Got the wind up?
As the process to decide on whether an experimental wind-powered electricity generator progresses into beyond the environmental impact stage, debates about the desirability or otherwise of wind power heat up.
Got the wind up?
As the process to decide on whether an experimental wind-powered electricity generator progresses into beyond the environmental impact stage, debates about the desirability or otherwise of wind power heat up.
One issue is sheer aesthetics: are they beautiful or not? Do they intrude on our sense of privacy and open space? The monks at Mariya uMama WeThemba monastery, treasuring the contemplative peace of their beautiful location, have strongly expressed this concern.
A suggestion has been made that just by positioning the wind tower a couple of hundred metres one way or another could effectively shield it from view and hearing.
At any rate, people around the world and many countries are a long way ahead of South Africa already – are deeply divided over the aesthetics of wind farms.
For example, writing in the online magazine Contemporary Aesthetics, Yuriko Saito argues: “[I]t is possible to create an aesthetically pleasing effect by choosing the colour, shape and height of the turbines
appropriate… to the particular landscape, making them uniform in their appearance and movement, and… arranging them in proportion to the landscape.
” Another writer admires the windmills in Sweden as “graceful objects because the slender airfoils seem both delicate and powerful, while their gentle motion imparts a living kinetic nature.”
It’s another question whether wind power will really deliver. James Lovelock, the advocate of the so-called Gaia hypothesis (the idea that life regulates the conditions for its own survival on Earth, not necessarily to the benefi t of all organisms uniformly) regards wind turbines as bad engineering and a false promise: he claims they will never pay off the carbon defi cit incurred by the cement that goes into their construction and maintenance. Lovelock favours nuclear power.
At least some advocates for wind generators around Grahamstown would disagree. They note the high cost of most other forms of power generation (quite apart from hidden environmental costs, especially pollution).
The National Energy Regulator’s recent projections place the unit cost of wind-generated electricity at the lower end of all methods, alongside biogas and biofi ll.
The NER predicts that in 2030 wind power will cost about 0.9 R/kilowatt, as opposed to around 1.7 R/kw for coal and nuclear power.
The most expensive options are likely to be open cycle gas turbines (4.2 R/kw) and photovoltaic energy (3.5 R/kw). Coal-fi red power is presently pretty cheap but unlike wind power is likely to rise to 1.6 R/kw over the next two decades.
These costs are only one factor, however: for example, the NER document does not note the consumption of water necessary for the different methods something to concern us particularly in this time of intense drought.
Most of the presently-used coal-fi red, water-cooled generators in South Africa consume a staggering amount of water.
Concentrated solar power units, using heated steam to drive turbines, are also water-expensive. Wind power, by contrast, consumes no water in the process of generating power. In our water-scarce country, this might eventually outweigh other negatives.
Wind towers may last up to 40 years, after which they can be dismantled and the land restored. A coal plant, on the other hand, would have consumed about 5 million tons of coal over those 40 years, worth about R2.4-billion.
Based on heavy metal contents of typical high grade South African coal, over that period about 3200 tons of mercury, 2000 tons of arsenic, 1600 tons of nickel, 4400 tons of selenium, 504 tons of cadmium, 378 tons of chrome and 115 tons of lead would be released into the atmosphere or leach into water-sources from slag-heaps.
According to local activists, the wind farm will be 26% owned by a community education trust which, over its lifetime, it will pay itself off in about seven years, after which it will be able to invest (depending on wind conditions) up to R25- to R30-million per year in the education of children in Grahamstown.
It’s a complex question. At present, Coastal and Environmental
Services (CES) are conducting an environmental impact assessment (EIA) on the proposal by French fi rm Innowind to erect one 60m mast at Waainek, near the Highlands Road, which will measure wind speeds and associated factors, after which it will be taken down.
In addition, one turbine, to generate between 2 3 megawatts, is proposed. This is, however, a separate issue to the proposed Waainek Wind Energy Project, for which an EIA is being prepared and should be released shortly.
Concerns have been expressed that alternative possible sites, such as the open ground near the substation on the east side of Rini, have not been adequately considered.
Queries by interested persons can be directed to CES. They welcome your input. Contacts for Makana Enviro-News: Nikki KÖhly: nkohly@yahoo.com, 046 636 1643/Lawrence Sisitka:
heilaw@imaginet.co.za, 046 622 8595/Jenny Gon: j-gon@intekom. co.za, 046 622 5822/Dan Wylie d.wylie@ru.ac.za, 046 603 8409/ Nick James: nickjames@intekom.co.za, 046 622 5757