The Local community and about 35-40 planes turned out on Saturday 16th December out of concern for the future of the Cobden airport. The National Wind Farm Commissioner made a surprise visit. His attendance made him aware of the hill just to the north of the strip, upon which the Turbine hazards are proposed to be built. He said words to the affect,"it is something google earth does not show you," after observing the rising ground. The concerns of locals were heard by shadow minister for aviation, Gordon Rich-Phillips and member for Polwarth, Richard Riordan.

https://image.ibb.co/gjgyjm/75_E9943...E9_AD9_DA3.jpg

Good picture...good message image,too !

...and as Australia sacrifices its economy to the greeny gods and wind fairies over 62 sensible countries will be increasing the total world coal fired power plants by over 40%...

"...The new plants would expand the world's coal-fired power capacity by 43 per cent..."

Chinese companies to build 700 coal plants in and outside China | MINING.com


Perhaps Cobden needs a sign at their front gate commenting on the shear stupidity of the taxpayer funded 'subsidy powered wind turbines'..:hmm:





.

A great money spinner
 

Victoria has 1488 operating wind turbines over 1 MW

Here

The Government claim:"Victoria currently has approximately 949MW of operating wind power generation." But as the data demonstrates below, very rarely is that potential ever realised. How many wind farms would be required to even make inroads to the total energy required in Victoria alone. We are being conned. There are 1488 Turbines in Victoria producing only 33 MW of power today (Monday 18th @ 1335 Hours) and the Andrews Government would prefer a Hazardous Wind Farm over an airport that serves a community. Go Figure.

With the current technology we would require 6271 Wind Turbines to provide 50% of the total energy generated in Victoria last Wednesday 13th December @ 1245. This is at the Governments estimated 949 MW of capacity, however, we rarely see it. That means increased number of hazardous turbines.



TUESDAY 12 DECEMBER

There does not appear to be very much wind power generation today.

https://image.ibb.co/d5DWpm/IMG_1333.jpg

WEDNESDAY 13 DECEMBER

This was a hot day for us, around the mid 30's. From lunchtime, the wind generation reduced steadily throughout the day.

https://image.ibb.co/bKOaFR/Wed13_1245.jpg

https://image.ibb.co/fguFFR/Wed13_2045.jpg

THURSDAY 14 DECEMBER

https://image.ibb.co/bRqY26/thurs14_0755.jpg

https://image.ibb.co/myb6N6/Thurs14_1635.jpg

SUNDAY 17 DECEMBER

https://image.ibb.co/jGk0h6/SUn17_1135.jpg

MONDAY 18 DECEMBER

https://image.ibb.co/j7Gj9m/Mon18_0520.jpg

https://image.ibb.co/hZut26/Mon18_1335.png

If the issue is the aerodrome, then it has my interest and support. I can see a loss of safety due the size and proximity of the towers making them a navigation hazard that threatens operations at the aerodrome.

If issue is renewable energy policy and politics... I am stepping outside for a beer.

That is just me though.

Could someone from Cobden go on a flight using a Go Pro to show us from takeoff to landing how it looks from the cockpit and how it will effect flying . A voiceover pointing out exactly where the turbines will be would be helpful.

It's a bit hard to tell what's going on from 2,000 km away.:{

All the info has been provided to assist identification of the site. In the development plan there is a site map showing the location re local roads. Then all yer needs do is go to google earth and...

I do appreciate though that basic research is beyond some so they need spoon feeding..:hmm:





.

Good idea. Go hide in the booze.

The only reason the ding-bat wind generators are being installed is "renewable energy policy and politics"... it is the entire background to the issue..:hmm:





.

I like wind farms and an confident they will become and increasingly important slice of the power generation pie.

Hopefully this wind farm will successfully co-exist with the Cobden airfield. I get the impression that climate-skeptic nutters are trying to twist this issue to further their delusions.

The government should allocate more resources to speed the move move to renewable energy as a source of power generation.

cheers! :ok:

Yair Binghi I'm just an old bushwacker that can't understand where the problem is avoiding something that doesn't move.

I've always found it more challenging judging exactly where to put down so you get to point x before a herd of startled camels could get to it at their best speed and still have enough room past point x to stop or avoid the second mob of camels happily grazing on the edge of the runway.:eek:

Agree - away from existing airfields

In my view wind turbines should not be installed onshore at all.

They are a heavy pollutant of the sound and visual landscape. In addition to the turbulence noted here the noise they generate is highly irritating and unfortunately the proponents often choose locations that are otherwise particularly peaceful and/or beautiful - to which people are attracted for these reasons, most certainly NOT to listen to whump whump whump all bloody day :mad:

I understand that the UK have ceased subsidies for these things, and that there is a general thought they should now be located offshore (thus keeping them away from any land-based airfields!). If they must be used then this is the place for them, or directly in the middle of those cities for whom they supposedly provide a benefit...

