen dat de bevolking deze projecten accepteert in hun leefomgeving en dat ze niet zonder een duidelijke consensus worden gebouwd. Europa moet de ontwikkeling van alternatieven ondersteunen. Ook windenergie kan worden gewonnen met kleinere machines op daken, in steden waar gronden reeds zijn gekunsteld. Als mensen er de voorkeur aan geven natuur en biodioverentie te vernietigen en overal industriële windmolenparken te plaatsen, fijn voor hen, maar ik wil niet wonen op een plaats waar industriecentrales de natuur hebben vervangen.","pl":"Przemysłowa energia wiatrowa opiera się na ogromnych maszynach, które mogą mieć istotny wpływ na środowisko, różnorodność biologiczną, ludzi i krajobrazy. Turbiny wiatrowe zabijają ptaki, nietoperze, owady, krowy itp. Spowodują, że ludzie i choroby lęgowe wymagają ogromnej ilości powierzchni, materiałów i metali ziem rzadkich. Wytwarzają one ogromne ilości odpadów (blady) i zanieczyszczenia (olej, beton w ziemi, zanieczyszczenia morza w przypadku morskich turbin wiatrowych itp.) Wytwarzają one losowo i wymagają zapasu kopalnego. Kosztują one wiele i są związane z korupcją. Europa musi również zadbać o to, by ludność akceptowała te projekty w swoim środowisku życia i aby nie były one tworzone bez wyraźnego konsensusu. Europa musi wspierać rozwój rozwiązań alternatywnych. Nawet energia wiatrowa może być wydobywana mniejszymi maszynami na dachach, w miastach, gdzie istnieją już sztuczną ziemię. Jeśli ludzie wolą niszczyć przyrodę i bioróżnorodność oraz stawiać przemysłowe elektrownie wiatrowe wszędzie, karać za nie, ale nie chcę żyć w miejscu, w którym zakłady przemysłowe zastąpiły przyrodę.","pt":"A energia eólica industrial depende de grandes máquinas que podem ter impactos importantes no ambiente, na biodiversidade, nos seres humanos e nas paisagens. As turbinas eólicas matam aves, morcegos, insetos, vacas, etc. Efetuam pessoas e doenças reprodutivas. Efetuam uma enorme quantidade de superfície, materiais e terras raras. Devem gerar resíduos (pás) e poluição (petróleo, betão no solo, poluentes no mar para turbinas eólicas offshore, etc.) produzindo aleatoriamente e necessitando de apoio fóssil. Prejuízos e estão associados à corrupção, a Europa tem de dar prioridade à ecologia, à biodiversidade e à preservação da natureza, em detrimento dos terrenos da indústria. A Europa deve também garantir que as populações aceitam esses projetos no seu ambiente de vida e que não são construídos sem um consenso claro. A Europa deve apoiar o desenvolvimento de alternativas. Mesmo a energia eólica pode ser extraída com máquinas mais pequenas em telhados, em cidades onde já existem motivos artificiais. Se as pessoas preferem destruir a natureza e a biodioversidade e colocar as centrais eólicas industriais em todo o mundo, penso por elas, mas não quero viver num local onde as instalações industriais tenham substituído a natureza.","ro":"Energia eoliană industrială se bazează pe utilaje uriașe, care pot avea un impact important asupra mediului, biodiversității, ființelor umane și peisajelor. Turbinele eoliene ucid păsările, liliecii, insectele, vacile etc. Ele fac oameni bolnavi și necesită o cantitate uriașă de suprafață, materiale și pământuri rare. Acestea generează deșeuri (lame) și poluare (petrol, beton în sol, poluanți în mare pentru turbinele eoliene offshore etc.). Ele produc în mod aleatoriu și necesită o rezervă fosilă. Acestea costă mult și sunt asociate corupției, iar Europa trebuie să acorde prioritate ecologiei și biodiversității, precum și conservării naturii, față de develomful unei industrii care le costă mult. Europa trebuie, de asemenea, să se asigure că populația acceptă aceste proiecte în mediul lor de viață și că acestea nu sunt construite fără un consens clar. Europa trebuie să sprijine dezvoltarea de alternative. Chiar și energia eoliană poate fi extrasă cu ajutorul unor utilaje mai mici pe acoperișuri, în orașe unde există deja motive artificiale. Dacă oamenii preferă să distrugă natura și biodioverumitatea și să instaleze centrale eoliene industriale pretutindeni, amenda pentru acestea, dar nu vreau să locuiesc într-un loc în care instalațiile industriale au înlocuit natura.","sk":"Priemyselná veterná energia sa opiera o obrovské stroje, ktoré môžu mať významný vplyv na životné prostredie, biodiverzitu, ľudské bytosti a krajinu. Veterné turbíny zabíjajú vtáky, netopiere, hmyz, kravy atď. Znechávajú ľudí a hniezd. Vyžadujú obrovské množstvo povrchu, materiálov a vzácnych zemín. Vytvárajú odpad (blady) a znečisťujú (ropa, betón v zemi, znečisťujúce látky v mori pre veterné turbíny na mori atď.) Vyrábajú si náhodne a vyžadujú si úhrnné fosílne suroviny. Sú spojené s korupciou Európy musia uprednostniť ekológiu a biodiverzitu, ako aj ochranu prírody. Európa musí tiež zabezpečiť, aby obyvatelia prijímali tieto projekty vo svojom životnom prostredí a aby neboli postavené bez jasného konsenzu. Európa musí podporovať rozvoj alternatív. Dokonca aj veterná energia sa dá ťažiť z menších strojov na strechách v mestách, kde už boli vykonštruované plochy. Ak chcú ľudia zničiť prírodu a biodiverzitu a umiestniť priemyselné veterné elektrárne všade, nechcú za nich žiť, nechcem však žiť na mieste, kde priemyselné závody nahradili prírodu.","sl":"Industrijska vetrna energija je odvisna od ogromnih strojev, ki lahko pomembno vplivajo na okolje, biotsko raznovrstnost, ljudi in krajine. Vetrne turbine ubijejo ptice, netopirje, žuželke, krave itd. Poškodujejo ljudi in obolele. Zaradi njih so potrebne ogromne površine, materiali in redke zemljine. Ti ustvarjajo veliko odpadkov (blade) in onesnažujejo (olje, beton v zemlji, onesnaževala v