“Jason, Yes I think we agree on the question of reality. However Denmark is not perhaps such a good example as people make out. The bulk of its admittedly significant wind-sourced output is exported to neighbours. It has considerable nuclear capacity and imports from neighbours when local generation is inadequate, much of which imported power come from conventional fuel sources including brown coal. Denmark is a world leader in turbine technology but despite this it has seen several frightening turbine failures/pylon collapses. We have had some in UK too, with blades being throw hundreds of feet. Googling turbine failure produces interesting reading and frightening videos. Few people realise the hazards of wind generation which include risk levels to the public not seen in conventional/nuclear generation.”

“The fact is being reliant on any one form of generation is foolish. Wind, nuclear and carbon based energy generantion are part of a combined approach.
I think Michael, that we both believe in a common sense approach to energy production. Its just that to say none at all is as mistaken as saying nothing but. Denmark is a good example of what can be reasonably done with wind power, France an excellent example of Nuclear. We can take our ideas from both those countries”

“More wind turbines the better. Many people think they are an eyesore but I could think of alot worse things to look at! Stop moaning about it and get a life, more things to worry about then 23 wind turbines!!!”

“Jason, I did read your comment. You said "Unless you are not using any modern, technological systems you have real right to complain about these turbines". Assuming that you missed out the word no between real and right you made a clear statement of support for wind turbines. I pointed out that immense numbers of these huge structures would be required to generate the electricity we need (which even then they would do unreliably). My comment about preferring to see a nuclear plant rather than a countryside of huge masts was pointed at jacko.

From your last post I gather that you are realistic and recognise that not only is nuclear a logical solution it is actually much safer than many would have us believe. However it's still not clear where you stand on littering the landscape with unreliable, ineffective wind turbines.”

“Michael, try reading my comment...The point being made was that people cannot expect to have the benefits of a modern lifestyle without the environmental costs that go with it. I do know nuclear power is the most reliable, secure and actually one of the safest methods of electricity production. However the publicity is such that the mention of it causes ihe generally ignorant public fto have its of terror.”