FP.

I don't believe they ever pay off the energy that goes into mining and smelting the materials, construction, transport to site then erection and maintenance. Then they wear out after 20 years. Useless, taxpayer-subsidised monstrosities just to placate the virtue-signallers.

You forgot to put a message at the end:- THE FLAT EARTH SOCIETY GUARANTEES THIS POST TO BE FACT FREE. NO BRAIN CELLS WERE USED IN COMPOSING THIS POST.

Please stop shouting, now there's a nice chap.

My sincere apologies if my capital letters upset your delicate sensibilities. In future I will endeavor to better control my anger and fustration with the never ending repetition of debunked nonsense.

If you don't believe the science then at least use common sense. If wind turbines use more power in their manufacture than they ever produce why don't those cunning shysters you make out the turbine industry to be, just buy power from the grid and on sell it at a profit and cut out all the stuffing around building turbines

To keep my temperature down at least quote your sources and the date when it was first published . In this fast evolving field of renewable energy even 6 months can make a substantial difference. Also don't bother quoting Lord Monckton or Jo Nova because I won't bother to read them.

There are plenty of people properly qualified that can present the true picture.

Mark Diesendorf, formerly Professor of Environmental Science at the University of Technology, Sydney and a principal research scientist with CSIRO has summarised some of the benefits of onshore wind farms as follows.[73] A wind farm, when installed on agricultural land, has one of the lowest environmental impacts of all energy sources:

• It occupies less land area per kilowatt-hour (kWh) of electricity generated than any other energy conversion system, apart from rooftop solar energy, and is compatible with grazing and crops.
• It generates the energy used in its construction in just 3 months of operation, yet its operational lifetime is 20–25 years.
• Greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution produced by its construction are very tiny and declining. There are no emissions or pollution produced by its operation.
• In substituting for load following natural gas plants [...] wind power produces a net decrease in greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution, and a net increase in biodiversity.
• Large wind turbines are almost silent and rotate so slowly (in terms of revolutions per minute) that they are rarely a bird strike hazard.

Rutan, here's some well qualified sources for you:

https://stopthesethings.com/2014/12/...turbine-noise/

Wind farm neighbours have greater risk of health problems: Australian study | Wind Concerns Ontario

Information | Waubra Foundation

Personally I don't need the research, I know just how polluting and noisy these things are, and how expensive it is to pursue a court case to deal with them. There is no free lunch, and the real cost to the environment of wind turbines is all too often overlooked.

The statement 'almost silent and rotate so slowly' demonstrates that the writer has utterly no understanding of the wider industry and the issues, nor even of simple maths. There are many commercial turbines that rotate quite quickly. For those that don't the blades are often quite long and so the rotor tip speed, just as in an aeroplane propellor can be quite significant, the outcome of this of course is aerodynamic noise pollution.

While in the case of aeroplanes this noise can be temporarily annoying to some it is generally a passing thing, but with wind turbines (aka noise generators) it can go on for days without end. The end effect of this, along with the visual pollution, can be quite significant and severely detrimental to local's quality of life and environment.

FP.

Blowing hot air: Are wind farms really bad for your health?

Quote: "But these symptoms do not occur in people who haven’t been told that wind farms are harmful. And in an experiment in which participants were led to believe that wind-farm sounds are beneficial to health, they actually reported positive symptoms."

It's important to search for credible peer-reviewed material, not websites run by people wearing tinfoil hats.

Remember also, it's the same people complain about the health effects or wind farms that complain about the health effect of airports

Residents struggling with Moorabbin Airport noise as training pilots make 726 flights a day.

"Moorabbin Airport Residents' Association president Peta Millard told Leader that she doesn't bother going to bed before 10pm each night because the noise is constant up until that time"

Personally I would search for empirical evidence if I were to make statements on a public website - experiments are for the lab really, and often do not reflect real life.

As for 'tinfoil hats', I don't believe that belittling people or their views in this way particularly assists knowledge and understanding. The latter is something to be sought - after all we'd like people to understand our view wouldn't we, rather than just call us 'wannabe Biggles' or something?

If you look at some of the detail I earlier included it will lead you to much research and empirical evidence. I don't see the need on this aviation site to cite the hundreds of articles, scientific papers, and real people I've been involved with over these noise generators but I do assure you that there is plenty of evidence (and personal experience) of the affect on health due directly to them

The same people? Where's the complimentary article citing Peta Millard is also having issues with a wind turbine (aka noise generator)?

Attempts to dismiss people by lumping them into the 'professional whingers' category also doesn't promote understanding, nor does it assist in achieving resolution.

FP.