Solar Farms

[d000hg]

A blot on the landscape to me, but graceful and elegant to you, so you would have them imposed on me?

Absolutely.

[Doggy Styles]

Yes, if it helps achieve energy security.

It won't. Have you not been listening?

[AtW]

It won't. Have you not been listening?

It generates power from renewable independent source that does not depend on crazy dictator far away.

You think subsidy is too expensive for the power? Turn off all your electricity just to find out how you'd manage it, most certainly after a week you'd be happily paying premium just to have power on at least a few hours a day.

Granted, shale gas has got bigger potential in this country, but fraking has got plenty of opponents also.

[Malcolm Buggeridge]

It generates power from renewable independent source that does not depend on crazy dictator far away.

Well, not until a crazy dictator far away learns how to control the weather.

I have to say, I totally agree with DS on this one and I am far from convinced that the returns from these technologies in any way counter balance the detrimental visual impact on our wonderful countryside.

[AtW]

Well, not until a crazy dictator far away learns how to control the weather.

[warrenboon]

They're planning one by the Cotswold Water Park. Ironic really, since a lot of the area around here (ex gravel pits) has been turned over to wildlife, and the plans have been proposed by the Wiltshire Wildlife Trust...

[d000hg]

Well, not until a crazy dictator far away learns how to control the weather.

I have to say, I totally agree with DS on this one and I am far from convinced that the returns from these technologies in any way counter balance the detrimental visual impact on our wonderful countryside.

Yes, terrible to ruin our man-made landscape with a man-made wind-mill.

[Malcolm Buggeridge]

Yes, terrible to ruin our man-made landscape with a man-made wind-mill.

Ah, that old chestnut. Somebody always trots out with that when trying to defend the carpeting of our countryside be it with housing or solar farms.

I like to think of it as man modified. There's a big difference in that what goes to make up that landscape is living organic matter not a load of concrete and glass.

Furthermore, a lot of this so called man made landscape has evolved over hundreds of years - take the hedgerows for instance. Yes, I know a lot of these have been ripped out in the name of monoculture - and that's something else I have always strongly opposed - but the places where this has happened are generally not earmarked for development as they are prime agricultural land.

No, from my experience, these sites are generally located where they will have maximum visual impact, e.g. on the side of a hill where they will be visible for miles around.

So what? Well, I'm an unashamed aesthete - the gentle, almost maternal nature of the rolling English countryside is, in my mind, the best thing about this country and the thought of it bristling with all this technology fills me with horror. Yes, it's the same landscape but it will be like looking at a rose with blight. It's still a rose but it is a rose that is covered in blight. This would greatly impinge on my quality of life.

[Doggy Styles]

Ah, that old chestnut. Somebody always trots out with that when trying to defend the carpeting of our countryside be it with housing or solar farms.

I like to think of it as man modified. There's a big difference in that what goes to make up that landscape is living organic matter not a load of concrete and glass.

Furthermore, a lot of this so called man made landscape has evolved over hundreds of years - take the hedgerows for instance. Yes, I know a lot of these have been ripped out in the name of monoculture - and that's something else I have always strongly opposed - but the places where this has happened are generally not earmarked for development as they are prime agricultural land.

No, from my experience, these sites are generally located where they will have maximum visual impact, e.g. on the side of a hill where they will be visible for miles around.

So what? Well, I'm an unashamed aesthete - the gentle, almost maternal nature of the rolling English countryside is, in my mind, the best thing about this country and the thought of it bristling with all this technology fills me with horror. Yes, it's the same landscape but it will be like looking at a rose with blight. It's still a rose but it is a rose that is covered in blight. This would greatly impinge on my quality of life.

WHS

Just because Person A would like a countryside dotted with windfarms, that is no reason why it should be imposed on Person B who would not. That is the height of arrogance.

[d000hg]

WHS

Just because Person A would like a countryside dotted with windfarms, that is no reason why it should be imposed on Person B who would not. That is the height of arrogance.

That's an utterly ludicrous position to take. Logically extended, since nothing will please everyone, the only way to protect everyone from being "imposed upon" is do do nothing. I mean think about the Golden Gate Bridge... to many a wonderful iconic landmark, but doubtless to others a horrific blot on the landscape which glorifies in refusing to blend in with its surroundings.

And our countryside is not 'adjusted' or 'evolved' it is totally unnatural. I think the English countryside is beautiful but that's really a happy accident.