morju za vetrne turbine na morju itd.) Naključno proizvajajo in zahtevajo fosilno rezervno podporo. Ti stroški so zelo dragi in povezani s korupcijo, mora Evropa dati prednost ekologiji in biotski raznovrstnosti ter ohranjanju narave, pred dezurstvom, kot so propadanje. Evropa mora tudi zagotoviti, da prebivalstvo te projekte sprejema v svojem življenjskem okolju in da ti projekti niso zgrajeni brez jasnega soglasja. Evropa mora podpirati razvoj alternativ. Celo vetrno energijo je mogoče pridobiti z manjšimi stroji na strehah v mestih, kjer so bila zemljišča že umetno utrjena. Če ljudje raje uničujejo naravo in biotsko raznovrstnost ter povsod postavijo industrijske vetrne elektrarne, jim naloži globo, vendar ne želim živeti v kraju, kjer so industrijski obrati zamenjali naravo.","sv":"Den industriella vindkraften är beroende av enorma maskiner som kan ha stor inverkan på miljön, den biologiska mångfalden, människan och landskapet. Vindturbiner dödar fåglar, fladdermöss, insekter, kor osv. De gör människor och sjuka. De kräver en enorm mängd yta, material och sällsynta jordartsmetaller. De genererar avfall (blad) och föroreningar (olja, betong i marken, föroreningar i havet för vindturbiner till havs osv.) De producerar slumpmässigt och kräver fossila backup. De kostar mycket och är kopplade till korruption i Europa måste prioritera ekologi, biologisk mångfald och naturskydd, framför utvecklingen av en industri. Europa måste också se till att befolkningen accepterar dessa projekt i sin livsmiljö och att de inte byggs utan ett tydligt samförstånd. Europa måste stödja utvecklingen av alternativ. Även vindkraft kan utvinnas med mindre maskiner på tak, i städer där marken redan har byggts upp. Om människor föredrar att förstöra naturen och biodiöversiteten och placera industriella vindkraftverk överallt, bötfällt för dem, men jag vill inte bo på en plats där industrianläggningar har ersatt naturen."}},"title":{"en":"Improve protection of nature, environment, biodiversity and people when developping industrial wind power plantsin Europe","machine_translations":{"bg":"Подобряване на опазването на природата, околната среда, биологичното разнообразие и хората при разработването на промишлени вятърни електроцентрали в Европа","cs":"Zlepšit ochranu přírody, životního prostředí, biologické rozmanitosti a lidí při výstavbě průmyslových větrných elektráren v Evropě","da":"Forbedre beskyttelsen af natur, miljø, biodiversitet og mennesker i forbindelse med udvikling af industrielle vindkraftanlæg i Europa","de":"Verbesserung des Schutzes der Natur, der Umwelt, der biologischen Vielfalt und der Menschen bei der Entwicklung industrieller Windkraftanlagen in Europa","el":"Βελτίωση της προστασίας της φύσης, του περιβάλλοντος, της βιοποικιλότητας και των ανθρώπων κατά την ανάπτυξη βιομηχανικών εγκαταστάσεων αιολικής ενέργειας στην Ευρώπη","en":"Top wind power in Europe","es":"Mejorar la protección de la naturaleza, el medio ambiente, la biodiversidad y las personas en el desarrollo de centrales eólicas industriales en Europa","et":"Parandada looduse, keskkonna, bioloogilise mitmekesisuse ja inimeste kaitset tööstuslike tuuleelektrijaamade arendamisel Euroopas","fi":"Parannetaan luonnon, ympäristön, luonnon monimuotoisuuden ja ihmisten suojelua, kun kehitetään teollisia tuulivoimaloita Euroopassa","fr":"Améliorer la protection de la nature, de l’environnement, de la biodiversité et de la population lors du développement des centrales éoliennes industrielles en Europe","ga":"Cosaint an dúlra, an chomhshaoil, na bithéagsúlachta agus daoine a fheabhsú agus stáisiúin chumhachta gaoithe thionsclaíocha á bhforbairt san Eoraip","hr":"Poboljšanje zaštite prirode, okoliša, biološke raznolikosti i ljudi pri razvoju industrijskih vjetroelektrana u Europi","hu":"A természet, a környezet, a biológiai sokféleség és az emberek védelmének javítása az európai ipari szélerőművek fejlesztése során","it":"Migliorare la protezione della natura, dell'ambiente, della biodiversità e delle persone nello sviluppo di centrali eoliche industriali in Europa","lt":"Gerinti gamtos, aplinkos, biologinės įvairovės ir žmonių apsaugą plėtojant pramonines vėjo jėgaines Europoje","lv":"Uzlabot dabas, vides, bioloģiskās daudzveidības un cilvēku aizsardzību, attīstot rūpnieciskās vēja elektrostacijas Eiropā","mt":"It-titjib tal-protezzjoni tan-natura, l-ambjent, il-bijodiversità u n-nies meta jiġu żviluppati impjanti tal-enerġija mir-riħ industrijali fl-Ewropa","nl":"De bescherming van natuur, milieu, biodiversiteit en mensen verbeteren bij de ontwikkeling van industriële windenergieplatforms in Europa","pl":"Poprawa ochrony przyrody, środowiska naturalnego, różnorodności biologicznej i ludzi przy tworzeniu przemysłowych elektrowni wiatrowych w Europie","pt":"Melhorar a proteção da natureza, do ambiente, da biodiversidade e das pessoas aquando do desenvolvimento de centrais eólicas industriais na Europa","ro":"Îmbunătățirea protecției naturii, a mediului, a biodiversității și a oamenilor în procesul de dezvoltare a unor centrale eoliene industriale în Europa","sk":"Zlepšiť ochranu prírody, životného prostredia, biodiverzity a ľudí pri rozvoji priemyselných veterných elektrární v Európe","sl":"Izboljšanje varstva narave, okolja, biotske raznovrstnosti in ljudi pri razvoju industrijskih vetrnih elektrarn v Evropi","sv":"Förbättra skyddet av naturen, miljön, den biologiska mångfalden och människorna när de utvecklar industriella vindkraftverk i Europa"}}}
This fingerprint is calculated using a SHA256 hashing algorithm. In order to replicate it yourself, you can use an MD5 calculator online and copy-paste the source data.
