Nice to see at least someone agrees with me.
Right load of NIMBY buggers the rest of you are.

_________________
"go and stick your dog up your arse"
-- G.O.D.S.

Well what a wonderful attitude you have.

And I was one who did say I thought it a worthwhile idea.

If our opinions mattered in this (and they don't, it will go ahead regardless of what any of us think) I'd be inclined to reconsider just because you are so obnoxious in dismissing anyone who wants to examine the pros and cons rather than simply embracing it with no thought.

Trust you to take a general statement personally.

_________________
"go and stick your dog up your arse"
-- G.O.D.S.

Since you slagged off "the rest of you [people who posted in this thread]", that obviously does include me.

You make a habit of lumping people into groups and ascribing beliefs to them they never stated. Then you criticise them for making these stupid remarks that they never said.

And when called on it you claim that you weren't talking about anyone in particular.

_________________
"go and stick your dog up your arse"
-- G.O.D.S.

<img src="http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/0/4231/948971-picard_facepalm1_500x328_super.jpg" width=300>

Look, if you made a post saying you supported it, and I waved the insult "NIMBY buggers" at a crowd that happened to have you in it, then obviously I can't have intended to specifically include you.

Are you /really/ that desperate for validation? Does my unambiguous public approval mean so much to you?

Fine: You're all NIMBY buggers except for Lamma-Gung and Alan and anyone else who posted their support of the wind farm.

Happy now?

_________________
"go and stick your dog up your arse"
-- G.O.D.S.

That isn't what happened.



Again you try to restate my position to make me look like a twat.

I don't need your approval.
I do however take exception to your smarmy and dishonest method of argument.

In particular, none of the objections raised could be described as "nimbyism". But you persist in using that label to trivialise the issues.

_________________
"go and stick your dog up your arse"
-- G.O.D.S.

As I said, smarmy and dishonest.

That was referring to the possibility of siting a string of turbines ON LAMMA, not offshore.
If you look at the link in that passage you quoted, you'll see my reasons in detail.

Address those if you actually care about the issues.

NO, I'm not happy!
Why am I being excepted from being a "NIMBY bugger" here?

I like the sound of being a "NIMBY bugger" and don't mind being called that at all!

What's a "NIMBY bugger" anyway? Sounds like a title of a more offbeat Lamma-zine story, probably about silly and unnecessary flame wars about windfarms...

How about discussing the real issues of the windfarm here? Who'd be disturbed by the visual impact of this windfarm? Environmental impact, carbon-saving, potential tariff increases and issues like that?

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

Wind energy is costly. Will HEC have more excuses for charging a bigger bill to their customers when this wind farm is built?

Yes, they will be permitted to charge more because of the much higher cost of generating electricity from wind turbines. The recently revised Scheme of Control by the govt. allows a higher return on investment (11% instead of the new standard 9.9%) for alternative energy sources.

The windfarm is a huge investment, but it's distributed over several years, representing only 1-2% of their generated power, so the tariff increase will be pretty low, I'd guess. The current gradual, slow conversion from coal to much more expensive gas (double the cost?) will have much more effect on increasing tariffs in the next few years.

And CLP is building an even much bigger windfarm off Sai Kung, so they'll also be increasing tariffs in a few years time... Replacing coal with any alternative energy sources doesn't come cheap...

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

Would nuclear energy a better option? It seems to be quite safe at the moment.

We already have a nuclear facility "in our back yard" at Daya Bay. One can only hope that it is indeed "quite safe" as it is only 50km from Central as the crow (or the cloud of radioactive nuclear fallout) flies. Since the government does not even have an evacuation plan, the only way to get a decent night's sleep is to assume that it is in fact "quite safe".

CLP owns 25% of Daya Bay and buys 75% of its output. So we already have about 25% of HK supplied by nuclear power.

Interesting details of the Wind Monitoring Station, 4km off the SW of Lamma Island, testing for HK Electric planned 100 Mega Watt offshore Wind Farm:

http://www.districtcouncils.gov.hk/island_d/pdf/2010/IS_2010_046_EN.pdf

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

Lamma lasers to shoot winds

by Samson Lee
The Standard - Friday, August 05, 2011

Should we Lammaites all be very worried about these Lamma Lasers?

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

Just build some Tesla coils, and knock down the Power plant at Power plant beach, and plant some trees in it's place. Lamma Forest 2? ha ha ha.

A few recent infos on HK Electric's Windfarm, 3.5km off Lamma's SW coast:

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.