On 11 Oct 2011 at 3:19pm Feline wrote:
Apparently the Glyndebourne wind turbine is being delivered to the site in 3 loads this afternoon. Will be interesting to see what it looks like and how much electricity it generates.
On 11 Oct 2011 at 3:39pm Clifford wrote:
Shocking news, eh watt?
On 11 Oct 2011 at 4:59pm It blows! wrote:
I suspect it'll look a lot like all the other wind turbines. White pole with a twirly bit on top.
On 11 Oct 2011 at 5:03pm Zebedee wrote:
And it'll blight the view of thousands whilst supplying subsidised grant-aided power to a small elite. It stinks.
On 11 Oct 2011 at 5:12pm trickcyclist wrote:
Very expensive way of culling birds of prey!
On 11 Oct 2011 at 6:19pm Bazooka Joe wrote:
As I was driving out of Church Lane this afternoon, I witnessed it go past with police escort. Must say it is one hell of a f-off size turbine - it looks bigger than standard turbines, but then it IS for Glyndebourne (and I doubt they would want a bog standard edition). A sad day for Ringmer.
On 11 Oct 2011 at 7:37pm Wriggle a toe wrote:
They`ll need a big turbine to harness all that wind coming out of the opera house!
On 11 Oct 2011 at 8:07pm Ed Can Do wrote:
Glyndebourne are hoping to generate 80% of the electricty they use from this turbine so it must chuck out a fair bit of power.
I don't see what everyone's problem with it is to be honest. It's no uglier than the electricity pylons currently festooning that particular hillside and I'll wager that back in the day when windmills to grind grain were first built people probably complained about the new eyesores across the countryside, allowing an elite few to grind their grain using wind power rather than by hand. Let's face it, Ringmer is hardly a pituresque little town and there's not even that many houses from which one can see the new turbine. I suppose those that can would prefer to see the waves gently lapping up the Ouse Valley from the rising sea levels caused by the continued reliance on fossil fuel over cleaner forms of energy?
And they don't even spin that fast. Any bird of prey that manages to get taken out by one of them, it's probably a blessing to the species having it removed from the gene pool.
On 11 Oct 2011 at 10:33pm Windy Miller wrote:
We will have a direct view of the turbine (once it goes up), and to be honest I can't see what all the fuss has been about. Personally I think they are quite beautiful and I'd rather see that than a pylon.
On 11 Oct 2011 at 10:44pm Zebedee wrote:
You'll see both a pylon and a turbine.
Acoustivcally, the Glyndebourne theatre is so well designed it does not require electric amplification. As an institution it's power needs a probably not that great. Certainly not great enough to blight the downs with another ugly man-made encroachment on nature's beauty.
On 12 Oct 2011 at 1:24am Peasant wrote:
Lord of Manor want great big turbine so those piloting their 4x4s and helicopters towards Opera House can spot where they are heading. Also good scheme to get you peasants to pay for his electric bill, should the wind happen to blow, but that isn't really the point. Lord of the Manor educated at Eton, so can do whatever he wants. So he does. Big turbine carefully sited so that not visible from any Glyndebourne windows, but there to show to peasants what big, important person Disgustus Christie is.
On 12 Oct 2011 at 1:46am Been there wrote:
And of course we peasants provided the funding for the thing in the first place. Just another small example of the current popular theme of taxpayers funding the rich and corrupt.
On 12 Oct 2011 at 8:23am jelly wrote:
Oh come on! You make me sick with the chips on your shoulders and your grudges against the 'elite'... I entirely agree with Ed Can Do and Windy Miller, and at least Gus and co. are trying to be environmentally friendly. You are the ones who could power a wind turbine single-handed with your 'hot air'... Talk about NIMBYs...
On 12 Oct 2011 at 8:30am 'ere be monsters wrote:
Ed, the tip of a wind turbine blade travels at up to 200 mph depending on the length of the blade.
The only thing I don't get about these things is why it has to be there. Why can't they pay to have it put in an off shore wind farm and just take their power from the National Grid.
I agree Zebedee, it's only the microphones that use electricity, what on earth else would they use it for?