Share:
Share link:
Please paste this code in your page:
<script src="https://futureu.europa.eu/processes/GreenDeal/f/1/proposals/671/embed.js"></script>
<noscript><iframe src="https://futureu.europa.eu/processes/GreenDeal/f/1/proposals/671/embed.html" frameborder="0" scrolling="vertical"></iframe></noscript>
Report inappropriate content
Is this content inappropriate?
95 comments
Conversation
This is an excellent proposal that I support at 100 %. The wind industry is a false “green” idea both onshore and offshore. In Europe, and in particular in France, he stopped the sponsorship made by the government on the back of citizens, via the CSPE. These billions offered to financial companies should be used to renovate housing and buildings in order to avoid excessive energy consumption. Agricultural land, forests are unnecessarily sacrificed for little or no production that cannot be managed. Fishing areas will be sacrificed and the sea polluted anti-corrosive and other heavy metals. Looking at the planet and not just in front of its door, 90 % of these heavy metals come from China and are extracted in inhumane conditions!! Let’s open the eyes!
Current wind energy is not perfect, but plays an important role in transition. I know régions, where wind energy works perfectly well & has vastly improved the situation of farmers,, citizens & municipalities, financially, socially & economically.
People in these regions embrace wind energy & would lough at your fears. But the common traits of these regions are that dedicated individuals there have endorsed wind energy & explained the benefits of the technology to their fellow citizens - in many cases already several decades ago.
So this wind energy is owned, created, maintained by the citizens. They benefit together, cut down their energy costs, seized to pay foreign countries for fuel & run their own energy production instead. There people are inspired by the abundance of energy to continuously create new startup companies, which provide additional wealth to municipalities & regions.
Unfortunately, big energy companies have succeeded to scare people outside these regions away from wind energy. They made people believe that energy can only be produced in big industrial power plants or will never be enough to supply for all needs.
But how comes that municipalities & regions, where citizens organized themselves to produce their own energy, often are 100% renewable & well off?
I guess, they had some interest to make the whole setup work. They also integrated different sources of renewables & found viable forms of storage - not always in form of batteries.
Many people also don't understand the market setup of the energy market & thus believe that renewable énergies are expensive, because the market setup makes them seem to be. The market setup was created, when renewables really were more expensive. The function was to boost the new technology & make it financially viable for citizens to invest in this sector. This actually happened much faster than forecasted.
Since then, the settings have been changed several times, not always for the better. The new settings disproportionately favorise & benefit big companies & make prices explode, while smallholders have a difficult standing & are driven out of the market.
Helpless costumers are made believe that the renewables drive the race. But this is not the case, as production costs are now at the same level or lower than those of fueled power plants.
One driver of energy prices is actually speculation, another compensation. Il for example the government does nothing to make sure that available renewable energy will find its way to the customers or can be used elsewhere when power lines are blocked, the costumers have to pay the compensation for available, but unused renewable energy.
If coal power plants produce what ever they can, even if not needed inside the country, & thus have to sell their energy at minus prices - what actually happened - costumers also have to fill in the gaps.
These are just some examples, I do know superficially. Unfortunately, consumers are mostly not informed about these things & public debate circles around the seemingly obvious. Prices are rising.
In the beginning of citizens attempts to create their own wind energy, it was stated that the general grid will not be able to take more than 5% of renewables. Or even renewables would be all to hard to take for the grid.
Later it was assumed that more than a certain percentage will destabilize the grid. We have & had also big discussions about storage & additional power lines. But the energy distribution company with the highest amount of renewables only started to go for a sizable amount of energy storage, when they surpassed 50% renewables some years ago. Before they managed without. And the additional power lines, which really would have transported renewable energy, often did not materialize. The ingenious guys & girls of the mentioned company partly managed by empowering the existing lines. They also found that the closer power production is to the consumers, the less power lines are needed. But however, for all the badly managed chaos, consumers have to pay.
Time & again, I hear that renewables are soooo expensive & drive up energy prices. How comes that development agents & economists, concerned with developing countries say that the renewable energy legislation was the most successful & effective development program ever! As the boost of private investment has quickly driven down the costs & thus made it possible to provide solar panels to poor off grid households & institutions in developing countries? While other countries started wind energy to broaden their energy portfolio.
Renewables are said to be less productive & instable. Sun & wind are less steady than fueled power production, but years ago, energy experts with experience & expertise in renewables wrote that solar & wind energy are complementary most times of the year. To develop both forms of energy in a fixed proportion would reduce the need of storage. But the advice wasn't taken.
Instability of yields are a basic complaint of anti wind propaganda. But a physicist with experience & expertise in renewables said that solar & wind energy could easily run more stable over much longer periods, if only a little detail in the settings would be changed. It's not even about the hardware or production. It's the tuning of the power production settings. Now they are optimized for maximum yield. They as well could be optimized for maximum coverage of production time. To get this done, you need some changes in the legislation & market setup. This means to depart from the incentives for maximum yield & set incentives for maximum production time.
I also have read here that rotor blades are buried. But I found, this is not the case. They are burned. Mostly they are used as fuel for the cement production. The rest - mostly made of steel & concrete, can be recycled. The blades, made of composite materials, have to be burnt.
There was a claim on one site here on the platform that windmills generally need sizable amounts of rare raw materials, which can't be recovered. But I found out that only part of the existing windmills have rare raw materials & several producers did refrain from using them. Also there are methods to recover them.
There are false claims that windmills last only for fifteen years. Maybe, some countries give licenses for 15 years. But in Germany, federal support for renewables lasts for 20 years & experience shows that they are not yet exhausted. There are some upcoming issues with aging windmills, as steel has a limited life span. But seemingly this ends not abruptly after 20 years.
