Αρχική Επιτάχυνση της ανάπτυξης των Ανανεώσιμων Πηγών ΕνέργειαςΆρθρο 9 Θέματα χωροθέτησης εγκαταστάσεων ΑΠΕΣχόλιο του χρήστη anemokamenos | 15 Ιανουαρίου 2010, 10:08
  • Σχόλιο του χρήστη 'anemokamenos' | 15 Ιανουαρίου 2010, 10:08

    I would like to apologize for writing this in English and thank you for taking the time to read this and offer to all of us the opportunity to express our opinions. In light of that spirit, I think that it is also very important for the local communities to have a say as to whether and where the wind generators are erected. Wind generators are huge and noisy, they impact the landscape visually, auditorially, and environmentally. They will affect the value of neighboring land and potential income from the drop in tourism. A trade-off for the community might be income for electricity generated, but that of course, is dependent on who owns the generators. The wind park established at Anavra, Volos seems an ideal example of community support and gain as opposed to an outside company renting land at a minimal cost (yet high by local island standards) and deriving profit from the eyesore that windmills inevitably are – an eyesore whose consequences, though, only the local inhabitants suffer. It is critical for local communities to be involved in the choice for location and ideally the “company” which establishes the windmills. One major objection that I have to expediting the permits required is that it encourages any businessman or landowner to erect a windmill as long as the property is 500 meters from its neighbor. 40% of the cost (which inevitably is over-charged and thus most of the cost is covered) will be paid by taxpayers, electricity produced will be financed again by consumers at a higher rate, and the landowner or businessman will be very comfortable indeed. This sort of “racket” will run rampant across the countryside, one here, two there, five over here, etc and what was once a peaceful and harmonious landscape will be scattered with what are essentially industrial turbines. It will be ugly and catastrophic for the integrity of the landscape, and the appeal that Greece’s beauty offers to Greeks and foreigners alike. Between the forest fires and the wind parks, there will be few pristine forests left. Let alone that the subsidies for the wind parks might inspire arsenists to set fires in the future. We all know how that works in reality. If windmills must be erected, then at least on the islands, let them be for local self-sustinence, keyed into local power generation (diesel generators which can match up to sudden drops in wind power without power black-outs) without connecting the islands to the main grid (which requires huge investments and major construction on the islands themselves and the sea in between). The enormous difference in scale between wind generators (150m) and local houses is entirely incongruous and aesthetically disturbing. There should be a limit as to the size of the generators and the number (70m and 3 or 4 per island as local need demands). In the mainstream bibliography on wind generators, it is commonly encouraged for the wind parks to be located near gas plants. This is particularly relevant to mainland Greece because this would take advantage of the existing high-voltage lines required to feed the electricity to the main grid, plus, the intermediate control of fluctuations in wind power that gas accommodates would be monitored right there. And lastly, gas plants are already in industrial zones rather than in the middle of the natural landscape. They are most likely also where the main polluters are, such that the polluters would carry their burden for their pollution rather than place it in somebody else’s back yard. Lastly, wind generator commentators encourage their use on farms which can use the electricity directly and their land is already without trees. Again, though, there should be a limit on the percentage of their land used in such a way, otherwise agriculture might shift dramatically toward wind culture. Furthermore, there should be strict rules in the contracts with those who erect the wind generators to dismantle and remove the generators after they cease to produce, which is at best 20 years later. They should not be left to “rot” in the environment, running the risk of future accidents caused by blades breaking off or the collapse of the entire turbine, let alone the visual pollution left behind. In my personal opinion, I think that the amount of land required for any sort of result to be derived from wind generators wipes out the benefit that they provide (if any) to that same environment. I believe that as a country and particularly a ministry which is the only tool available to protect the environment, you should look into other sources of energy. For example, a reputable British scientist, David MacKay, recommends in an oversimplified nutshell that transport fuel be converted as much as possible to electric (hybrid cars and extensive electric train networks), and that nuclear plants and clean coal plants be used to produce electricity. Since Greece does not have any natural sources for gas or oil, whichever fossil fuel it imports should be the same to the country. (So in other words, we are not prolonging the life of a natural reserve within our borders by erecting wind generators). Therefore, why not look into other sources of energy? Gas and oil will run out at some point anyway, so why not be ready for it? We would dramatically cut CO2 emissions by either nuclear or clean coal, gain on the carbon tax levied to polluting countries, plus we could potentially export electricty. And we would not have a construction boom destroying our greatest national asset, which is Greece’s natural beauty. Thank you for your time, anemokamenos