Portland Port to build Wind Farm on top of wrecks in Portland Harbour

Diver Magazine's website is claiming that Portland Port Authority
has applied for planning permission to build a number of wind
turbines in the harbour at Portland. These turbines are in addition
to the two units on the ends of the breakwater for which permission
has already been granted. The new application is for 11 turbines,
10 of which seem to be located close to the breakwater on top of
the Countess. The Eleventh appears to be on the site currently
occupied by the Hood.

The RYA is objecting to these proposals and is keen to hear from
divers

More information and an email address for RYA is at
http://www.divernet.com/news/stories...nd050204.shtml

Regards,

Pete


--
__________________________________________________ __________________
Pete Young pete@antipope.org Remove dot. to reply
"Just another crouton, floating on the bouillabaisse of life"

"Dave Appleby" <dave_appleby@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bb57cdba6dfaff05801f2b96449d98f1.122971@mygat e.mailgate.org...
> "Pete Young" <pete@antipope.dot.org> wrote in message
> news:c0ak8h$nch$2@visp.bt.co.uk
>
> > Diver Magazine's website is claiming that Portland Port Authority
> > has applied for planning permission to build a number of wind
> > turbines in the harbour at Portland.
> > More information and an email address for RYA is at
> > http://www.divernet.com/news/stories...nd050204.shtml
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Pete
>
>
> I saw this late last night.
>
> The only think I could think of was what Izzy was going to say / do.
>
> Methinks there's going to be a small explosion from the direction of
> Underwater explorers.

Indeed. Methinks the pieces of the puzzle are now starting to fall into
place....

"Pete Young" <pete@antipope.dot.org> wrote in message
news:c0ak8h$nch$2@visp.bt.co.uk

> Diver Magazine's website is claiming that Portland Port Authority
> has applied for planning permission to build a number of wind
> turbines in the harbour at Portland.
> More information and an email address for RYA is at
> http://www.divernet.com/news/stories...nd050204.shtml
>
> Regards,
>
> Pete


I saw this late last night.

The only think I could think of was what Izzy was going to say / do.

Methinks there's going to be a small explosion from the direction of
Underwater explorers.

DaveA



--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

> > > Diver Magazine's website is claiming that Portland Port Authority
> > > has applied for planning permission to build a number of wind
> > > turbines in the harbour at Portland.
> > > More information and an email address for RYA is at
> > > http://www.divernet.com/news/stories...nd050204.shtml
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Pete
> >
> >
> > I saw this late last night.
> >
> > The only think I could think of was what Izzy was going to say / do.
> >
> > Methinks there's going to be a small explosion from the direction of
> > Underwater explorers.
>
> Indeed. Methinks the pieces of the puzzle are now starting to fall into
> place....

I get the impression that Izzy has known (or at least suspected) this for
some time now. It was hinted at in some of his earliest posts on the
subject on Divernet. I have to admit that I thought it a bit
"conspiracy-theorist" at first...

....anyway, if you haven't already done so...
http://www.divernet.com/xtra/hoodpet1.shtml

CAS

There was a thread on uk.rec.sailing about this not long ago. The general
opinion (and I concur) is that these are not really a problem - and so what
if RYA is objecting. Besides, even if it is a problem to us minority users
of the sea, does it really justify kicking up fuss to object to a genuine
effort to use renewable resources instead of polluting the planet? I support
these things. There's plenty of other places to sail and dive - the sea is a
big place. We should support these initiatives.

"Ric" <spam@off.com> wrote in message
news:c0b2qk$f2k$1@news-reader3.wanadoo.fr...
> There was a thread on uk.rec.sailing about this not long ago. The general
> opinion (and I concur) is that these are not really a problem - and so
what
> if RYA is objecting. Besides, even if it is a problem to us minority users
> of the sea, does it really justify kicking up fuss to object to a genuine
> effort to use renewable resources instead of polluting the planet? I
support
> these things. There's plenty of other places to sail and dive - the sea is
a
> big place. We should support these initiatives.
>

The fuss that is being kicked up, or at least by Izzy, has nothing to do
with objecting to genuine efforts to use renewable resources. It is to do
with a private company (Portland Port) looking out for their interests
(revenue generated from the wind farm scheme, monies not spent on full
consultation with users and monies not having to be spent policing scheme as
all minority sea use [or at least diving] has been banned outright) at the
expense of the minority users (in this case divers on the hood [and, worst
case, all Portland harbour wrecks]) and their legal obligations (in this
case to hold proper consultation as stipulated in some contract or Act or
something that Izzy dug up).