Lately I learned of the proposal to use carbon fibers for the rotors. I don't know if it's already in production. But I know that carbon fiber is already used as replacement for steel in steel concrete. It's more lightweight, more durable, more flexible & has it longer life span.
Carbon fiber nowadays is made of fossil fuels, but also can be created from CO2 & energy & can be recycled.
This could be really a nice case for carbon capture and storage! :)
Maybe, the steel could also be replaced by carbon fiber. :)
Hello Chiara, The problem with industrial wind turbines is that by nature they have very low energy density. In fact, they are as invasive as they are harmful. To produce a little bit and randomly, it takes a lot of it (i.e. 40003 MW wind turbines to replace a nuclear power plant like Fessenheim). France has 9000 wind turbines that are installed either near homes and their nuisances disturb homes that do not want them, or in natural areas with considerable damage to the environment and biodiversity. And that is the reason for this proposal on this platform.
In all cases, industrial wind turbines require extensive soil artificialisation. That’s not acceptable. For renewables, it is necessary to prefer indigenous means of production, to be installed on existing buildings. In addition, the advantage is to pay individuals, not non-EU pension funds. If it is to build industrial sites, they must at least be pilotable and produce a lot.
Conversation
Absolutely not. Buildin on-shore (and offshore) wind farms should be made easier. Obstacles should be removed, and NIMBYism should no longer be accepted. This "idea" is not factual and completely dishonest. (Wind farms do not "make people and breeding sick" - that assertiong is about as credible as claims that 5G caused Covid-19)
1) Yes, infrasounds are making people sick. There are enough people being sick (and studies) to take it seriously. It is a lie to challenge this. And the bats and birds killed is also an illusion?
2) Obstacles should not be removed and the will of people against it must be taken into consideration. Wanting to impose this industry is fascism and it is should not be the future of Europe
3) The most famous NIMBYist is president Macron who managed to stop a project in front of the place where he goes on vacations. Anyway, it should be in nobody's backyard. If nobody wants these machines in their backyard is because there is a strong issue.
I understand that you get revenues from those, but this time should be over in an ideal Europe.
The will of the people should only be taken into consideration when it does not harm the planet. The will of the people is often against minor inconvenience, at the expense of major suffering elsewhere. People protested against fuel taxes, against wind farms, against Covid restrictions etc. - people don't mind if entire countries become uninhabitable due to climate change somewhere else, or if entire generations die of a disease, so long as they don't have to look at a windmill or pay a little more for gasoline, or wear a little bit of cloth in front of their face. The future of the EU should be about what is best for everyone, not what is best for the most selfish people in society.
Lol, so indeed you really don't understand anything about wind power, proving this survey is totally true: the more we know about wind power, the less we like it (https://www.documentaire-et-verite.com/blog/enquete-ifop-connaissance-francais-energie-eolienne)
1) When there is no wind (wind turbines produce at 24% of their capacity, what a joke), it's coal and gas which are used. How many dead per year from pollution? how many CO2 emitted? search for it.
What are the emissions in Germany who have more than 60 GW of wind power? Again, it's a joke.
2) Blades cannot be recycled, it's 50 millions of tons of waste which are expected in 2050
3) 1 kWh produced with wind turbines generate less CO2 than coal and gas, but more than nuclear (between 2 and 3 times)
4) The quantity of materials used to produce 1 MWH from wind turbines is huge, like the quantity of concrete and steel in the ground
5) What is the artificiliazed surface needed for producing 1GW from wind turbines? Again, it's huge
I am very very concerned about the climate change and I think that Europe is not doing enough.
But, I am even more concerned about lobbies who try to impose wind power industry which is very bad for people, bad for animals, bad for grounds, bad for the environment.
It is an INDUSTRY. How can you say that you defend the biodiversity and environment by putting thousands of industrial machines all over the countries?
Alternatives exist:
1) reducing A LOT our consumption of energy. You want to impose industrial machines to people and you want them to make a sacrifice. Why it's not ALL the people to make sacrifices by NOT consuming the same quantity of electricity produced by those machines and get rid of those?
2) use other techniques to generate electricity from the wind, installed on roofs where it's already artificialized and industrialized and leave the nature preserved
3) use any other way to produce electricity that is less invasive than wind power
Wind power is BAD. Very BAD.
That study from 2016 had to be corrected due to calculation erors. Infra SONIC was calculated by a factor of 1000 in some cases. That study is void. If you climb into your diesel car and power it on, you exposed yourself to more infra SONIC by large. As for the rest you claim here. The most of it is straight up nonsense and the rest is NIMBYism. It is bad. Wind power should be made easier on and off shore! Most times, when put into woods, it’s revenue is just what is requested to pay for the restoration after the losses caused by climate change and insects.
Ahahah, some many feedbacks from people impacted, proving that indeed, there are issues.
You cannot deny the issues caused by industrial wind plants.
And destroying forests to put industrial plants, this is non-sense.
EU just warned France about destruction of environment with industrial projects:
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/fr/inf21441
And in Sweden, it's european court of justice who announced that Sweden has not given sufficient consideration to species.
What we want is that nature and biodiversity get priority over industrial projects and sorry for you if you get your revenues from wind power ;)
If you do not like nature and biodiversity and prefers to destroy, it's your choice.
I prefer to live in an Europe where ridges are still natural and not covered by gigantic industrial plants.
I understand that Wind power has downsides. There is no questioning that. But I'm still looking for the perfect alternative.
1 ) Reducing energy consumption is definitively a must. But how far can we go? How far are we ready to go?
2 ) As far as I can tell, rooftop wind power is highly inefficient because it's too close from the ground turbulences. Producing such wind turbine probably costs much more than any of the big wind turbines because the efficiency is squared with the turbine size.
3 ) Your mentioning "any other way to produce electricity that is less invasive than wind power". Do you have some examples?
- Photovoltaic panels have a much lower return on the CO2 investment needed to produce them,
- Hydroelectric is mostly saturated (and we could question the fact that it is less invasive),
- Nuclear fission is sure efficient but I suspect the resistance against having nuclear waste in your backyard would be even stronger,
- Nuclear fusion is far from being a reality.
