Does it matter if we develop programs that are sustainable? Do we want to give our children and their children the same access to the earth's resources that we had or should we just let them fend for themselves? Do we have the ability to think and plan for a period past our own lifetime? I don't think it is in our genetic programming, but maybe it can be within our intellectual capacity.

Even if there are problems with wind power (which seem minor to me, but they are worth reviewing), wind is sustainable. Wind gives us the chance to delay running out of fossil fuels and gives our children a better chance to make their future. Are we willing to pay more for the wind power as a few % of total electricity needs, as an insurance policy for our kids, or should we tell them - tough luck?

The environmental comparison of huge unsightly open cuts and tonnes of overburden in mining coal, tonnes of ash, tonnes of SOx, NOx, and particulates in generating the power, versus wind turbine noise and access roads, seems like an easy choice. Add greenhouse, even easier.

If we want more sustainable energy and a better chance for our kids, wind power has got to be in the mix.

Mark has got you pegged to a T snowman. Your the type of person who would argue the ship wasn't sinking as the water covered your head. Stick to travel writing.

nauswea please answer these questions.
Are wind farms loader then a train, airplane, highway?
Are wind farms uglier then a coal fire power station?
Are wind farms more dangerous then nuclear power station?
Would you rather have a nuclear power station where the turbines are now.
Do you think that a wind farm devalues a property more then a coal fired power station in the same location would?

Please try to answer the questions with answer not questions.

Please try to answer the questions with answer not questions.

I think that most people, including Snowman agree with the research being done into alternate energy sources. From a purely economic point of view it means more industries, more jobs, and advancement of scientific knowledge. The main problem seems to be hysterical beat-ups about the dangers we face from global warming etc.

Property devaluation, land clearing etc are all legitimate concerns when it comes to wind farming. I've never heard the noise that is generated but from descriptions I've read I hope the wind farming companies are putting money away to pay for the inevitable lawsuits for "psychological problems", real or imagined caused by the noise.

Kenny, just because people oppose wind power stations in some locations doesn't mean they like or promote the use of coal or nuclear. Just because wind energy is renewable doesn't mean it hasn't any negative effects. To even talk about wind power vs coal power is silly. This issue is about location. These companies are choosing sites with their eye on the triple bottom line, profit, profit, profit. The fact people live there is irrelevant to them. Don't think for one minute these guys are environmentalists, believe me they are hard nosed business people using exactly the same tactics and ethics associated with industry.
For my part I would love to see an accelerated uptake of grid connected solar panels and solar HWS, particularly on the sea of rooftops in the suburbs. The capital cost at the moment is high and this is where the government should be directing subsidies or no interest loans to allow ordinary householders and tax payers to install solar panels and solar HWS's. Eventually the upfront capital cost would fall negating the need for further subsidies. This would have the benefit of actually reducing electricity use and saving people money on their power bills. Subsidies should also go to help low income people afford roof and wall insulation on existing houses. I agree with 5 star ratings for new houses, if people want to build a massive McMansion that requires a huge airconditioner then they should pay a premium for the power they use.
Coal fired power stations could be converted to natural gas, unfortunately this would result in massive job losses and large power bill increases. No politician wants to be responsible for either, for them it is much better to go with useless wind turbines because they are big and the average voter thinks the government is doing something about greenhouse gas emissions.

Sounds as though someone in the wind industry has found an appropriate location to build a wind power station if where Kenny lives is within earshot of a steel mill.

The area must already be industrialised and is therefore unlikely to be of high scenic value. This means that background noise levels will be high unlike when peaceful rural locations are chosen.

Find the right location and opposition will fade away - I'm pleased that Kenny and his wife are happy to live near a wind farm - but it doesn't mean they should deny others their own view to the contrary.

Mark,

I do not expect to be about in the year 2040, so I will never be able to verify your prognosis for the energy mix in that year. None-the-less, I would bet that even in Australia nuclear power will be up and running by then. Please pay any winnings into my estate account.