The correct thing for Portland Port to have done would have been to consult
the local businesses and minority sea users regarding the Hood (and the
divers are the MAJORITY users of this particular resource) and taken their
advice.

The correct thing for Portland Port to do now is to remove the ban, hold
proper consultation and come to agreements between themselves, the windfarm
developers, the RYA, the divers, the local businesses and everyone else (it
is their duty after all).

Lets face it - its a wind farm - the windmills are above the water - we are
divers - we swim around UNDER the water - there is absolutely no reason
(with the exception of an easy life for Portland Port) why the two things
cannot co-exist.

THAT is justification enough for kicking up a fuss. Now get over to
Divernet and sign that petition...

CAS
--
Temperature @ Stoney? Find it or share it @
http://stoneytemps.calumscott.me.uk/

Ric <spam@off.com> writes:

>There was a thread on uk.rec.sailing about this not long ago. The general
>opinion (and I concur) is that these are not really a problem - and so what
>if RYA is objecting.

I suspect the argument on uk.rec.sailing may have been about the
previous planning permission for the two units on the breakwaters.
The date of the Diver article is 6th Feb, and I can't find anything
in uk.rec.sailing since then .

The RYA reckons that the new proposals will make it impossible to do
any sailing in Portland harbour because of the turbulence, and the
RSPB is also concerned about the effects of local wildlife.

It seems much more reasonable to me that if they need to site a
windfarm down there, they should put it several miles out to sea like
the one that is being built offshore at Great Yarmouth. It won't
inconvenience anyone except the developers.

Pete

--
__________________________________________________ __________________
Pete Young pete@antipope.org Remove dot. to reply
"Just another crouton, floating on the bouillabaisse of life"

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:00:08 +0100, "Ric" <spam@off.com> wrote:

>There was a thread on uk.rec.sailing about this not long ago. The general
>opinion (and I concur) is that these are not really a problem - and so what
>if RYA is objecting. Besides, even if it is a problem to us minority users
>of the sea, does it really justify kicking up fuss to object to a genuine
>effort to use renewable resources instead of polluting the planet? I support
>these things. There's plenty of other places to sail and dive - the sea is a
>big place. We should support these initiatives.

As you say the sea is a big place, so why not put the wind generators
30 yards away so you are not destroying one of the most dived sites in
the UK? I would guess it will cost a bit more.

So PPA trash the diving for the users, trash the livelihoods of the
instructors and skippers from Portland, kill the tourism industry in
Portland etc. All because they don't follow your arguments that "the
sea us a big place"

Pete
diving 'at' melbourne 'dot' me 'dot' uk

Pete Melbourne wrote:

> So PPA trash the diving for the users, trash the livelihoods of the
> instructors and skippers from Portland, kill the tourism industry in
> Portland etc. All because they don't follow your arguments that "the
> sea us a big place"

The sea may be big but the only bit the PPA can make any money
out of is the harbour. This is not about enviromental concern,
renewable energy or anything like that. This is about rent.

nigelH

Ric <spam@off.com> skriver:
> There was a thread on uk.rec.sailing about this not long ago. The general
> opinion (and I concur) is that these are not really a problem - and so what
> if RYA is objecting. Besides, even if it is a problem to us minority users
> of the sea, does it really justify kicking up fuss to object to a genuine
> effort to use renewable resources instead of polluting the planet? I support
> these things. There's plenty of other places to sail and dive - the sea is a
> big place. We should support these initiatives.

Yes, I support renevable energy sources. But why place 11 wind
turbines inside an harbor and behine a large mountain so then only
winds from south east (or is it south west) can ba used for energy.
But moving them a mile or two outside the harbour they will get wind
from all sotherly wind direactions? This in cominations with being bad
for the wild life and turism to the area? To me sounds like a badly
planned idea.

/ Balp
--
http://anders.arnholm.nu/ Keep on Balping