Alternatives are another debate. What I propose here is to reason the development of industrial wind power because we know all the problems today. It is a sector that has an increasingly weak acceptance. Going into force, as it is now, will lead us to serious social crises. So we need to build a mix by limiting industrial wind. And falling consumption is not a choice. If it is not our generation that will go in the direction of sobriety, it will be the following generations, by constraint.
It seems to me, however, that we cannot have this debate without comparing all the alternatives. Based on the assumption that no energy production technique is perfect, which ones have the least impact on our environment? The problem is that if we eliminate alternatives separately from each other, we will end up without energy. Even polluted muscle energy! However, industrial wind energy is the least CO2 emitting medium after nuclear power, but the latter also has limited capacity by existing Uranium deposits (the extraction of which is not necessarily without impact either). Rather than a simple ban, I would advocate for rational use and to limit nuisances.
So, for me, it’s like you'd recommend stressful patients to smoke cigarettes to fight their stress. Yes, it will surely work, but with what consequences and what costs?! Wind turbines are machines with low energy density. As a result, their impact on the environment, biodiversity and territories is ENORME for FAIBLE production. You should not take only CO2. Biodiversity erosion is a more important problem than global warming. Today, the French state lets do anything to develop this sector, according to the wishes of the wind lobby. So yes, there’s need to reason all this before it’s too late, that’s the purpose of my proposal. And finally, in 2019, wind turbines produced 6 % of the French electricity mix. Let’s reduce production by 6 % and remove these machines. Ah, no, it takes sacrifices for those who want to impose these machines on others
I'm not sure I understand the analogy. The source of stress today is the human species. The real solution to help someone get rid of their stress is to remove the source of stress. I suppose you're not proposing to remove the human species? On the other hand, I would rather have a medication in mind than cigarettes, it’s not ideal but less harmful. If my information is correct, wind turbines have produced 6 % of French electricity, which represents 20 % of the energy consumption. How will you convert 80 % of energy production to electricity generation if you start playing with exclusives? Again, I don't deny the inconvenience of wind turbines. I just want to stress that we cannot oppose something without proposing alternatives. Status quo is no longer possible.
In 2020, renewable energy accounts for 13.1 % of primary energy consumption (less than natural gas!) And wind energy accounts for 12.7 % of renewable energy. Source: SDES. It shows you how much wind is a problem, since among all the sectors, it is the one that creates the most conflicts (9000 wind turbines!) while its contribution to the mix is anecdotal. So, on the one hand, making a mix by relying on all the other channels is an option. This is what Switzerland’s grosso-modo envisages because wind energy is not suitable for this country (though the lobby grows very strongly). And on the other hand, again, the only solution is sobriety. If we stop wasting, we'll find them easily the tons of CO2. The covid allowed us to see that a lot was possible.
COVID has shown us that by virtually completely stopping economic life for several months, we can reduce greenhouse gas production by 5-10 %. We are far from the 80 % reduction required by 2050. With today’s technologies, sobriety is a sweet euphemism for reality. If you're ready to become vegan, replace your car with public transport and a bike, stop flying, stop heating and stop buying new ones, I doubt everyone is ready to do the same. Under these conditions, I can hardly see how we can do without a form of energy. Even RTE in its most nuclear scenario (N03) expects 25 % wind to be 65 GWh. It’s not that easy to replace. This already takes into account a 40 % reduction in overall energy.
The pressure on the territories is too high. There’s going to be a mess. Not to mention the harmful effects on the health of residents. Just because of that, we should stop implanting them.
Denmark and Belgium respectively have 6200 and 1700 wind turbines installed in territories more than 13x smaller than France, and more densely populated. So they should give a good idea of what it could do to increase the number of wind turbines. Are there any studies in these countries that indicate the harmful effects you fear? There are a large number of wind turbines in the territory of my municipality but I don't know anyone who suffers from it. It is obviously not very scientific as an evaluation, but relying on a few complaints from local residents is not very scientific either. The Aisne’s list of complaints confuses among other correlations and causality. Case 46 (to mention only him) is extremely clear: he complains that he finds rare earths in the hairs of his cows, but onshore wind turbines do not contain them. On the other hand, the soil where its cows graze certainly contains it (as everywhere on earth).
There are studies in all countries that show the harmfulness of industrial wind turbines. I'm not saying that ALL riparians will be sick, but I say there are residents who are sick. For France, take the decision of the Court of Appeal of Toulouse. Today, the French state ignores them. Which is not normal. Since when did they know and let them do it? And now, what do we do for these sick people?
If I followed your reasoning, we would have to forbid: — Cars (2541 deaths on the road in 2020, not to mention the pollution they cause and the deaths that follow) — Cigarettes (tens of thousands of cancers and are attributed to it up to 75,000 deaths a year in France) — Alcohol (41,000 deaths per year in France) — Meat (which would be carcinogenic not counting the thousands of animals killed for our pleasure) — Cats (which would kill more than 1.4 billion birds a year in the United States) — Medicines (600 poisonings that caused death in 1999 in France)... How many wind turbine deaths are there? I do not deny that there can be an effect, but the size of that effect does not seem to me to require a pure and simple ban. At most, implementation can be improved. If all the genes generated were to be taken into account, virtually any human activity would have to be banned. Wind is very low in the list of priorities.
So, it’s off-line of course, but if you make a proposal to delete all this, I vote for immediately! ) Otherwise, I will reexplain the problem of wind energy differently: these machines have low energy density and produce randomly. This makes them harmful, invasive while being particularly ineffective. Besides, go see the mix in real time on the RTE website: the production of our 9,000 wind turbines is ridiculous right now. 4 times as gas! In winter, when we need power! And all this for how much? 90 billion? It’s a scandal. So let’s not ban them (by the way, my proposal is to reason their development, not forbid it), BUT: let us stop subsidising them as soon as possible, stop implanting them anywhere and impose local referendums so that the inhabitants have a say.
