iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Matt Baker Hits Out At Wind Turbines

Matt Baker Wind Farms

First Posted: 21/02/2012 07:44 Updated: 21/02/2012 07:45   PA

Amazing
 Inspiring
 Funny
 Scary
 Hot
 Crazy
 Important
 Weird

Countryfile presenter Matt Baker has criticised the number of wind turbines springing up in the countryside.

The One Show host, 34, said it was "sad" that villages are now "empty", with few people who live in the countryside still working there.
But asked to name the greatest threat to the countryside, Baker, who grew up on a farm in Durham, told the Radio Times: "I think there's an enormous number of wind turbines.

"They are right next to the farm in Durham and they're 90 metres high. I'm not sure how effective they are as they never seem to be actually working!"

Former Strictly Come Dancing finalist Baker is not the first celebrity to speak out against wind farms with conservationist David Bellamy recently opposing them, saying that they were destroying the landscape.

Baker is co-presenting BBC1 show Countryfile with Julia Bradbury, who returns to the screen after giving birth, at the age of 41, to her "miracle" baby last year.

Bradbury was already back at work filming The Great British Countryside just two-and-a-half months after giving birth to a boy, Zephyr.

The presenter, who was told that it would be almost impossible to get pregnant because she suffered from the medical condition endometriosis, said of taking her baby on location: "There I was in car parks with Zeph (breast-feeding) up my jumper.

"I'm sure people were thinking, 'Is that Julia Bradbury over there? What is she doing?' But, to me, it was, and is, all about Zeph."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK ENTERTAINMENT

Countryfile presenter Matt Baker has criticised the number of wind turbines springing up in the countryside. The One Show host, 34, said it was "sad" that villages are now "empty", with few people ...
Countryfile presenter Matt Baker has criticised the number of wind turbines springing up in the countryside. The One Show host, 34, said it was "sad" that villages are now "empty", with few people ...
Filed by Dina Rickman  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 107
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
thedookey
13 Fans
03:44 PM on 02/21/2012
Wind turbines = waste of time,resources,space. Build the nuclear stations now, let's have security and reliability of supply. Proper engineering ,with proper engineering employment and apprenticeships , even for the long term.
Bin the Airfix Kit mentality , that's not engineering,besides ,anybody actually seen these eyesores working and generating power? Crass stupidity.
Permalink  |
SuperDoc2
35 Fans
03:39 PM on 02/21/2012
We are surrounded by water... this makes a lot of waves... turbines work well in waves... waves are constant to one degree or another and in the UK usually strong. Why oh why don't we harness the water!!!
Permalink  |
lcdmartin
50 Fans
03:38 PM on 02/21/2012
Wind turbines are great - in theory. Unfortunatly they have been shown to induce epileptic fits and many residents don't like seeing them on an otherwise nice view. One solution could be to put them on the uninhabited islands around the coast (the tiny ones) and maybe even some manmade ones - plenty of high winds at sea and noone has to put up with the view. Sorted.
Permalink  |
taffy terrier
56 Fans
03:28 PM on 02/21/2012
The only people benefiting from these monstrosities are the people making a fortune from them they are a complete waste of time and are a blot on the landscape and the politicians that want them putting up do not want them in their villages blighting their countryside
Permalink  |
stoke
47 Fans
02:40 PM on 02/21/2012
Well done Matt you are saying what the vast majority already think, apart from the left libdems
Permalink  |
Bebe123
17 Fans
02:36 PM on 02/21/2012
Is 'slam' the new differing opinion?
Permalink  |
Susie Sparkle
0 Fans
02:26 PM on 02/21/2012
Matt Baker is only saying what we all know, apart from some well meaning deluded people.
Permalink  |
photo
yormerlin
37 Fans
02:19 PM on 02/21/2012
If the wind don't blow the turbine don't work so a back up power source is always needed,,,complete waste of money and time.
Permalink  |
esso man
66 Fans
04:18 PM on 02/21/2012
thats why we need more "OFFSHORE" turbines as its very rare not to have wind,or how about water powered generators,just like the water wheels of yesteryear,but at the end of the day we need to generate more power,at less costs,I know that any suggestions will be dismissed as its always down to the saying "NOT in my backyard" but something is definately needed,or we will end up like in the 70s where we only had power on certain days or hours depending where you lived,& that was no fun coming home in the dark only to find that the power was off so unless you had gas to cook with even a cup of coffee was not possible !!
Permalink  |
gogsrule
56 Fans
02:06 PM on 02/21/2012
He's just another C-grade celebrity NIMBY. We need to find alternative sources of enegy because one day gas and oil reserves (and coal) will run out and, anyway, who holds them can hold us to ransom. We should have used our North Sea legacy long ago to develop alternatives.

Let's not go on a guilt trip about CO2 emissions however - see the following.

Global Carbon emissions annually (%)
China 23.3%
USA 18.1%
India 5.78%
Russia 5.67%
Japan 4.01%
UK 1.73%

