Wind turbines require a far bigger share of the carbon footprint than even greenies expected, with lots more land needed clear for installation, even after the devastation of using rare earths and steel in their manufacture. Greenies are devastated:
Environmentalists are fuming. Opponents accuse the wind turbine developers and the local and state authorities of covering up the environmental costs and impacts of the project and misleading the public. Critics say the senselessness of the project is tantamount to putting wind turbines on Ayers Rock.
Unrealistic profit projections used to “bait the public”
Opponents also accuse the wind park developers of putting out overly optimistic figures for expected wind turbine performance in order to bait the public. Die Welt writes:
Ernst Gerber believes the promises of profitability, with which investors and local representatives are being baited, are estimates from a naïve milkmaid: ‘Despite the subsidies, things are moving towards the lower limits of profitability.’”
Die Welt itself characterizes the promise of profitability made by the wind park developers as “rotten”, and that the region is one that is “low in wind”.
Threat to wildlife…violates the law
The wind park opponents also say that the monster turbines are a threat to wildlife and birds. What’s more, turbine critic Rainer Becker thinks they would violate the law, “The construction of the wind parks are clearly in violation of the existing laws and the international species protection act“.
Other opponents claim that big business and power companies in Luxemburg are ramming the projects through and ignoring the wishes of the local inhabitants, Die Welt writes.
Most Greenies haven’t bothered to see how small the footprint of a frakked gas well is, either. Instead they resort to exaggerated images like this by The Wilderness Society:
[…] Believe it or not, our vision for a sustainable future for the Kimberley doesn’t include fracking in the Canning Basin, heritage listed Fitzroy River or southern Kimberley!
The company leading the charge to frack the Kimberley is Buru Energy. The EPA chose not to assess them – despite significant concernsabout contamination from chemical fracking, and as our appeal was dismissed they received approval for 34 fracks across four wells – ‘Yulleroo 3 & 4’ in Yarwuru country and ‘Valhalla’ and ‘Asgard’ in the Fitzroy River catchment.
Assessment and regulation of these critical drilling proposals falls to the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP) – which has a conflict of interest, due to the fact that they are actively promoting the industry. This system is currently failing the people it is meant to be protecting. Currently, if you notice your drinking water is contaminated or gas bubbling in the nearby creek you love, you will not be able to access information for almost two years!
The Wilderness Society stands with all the other WA environment groups and Traditional Owners calling for an immediate moratorium on fracking in WA because of the serious long term risks it poses to our communities, our water and our environment. […]
They much prefer the devastation of wind turbines instead. All the wells pictured in their advertisement would not even add up to the footprint occupied by the gas powered town of Broome. I visited a frakked well on the weekend in the Canning Basin to see for myself. I struggled to see any problem environmentally. It was hundreds of kilometers from anywhere, too.
If turbines weren’t subsidized by taxpayer funded governments, nobody would have them:
[…] At the moment, most rich countries and China subsidise solar and wind power to help stem climate change. Yet this is the most expensive way of reducing greenhouse-gas emissions. Meanwhile Germany and Japan, among others, are mothballing nuclear plants, which (in terms of carbon abatement) are cheaper. The implication of Mr Frank’s research is clear: governments should target emissions reductions from any source rather than focus on boosting certain kinds of renewable energy.
SUBSIDIES for renewable energy are one of the most contested areas of public policy.