It seems that we have found common ground. However, I would keep medications that save more lives than they take. More seriously, I do believe that mature energies (wind, solar and nuclear) no longer require subsidies because they are sufficiently profitable. At most they require a stable legal framework to ensure their development. These subsidies would probably be better used in the search for new forms of production and in the development of means of stabilising the electricity grid. I suppose we could continue to discuss what a reasonable development is, but I fear that this debate will not attract enough attention to be useful. Thank you for your reactivity in this debate:-)
We're 100 % okay. But you will understand that we need to reason the development of industrial wind in Europe and that we can't let everything and anything do like today. That’s the purpose of my proposal.
https://www.eastcountymagazine.org/do-wind-turbines-harm-animals
Conversation
This is what our policies in France think... far from being NIMBY!!! It is “A rape of the territories”, meaning MEP LREM (presidential majority), Marjolaine Meynier Millefer, rapporteur-general of the Parliamentary Inquiry Committee. In January 2020, Emmanuel Macron publicly acknowledged before the French mayors in Pau that wind turbines were a well-known failure in France, pushed by the majority of local populations ‘on whom they could not be imposed from above’. The rapporteur-general of the Parliamentary Inquiry Committee, MEP LREM Marjolaine Meynier Millefert, had preceded it by criticising wind developers in the National Congress for ‘citing the French people’ and using the very harsh term ‘local rape’. “The technical solution of the current wind turbines is in no way ecological, according to the MEP.” Hier, on 20 April 2021, wind production was 1 %.... for normally 10 %..... and this has been going on since January!!
Yes, and the previous Minister of ecology (Mrs Borne) mentionned that the development of this industry was "anarchic".
Marjolaine Meynier-Millefert: https://youtu.be/xVUeeLKy0zU
Emmanuel Macron: https://youtu.be/QWkOx6saZRM
Elisabeth Borne: https://youtu.be/jNbS87VSRfU
One must be dishonest to approve the development of this industry.
Like people prefer money over biodiversity and ecology. That must stop. Europe must show the way.
Yes to this proposal.
Before commenting or voting, please get informed about this industry.
It is very important to understand all the stakes.
A lot of advertizing and lobbying have been done all the past years to make you think it is "green", "clean", "free", etc.
But don't be fooled, it's not the reality.
Be informed.
Conversation
This is conspiracy theory not science. And the arguments presented are verifiably false.
Stop spreading lies please.
In which world are you living? Care bears? Pictures of the construction of an industrial wind plant: https://www.vivreaupieddumontdor.fr/2021/03/lecologie-en-photos.html Industrial wind plant protected species: https://infodujour.fr/business/des-entreprises/47184-parc-eolien-condamne-pour-destruction-despeces-protegees This is destroying red kites: http://www.lorraine-association-nature.com/actu-381.html Industrial wind plant to be stopped since its too Noisy: https://actu.fr/normandie/echauffour61150/echauffour-le-parc-eolien-est-mis-a-l-arret-par-decision-prefectorale38926722.html Complaints after health disorders: https://www.energieverite.com/post/l-%C3%A9olien-la-sant%C3%A9-et-les-villages-martyrs-de-l-aisne
And against 4 ministers for health disorders: http://www.lemouvrural.fr/fr/environnement/69-eolien/565-eolien-lmr-porte-plainte-contre-quatre-ministres This one found in Australia: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-20/gippsland-landmark-legal-win-over-bald-hills-wind-farm/12572498 Rare Earths extraction: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1241872/EXCLUSIVE-Inside-Chinas-secret-toxic-unobtainium-mine.html Blades being pilling up in landfills: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-02-05/wind-turbine-blades-can-t-be-recycled-so-they-re-piling-up-in-landfills Estimation on wastes from blades: https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1810/263878/LiuandBarlow-2017-Waste_Management-AM.pdf About concrete required in the ground: http://www.economiematin.fr/news-eoliennes-beton-artificialisation-sol-biodiversite
About corruption: Sources: https://www.capital.fr/economie-politique/scandale-des-eoliennes-les-condamnations-d-elus-pour-prise-illegale-d-interets-s-empilent-1038489 Etc. You’ll find a single lot. JUST spend a bit time informed and stop listenning to the liars who promote industrial wind power as a good thing. It is not. And stop willing to put these awful and Noisy gigantic industrial machines in others’ neighborhood!
https://www.eastcountymagazine.org/do-wind-turbines-harm-animals
Giovanni Toffoletto, are you so sure is conspiracy?
Because I found one of your ideas that is pretty nonsense. So I do wonder what are your compentences in this subject.
Getting into the details, this idea is partially right. Renewables as wind are, in many places, harnessing lot of subsides from taxpayers money and are impacting other categories of impact rather than the so called (and not yet verified by EU) climate change. Therefore Wind turbines require REE and last for really small time, which still may be a viable solution for offshor or inshore plants in Nord of Europe, eg see NL or DK. But what is missing here, and I suggest you to watch my idea, is an holistic impact assessment framework to be in place
Regarding the recycling of blades, in the link you provide to bloomberg, an industrialist is quoted and mentions a 99.9 % recycling. On their site (found in the article), they give rather 99 %, but in any case, it shows that solutions exist
I no longer have access to the article because they changed their access policy. But do not confuse recycling and burn blades or make them dust for re-use in cement. It’s not the same thing;)
Conversation
While some of your points are totally valid and I agree with them, I find it a bit hard to understand some sections of your post. Maybe try writing in your native language next time, the system is made in a way to translate it automatically ;)
But to comment on what I understood: It's true that wind turbines kill a surprisingly high amount of flying animals, but I don't really see how it kills cows. It doesn't make people sick though, that's just a conspiracy and it's the same as saying that Wi-Fi or GPS signals are making people ill. Although that doesn't sound unbelievable, there were loads of studies about this and none of them found any health effect on living organisms. What people experience is a nocebo effect. Watch this video for more information: https://youtu.be/FfgT6zx4k3Q
What I mind about wind electricity the most is probably the way it affects the landscape. I don't know about others, but the turbines just don't look natural and destroy the view. And of course, the waste.
But to include some arguments pro-wind energy, I don't think that the idea of them isn't worth keeping. I think that if we managed to build them from a durable and easy to recycle material (for example, destroyed turbines could be ground and used as a building material), it might be okay to build them somewhere in the ocean. They could even be connected with the power plants that take advantage of sea streams.