Let's get real, for all the expense and effort to reduce our emissions, they barely register on the scale BUT, one day we will need alternative sources of enery.
Permalink  |
Blindstu
132 Fans
02:45 PM on 02/21/2012
Just where do they get these figures from?........My view is that they are an absolute nonsense and all guesswork. I will believe in wind turbines the minute they produce one that can provide enough electricity to run a steel blast furnace. No way, not possible and I speak from my experience of running power plants on very big ships over many years. The only people who will gain from these wind turbines is the company that produces them and they appear to have a very strong propaganda section who seem to have convinced the public that it would be a good idea. The only way this is going to make a difference is to cover the entire country in wind turbines and who wants that? They would probably do better to fit a barrage across the Bristol channel and fit it with tidal turbines...............however, turbines in the sea means marine growth that would cause a serious loss of efficiency very quickly.
Permalink  |
gogsrule
56 Fans
07:23 PM on 02/21/2012
They're freely available on the internet. Try Global CO2 table. Al I'm saying is that the UK is a drop in the ocean and any effort we make to reduce ours is miniscule inthe big picture.
Permalink  |
pptrck
1 Fans
03:01 PM on 02/21/2012
Perhaps you would like them in your back garden?
Permalink  |
gogsrule
56 Fans
07:25 PM on 02/21/2012
Threre's a big array in the Thames Estuary close to where I live and similar in the NOrth of Scotland near my home town.
Permalink  |
jenglow
28 Fans
01:34 PM on 02/21/2012
Wind tubrines don't work. They don't contribute enough by a long long long way. Germany has more than anyone else and they only contribute short of 1% of their needs. Too expensive to run too they are subsides by taxes. My husband spends a lot of time in Germany and believe me they Germans resent them. They won't be putting more up.

.
Permalink  |
photo
rabidrightwatch
Green lefty & active environmentalist
2972 Fans
01:49 PM on 02/21/2012
Wind power in Germany contributes 9% of the nation's requirement, which is far greater than the UK, and the national infrastructure plan is to increase this to 18-20% by 2022.
I work in Germany for approx 3 months each year, and there is opposition, but nothing like the scale of the UK.
Germans tend to more practical and pragmatic than us - they more readily recognise and promote engineering, electronics and technological advance; they are world-renowned for it, after all..
Tax subsidies are used, but there again, every new form of energy receives subsidies, and coal, oil and nuclear still receive support and subsidies from taxation.
So why should alternative energy sources be treated differently?
Permalink  |
This comment has been removed.
Permalink  |
ronnieince
57 Fans
03:25 PM on 02/21/2012
Germany is by far the biggest polluter in Europe - they burn huge amounts of lignite in power stations and this produces large acidic discharges and if they close their nuclear stations ( as Frau Merkel says she will for safety reasons after Fukashima ) their pollution will get worse - they are also by far the heaviest users of automotive fuel per kilometre as they on average run larger cars and drive flat out at every opportunuity .

Alternative energy needs to be looked at but the reality is apart from nuclear there is no viable and reliable alternative to fossil fuels - France has gone over 90% nuclear and 43 new nuclear plants are currently under construction around the world - 4 in Europe .

Two produce the UK energy requirements from wind turbines would require over 200000 assuming the wind was constant - it is simply not a viable technology for continuing power demands
Permalink  |
photo
rabidrightwatch
Green lefty & active environmentalist
2972 Fans
01:28 PM on 02/21/2012
Does it really matter what Matt Baker thinks..? he's a minor 'celebrity' which doesn't make him an expert in green energy, after all.

We have the best & most consistent wind 'resources' in Western Europe, particularly offshore, but land sites, where suitable, should also be considered.

Other countries don't appear to have this problem of default answer of 'NO'.

From a personal viewpoint, I think wind turbines look great and much more sympathetic to the landscale than, for examples, electricity pylons, mobile phone masts and phone cables.

In other countries, they have a different approach. Many realise that the communities affected should be involved and benefit (or be compensated?) from green energy in their area.
One example is Germany, where residents within 2km of a wind turbine installation receive an electricity rebate (cheaper electricity); it's amazing what a bit of permanent and ongoing compensation can do... it would work here too, but the anti-brigade is in full cry and, like all those who shout loudly, they can't hear another argument.

I would not complain at all if a wind turbine farm was instaled near me.. I think they look very elegant.

We need as many different sources of alternative energy production as we can muster, and wind will play its part in that mix.
Permalink  |
ihatefrogs
14 Fans
01:27 PM on 02/21/2012
sour grapes from that boy
Permalink  |
JRWaddy
42 Fans
12:43 PM on 02/21/2012
What the fox & hounds has Julia Bradburys' offspring got to do with this story ?????
Permalink  |
hautchamps13
11 Fans
11:32 AM on 02/21/2012
What is special about the UK weather? When its either very hot or very cold, i.e. maximum power demand times, we are under an anticyclone (High). In a high there is little or no wind, hence we have to have either Nuclear, Gas, Oil or Coal as a back up and at a peak level of output.

Wind farms need to operate for at least three years just to replace the energy required to build them and have a predicted life of about 10 years.

IF we want reliable green energy, tidal power, which is always there must be at least one of the answers way ahead of wind farms. The Severn barrier makes sense. In France the Rance estuary was dammed back in the 60s and has produced gigawats of energy. Also to all those who talk about reducing consumption of electricity, where are all the electric cars going to get there power from?

Another source of power would be Thorium reactors, far safer, more plentiful supply and able to 'burn' uranium reactors waste products and producing minimal waste themselves.
Permalink  |
Tamethyst
8 Fans
11:09 AM on 02/21/2012
I wonder if the farmers and landowners were NOT paide a HUGE subsidy by the GOVERNEMENT, whether they would allow these turbines at all on their land?

Have to ask why we, as taxpayers are paying farmers for having these turbines on their fields, whilst the power companies pay out nothing for them and reap free energy which they overcharge us for.
Permalink  |
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paul Wagland
Resistance is fertile
253 Fans
12:34 PM on 02/21/2012
I don't think there are any tax-funded subsidies for wind turbines. Can you provide info to the contrary?
Permalink  |
Tamethyst
8 Fans
12:50 PM on 02/21/2012
Yes, local farmer friend is offering his land up for turbines. He is paid three times for the land. One is an annual rent from power company. Another is payment from turbine setup company, a one-off. The third is govt subsidy payment given because he is permitting green energy on his land. He will not say how much he is getting, but he said he is now planning on buying a new tractor......
Permalink  |
 
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)