On 12 Oct 2011 at 9:35am Ed Can Do wrote:
Well the microphones and the lights. And the heating. And the computers in the offices. And the air conditioning. And there's those big old restaurants. Probably a few electrical gizmos in the kitchens I'd imagine too. Wouldn't surprise me if the Christie family pluf things in in their house from time to time also.
Anyway, I was driving up the hill today and I swear if I hadn't have known it was there I wouldn't have noticed it. Admittedly there's no blades on it yet and without the cloud cover it might stand out more but still, it's no uglier than the new houses on the way into Ringmer on the left, the entire arcade of shops in the middle of the village, the petrol station and the pylons all over the fields.
I'll admit I didn't realise they went round that fast but then I've never seen one move that fast. I suspect tip speeds of up to 200mph is similar to BT Broadband running at up to 20mb (Average speed 4.5mb).
On 12 Oct 2011 at 10:58am 'ere be monsters wrote:
They just don't look like they are travelling that fast, but they do. This particular model has a 44m blade diameter, it's maximum rotation rate of 34rpm is about 175mph according to my rather rusty calculations. Yes it will be lower when the wind isn't blowing, I must admit I didn't realise the weather affected broadband.
Nice analogy.
On 12 Oct 2011 at 11:34am Ed Can Do wrote:
Hahaha, it was more a comment on the use of the phrase "Up to" and the ability to say what you want with statistics. Let's hope the birds are all scared off by the perpetual, deep rumbling noises turbines are supposed to generate eh?
And your calculations are right, it's just over 175mph. Stick a few burning torches on the ends of the blades and it'd make a hell of a Catherine Wheel.
On 12 Oct 2011 at 11:44am 'ere be monsters wrote:
I'll get JC to wrap the ends, that'll be easier. Alternatively get Hils to lance them up.
On 12 Oct 2011 at 12:15pm Mr Forks wrote:
We could always wrap it and find a Viking to carry it down School Hill on the 710?!
On 12 Oct 2011 at 12:32pm Penguin wrote:
Would that make it Bonfire's biggest fan ? 
On 12 Oct 2011 at 4:49pm Peasant wrote:
The reason Ed Can Do didn't notice the Glyndebourne turbine was there was that it hasn't been put up yet (goes up on Friday, reportedly). What you hardly noticed was the crane that has arrived to put it up. When it is up, you will notice it. That is the point.
On 12 Oct 2011 at 5:48pm Annette Curtin-Twitcher wrote:
I'd rather see a turbine (or even hundreds of turbines, tbh) than something like Drax belching smoke for miles around, or Dungeness. I bet it won't be as ugly as that damn incinerator you can see for miles.
On 12 Oct 2011 at 10:36pm Nature lover wrote:
I'd prefer as tree or a bush. I'd also prefer the silence
On 13 Oct 2011 at 5:31am trickcyclist wrote:
I'd prefer not to subsidise wealthy landowners by paying extra for tiny amounts of electricity to be produced in this way.
On 13 Oct 2011 at 9:06am Zebedee wrote:
...whilst blighting the view for the peasants.
The turbine is a joke. That so many people think this type of thing is acceptable just goes to show what a lot of hoodwinked cap-doffing idiots the majority of us have become. Bailing out the banks and the ongoing mass transfer of wealth away from the masses to a comparatively very small rich elite is part of the same subjugated and fooled mindset.
On 13 Oct 2011 at 9:49am Ed Can Do wrote:
Or maybe those of us in favour of it just don't live in Ringmer and find the whole furore mildly entertaining? Or maybe we like the look of modern wind turbines? I think they look ok to be honest and add a touch of interest to an otherwise dull uniformity of managed fields with the odd clumps of trees round the edges you see so much of round here. Also agreeing that it looks far better than a proper power station or that silly incinerator thing, although I'd love to see the reaction if someone said they were planning to build a nuclear power plant up the Broyle.
On 13 Oct 2011 at 10:21am Rickshaw Eddie wrote:
Better a wind turbine than a polluting waste plant in Newhaven....