As for corruption, I'm afraid that that will be an issue for all sources of electricity. I think that the best thing we can do is limit the donations of wind power plants in places, where they don't have potential.
To end this, I think that it's very important to not forget, that renewables aren't as perfect as some people think, at least in some aspects. And vice-versa - a nuclear powerplant may even have a lower impact on the environment if managed properly. And of course, fusion would be the best (reliable, stable and without waste).
The problem in this discussion is that people who are against wind turbines or generally renewables tend to see energy as a commodity, centrally produced & delivered by big industries to a big variety of consumers. This is, what we are used to, but it's not the most efficient way to produce & deliver energy.
People who love wind turbines & PV often see energy production as a human right or civil right.
We have whole regions with a multitude of wind turbines, where farmers started to improve their situation by adding windmills to their enterprise. In these regions, farmers are mostly the owners - or municipalities, or a group of citizens. They harvest the revenues & the revenues stay in the community. Community & municipalities development have been boosted by these coorporations. Therefore, in these regions you seldom will find anyone who is against wind energy. You also will not find people going mad with infrasound etc. They would lough at you.
Unfortunately, politics hasn't supported the citizens in producing their own energy. They were not supported to build hot water storages & power plants, which can take both heat from biogas power plants & surplus electricity from wind mills, store it as heat & deliver either heat to industry & households or transform heat into electricity, if needed. In Denmark, a whole region is energy independent that way - for decades. They don't need any input from outside. They sell excess energy instead. The whole system is stable, as it's well composed, owned & maintained by the people.
Politics made it difficult to stay with old still intact wind turbines - or to repower them & stay with the same owner structure. Politicians didn't support citizens to produce their own energy, but favored big industry to step in. But why should people give their land for the profits of big corporations?
Energy for normal households, small & medium sized businesses is best produced by the people. House owners share their roofs, municipality buildings, buildings of small & medium sized enterprises do so as well.
Organic waste is used in biogas power plants, before turning into compost. This reduces methane & CO2 emissions & provides secure energy.
If rural communities want to integrate some windmills in the design, they should be free to do so, as long as there are no nests of big predator birds nearby. Because these birds have been found to be too absorbed by hunting to pay attention to the windmills.
Birds are killed by big horizontal windmills, but all numbers, I could find were far below cats, big glass facades, fast vehicles, power lines & hunger. Windmills seem to be very far from being the main source of killed birds. Similar numbers, I found for insectes. With bats, it seems to be more complex.
How many royal milans were killed by cats?
If communities of citizens are free to create their own energy & share within the community or with their neighbours, things become more efficient. There is a lot of small scale technology & knowledge available. This could also include small scale water energy, small urban windmills - as proposed above. Heat from industries or farms can be stored & used etc
There are a lot of unconventional energy sources already in use, in private households, municipalities & for companies as well. But most people don't know. There are companies in place that offer storage solutions for renewable energy other than batteries. Hot water, H2, methanol, ammonium, air etc. There are already more companies with their own renewables than many people estimate. Lately I heard from someone in Ireland that the chemical industry there is on renewables.
I found that in other countries energy providers make contracts with industrial enterprises to deliver renewable energy, when there is a surplus.
I fully agree: We must promote indigenous means of production. I am opposed to the large, imposed and non-consensual industrial facilities that degrade the environment and biodiversity. Switzerland is beginning to understand this and wants to develop photovoltaic panels rather than industrial wind. Well done.
These big consumers have battery storage or other sorts of storage in place if they can't use it all at once. So they take surplus renewable energy & therefore get it cheaper.
There are similar projects for electric heating, charging electric vehicles or producing H2 for transportation.
Experts of energy systems management say that the future will be more decentralised & more network like. Big energy companies will sell more costumised services & less plain energy. Medium sized & small producers serve local neighbourhoods & communities.
In Italy, there was a successful experiment with one PV & battery provider, where consumers already have the possibility to create a virtual power plant, exchange energy & share storage with other costumers.
I'm a little bit sceptical about big onshore wind parks. If there are good contracts & conditions, fine. If municipalities feel convenient, okay. But I wouldn't go for it first. I always would start with the ideas & interests of the citizens.
This is science fiction. The storage capacity required for intermittent means of production is immense and impossible in the coming decades (the more losses of about 30 % in each conversion). Read the report of the French Academy of Sciences: Https://www.academie-sciences.fr/fr/Rapports-ouvrages-avis-et-recommandations-de-l-Academie/apport-energie-nucleaire-transition-energetique.html If you want to dream, dream about controllable, decarbonised and cheap means of production;)
Thanks for the tip Jan. indeed english is not my mother tongue. You understand well that my goal here is to make people aware of the way tis industry is developed and make people think about how to make it better. For making people sick, I disagree with you: there are plenty of feedbacks. I say that it makes ALL people, I say that it makes SOME people sick. What do we do with them? In some countries, they get money and they change house. What a solution! When one lives in the countryside, one does not want to leave away an industrial plant is dismantling or making him/her sick.
Some studies passport an impact of infrasounds. https://suomenymparistoterveys.files.wordpress.com/2019/01/syte-pilot-study-2016-2.pdf Krankmacher Windkraftanlagen, Dr Muller, July 2019 Wind turbine syndrome, a report on a natural expert, Dr. Nina Pierbridge, 2009 A proposed metric for assessing the potential of Community annoyance from wind turbine low-frequency noise emissions, Dr Neil Kelly, 1987 Wind turbine noise, adverse health effects and professional ethics, Sarah Laurie, 2013 Public health impacts of health impacts. see my link above Bald Hills
Anyway, it’s not the main outcome for people: whether people must have these industrial machines in their living environment without being able to decide for it? In France, politician Marjolaine Meynier-Millefert worked on renewable energy commission for scrutinising and spoke about “rape of territories”. See my link above. This is exactly the way people are feeling when 200 + meters industrial wind turbines are erected near their village. And it is planted and exploited by businessmen who do not live there and who does not care at all. This is not the way of developing a green “industry”. And when I speak about corruption, it’s so spread here in France mayors are still farmers who own the grounds that the businessmen want to rent. They get the money and make the project achieved. Do you know why they rent it and do not buy it? Check it, it is closely involved;)
Yeah, you're right. The way renewables are pushed recently everywhere creates a lot of resistance against them in some countries and slows down the development in the right way. And of course, some extreme eco-maniacs are creating distrust against the whole EU, especially here in Eastern Europe.