On 13 Oct 2011 at 10:39am moan moan moan wrote:
NIMBY is the word I like best from this thread. Sums up every negative view. Rich people this, rich people that. Environment blah blah eyesore. As if that is what's driving you. Many of you active in local politics? No? I see, you just like to moan. Get over it or get involved
On 13 Oct 2011 at 11:38am Windy Miller wrote:
I love the view of it (well, I will do when it is eventually up) and I live in one of the closest houses to it. We are watching the work as I type.
On 13 Oct 2011 at 12:19pm Heaver Jeaver wrote:
Hope you are not so close that the noise disturbs you Windy
Why do you assume that no-one is actively involved moan?
Your NIMBY accusation misses one of the main recurring points made in this thread. It's the reason it's been built that causes much of the consternation, not the fact that it has been built. If it had been built to serve the power needs of the general Ringer and Lewes community then there would have been a lot less of the negative posts.
On 13 Oct 2011 at 2:26pm extra wrote:
I still can't understand why Glyndebourne didn't go for photovoltaics, the
location is ideal.
On 13 Oct 2011 at 7:48pm trickcyclist wrote:
I don't mind the look of the things myself,its just they are so ineffective at producing electricity. Its the smugness of these people who will say "oh yes, we are doing our bit for the environment" when in fact it is just a big monument to their ego which produces very little usable power for the investment.
On 13 Oct 2011 at 10:45pm moan mona moan wrote:
Second time lucky...
Heaver, was a general point at people being happy to pipe up but not do anything about it. Specifically I would question if people giving grief about it have actually done anything about it?
The reason it's been built is that it stops us having to dig stuff up and burn it. Sounds like a good one to me. All this digging and burning happens in places outside of Ringmer/Lewes/Sussex so often gets ignored.
Seeing as we all happily use electricity produced by power stations elsewhere I don't see that the location of power and users is relevant at all.
Brings us back to NIMBY.
On 15 Oct 2011 at 8:14pm Yawn.... wrote:
Whats's nuclear power, solar power, hydroelectric etc gotta do with digging stuff up?
Your NIMBY remark is still way off the mark and not a well targeted riposte. You might as well be in a different thread,
On 16 Oct 2011 at 11:36am Beauty first wrote:
All of the stuff about money, saving energy, privilege pales
into insignificance when seeing it there against the lovely
Downs.
It has to come down.
It is a beacon to our times.
A very real icon of how we have lost our way and
lost any sense of beauty in our lives.
The cult of greed and ugliness prevails.
I was so shocked driving down yesterday to see it
I live near Mark Cross and knew nothing about it
and was so saddened and shocked.
If their is a protest now let me know please.
On 17 Oct 2011 at 4:36pm Peter wrote:
I would just like to say that my partner and I visited the turbine on Sunday and both thought it looks beautiful. I love the grey colour and the organic lines of the nacelle and blades are captivating. We also had a look from different angles and different distances and again agreed that the turbine enhances the area from any angle. I have grown up in the country and cannot understand why people are against them. Our countryside has been evolving for millennia, I have seen many changes over the years and I believe that, to be able to harness power from the wind is a natural evolution of man and nature.
Congratulations to all who have had to endure the hate of the narrow minded few who are stuck in a time warp. with energy costs spiralling we will all need to make way for a lot more
On 19 Oct 2011 at 9:21am Meg A Watts wrote:
When the energy expended in its production, transportation, installation and maintenance is taken into account, this massive wind turbine has already used up more (fossil fuel-generated) energy than it will ever produce. A large part of that was paid for by the taxpayer, and the energy generated will never benefit the tax payer.
So who wins here? Oh yes, Glyndebourne who get all the power generated. Thankfully that will be a laughably small amount, and I am ashamed of my bitter satisfaction at that.
On 19 Oct 2011 at 9:59am Meg A Watts wrote:
Check out Peasant on this and the other thread Wind Turbine for details of how utterly insane the economics of this are.
Oh and by the way, if the National Grid was to RELY on wind power, it would have to increase its generating capacity from quick starting gas-powered plant to provide power on cold windless days like last winter's snowy fortnight. And these would have to run at tick-over the whole time to be ready. Alternative is power cuts. Only hope is nuclear future, then keep working on novel solutions: it is vital to keep up investment in our universities and encourage the most gifted students to study science, not banking, as the last generation have done.