The nocebo effect was invented to make the victims like crunch. Go explains to the cows that are dead that they have made up their minds and that they are planning https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M83SReL9WrI
As I explained in a different comment, I misunderstood the suspicion. I thought that it's the same thing as those "Your phone radiates harmful waves" stuff. I completely agree that the vibroacoustic disease might be real. More research and publicity is needed to not make it look like another conspiracy theory though.
Extract: acoustic study by Mariane Alves Pereira acousticienne. . Recent knowledge of the physiology of the cochleo-vestibular system has revealed a number of approaches to mechanisms of physiological effects that could be activated in response to exposure to low and low noise frequencies. This sensory system has a particular sensitivity to these frequencies, which is higher than that of other parts of the human body. Current data suggest that sounds that are too low or too low to be clearly audible could have mediated effects by cochleo-vestibular receptors.
lol, that's a good one "since when people must have those industrial machines in their living environment without even being able to decide for it?" In Germany each waste depot or coal power plant or even nuclear power plant can be build nearer to residential buildings than wind power plants. Big industry has won that since 150 years.
Well, you confirm what I'm saying: non-consensual industrial sites are imposed on residents. Except that industrial wind turbines are huge (more than 200 metres high now) and given their low energy density, it is necessary to put many, many, many (i.e. 4000 industrial 3 MW wind turbines to replace a small nuclear power plant like Fessenheim). And since they do not produce on demand, we must keep as much power from pilotable sources (coal and gas in Germany), so so many more nuisances! Not to mention the high voltage lines to connect all this. Even if we install means of production that produce little, put solar panels wherever possible (roofs, farms, car parks, etc.).
For the landscape, I fully agree. Plus the wind businessmen put their industrial wind plants on ridges. Best idea ever! Like for solar energy, the best solution is not the gigantic installations but on the contrary small installation, on places ready industry and artificial cities. Let’s installll small wind turbines on roofs. I want to advertise companies for some horizontal building wind turbines for buildings. Great. Let’s stop destroying the ridges, campaigns and forests.
Again, and to finish, I am very very concerned by the destruction of nature and artificial nature of our world. Wind turbines are a bad idea as they need a lot of ground. A lot. And as long as we install them in the forests and ridges, it’s as many natural places that are destroyed. Now, if people do not like nature and want to destroy it, fine for them, purpose it’s what I want. And I say it.
About cows, this is fresh news:
https://www.ouest-france.fr/pays-de-la-loire/loire-atlantique/parc-eolien-de-nozay-l-etat-privilegie-la-relocalisation-de-deux-elevages-7008a17e-a133-11eb-8a9a-06f908cc3273
France proposes to relocate 2 breedings.
One of them has amlready 400 dead cows since the industrial wind plant is operational.
Nobody knows what happens.
This is a video made by the farmer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUj4xPnynnw
There is an interview of him here: https://youtu.be/cMSNvFCVgkU
I don't mean that industrial wind turbines alone are killing cows.
It's one factor which triggers the killing.
We would like French state to follow precautionary principle.
Wow, that's... disturbing to say at least. Unfortunately, I don't understand French, so the second video is useless for me. But from what I understood in the comments under the first video, I see that this issue is something completely different than what I thought it is (the weak EM fields generated by electricity), so I suppose that it might be true.
I hope there will be more research about this before there are wind turbines everywhere.
Yes, That’s why I published this proposal: so that governments do more to protect animals and human beings. This industrial wind plant has been active for years, and for years, the people have been completed. It is not normal that they must fight for their health (and their animals’) and it is not normal that French State do nothing against it and to protect them. And there are tons of feedback about health issues affecting human beings. Even in Germany, where they accept less and less THOS machines: https://www.arte.tv/fr/videos/093002-030-A/xenius-energie-eolienne-la-controverse/ Today, industrial wind power lobbies are more powerful than the Governments (https://francais.rt.com/entretiens/85113-stephane-bern-moi-quon-imagine-pouvoir-suis-barricades-entretien) but it must change, and first at European level.
If the State recognises the need to relocate farms, after 400 cows of dead, there is a GROS problem! In addition, several farms, including horses, stimulate deformations due to vibration. There was a study to this effect in Portugal.
@nadine_alayrac Why the heck doesn't this get more publicity?! I'm literally finding out about this now. No wonder it looks like a conspiracy theory when nobody is talking about this officially.
Money;)
I don't mean that industrial wind turbines alone are killing cows. It’s one factor which triggers the killing." The links given do not show that. Link 1: relocation of two farms. Nothing else, no cause, no evidence, or even any hypothesis supported by any statement Link 2: A panicked calf. This is unfortunate (at the same time he lives in a cage and was separated from his mother very young, so behavioral disorders...), but it says nothing about the cause Link 3: only passage linked to this claim to 3'30. There is concomitence between the installation of the park and disturbances in 2 farms. That’s all. I'll look for the reports mentioned in video to see if there’s more material. To say that we need to be careful and that research must be mobilised: yes, yes. Say that wind turbines kill: No, no, no.
Yes, read the reports and there may still be a video of the hearings in the parliamentary committee. There’s a good problem. You're free to deny it. It doesn't change the fact that there’s a problem. It will be interesting to understand the reasons, in the meantime, what is scandalous is that the site is not stopped, as a precautionary principle. And that the state does not finance the studies necessary to understand the problem or even solve it. The Potirons had to launch a pool to fund expertise. Is it normal to get there under the rule of law? It’s a scandal.
https://www.eastcountymagazine.org/do-wind-turbines-harm-animals
As for every Technic there are positive and negative points: Offshore wind farms are likely to be the most acceptable. Don't forget that the catalytic conversion of water into clean Hydrogen is Progressing tremendously (see the relevant patterns litterature and not the classical bla bla one).
Conversation