Bye Bye wind energy.

Lord-Jaffa · 5 Feb 2008 at 16:22

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article3308527.ece

Nato has begun an investigation into British findings that wind farms make overflying planes invisible to radar as military chiefs fear a security threat from the rapid spread of the turbines.

The US has been attending tests by Britain’s Air Warfare Centre after it made the surprise discovery that the energy plants create blind spots in air defences.

Renewable energy campaigners have been stung by a spate of last-minute objections from the Ministry of Defence to proposed new wind farms in northeast England and the Scottish Borders.

Nato’s alarm about this potential Achilles’ heel against airborne terrorists or invaders is disclosed in evidence, seen by The Times, for a planning inquiry.

The MoD is now objecting routinely to all wind farms within line of sight of radar stations, irrespective of distance. There is currently no known technical solution.

Fireskull · 5 Feb 2008 at 16:24

Surely it would be easier not to make our Security holes public lol

Energize · 5 Feb 2008 at 16:25

Who needs radar when you have satallite?

One more reason go to nuclear anyway.

Vulcan · 5 Feb 2008 at 16:25

Take that, hippies!

Azagoth · 5 Feb 2008 at 16:29

I've never understood why the "Save the Planet" hippy brigade still think that nuclear power is the same as it was in the late 50's, early 60's!

stevenazari1 · 5 Feb 2008 at 16:41

I think that they dont care about how safe it is these days - its the potential harm they can do if one was to go inside and blowthemselves up. doubt it would be hard tbh but I know nothing of nuclear factory security.

if I was a suicide bomber living in the uk - thats the first place I would go.

Tefal · 5 Feb 2008 at 16:45

stevenazari1 said:
I think that they dont care about how safe it is these days - its the potential harm they can do if one was to go inside and blowthemselves up. doubt it would be hard tbh but I know nothing of nuclear factory security.

if I was a suicide bomber living in the uk - thats the first place I would go.

security =tight, why havent they bombed the 20+ ones we have now, or America's or Frances hundreds?

also there's a vid of fighter going into a sample of one of the walls around the reactor at several hundred mph the plant disintegrates, wall stands remember the reactor building is designed to withstand a meltdown a couple of pounds of explosives wont to anything to it.

robbiemc · 5 Feb 2008 at 16:45

stevenazari1 said:
... doubt it would be hard tbh but I know nothing of nuclear factory security.

if I was a suicide bomber living in the uk - thats the first place I would go.

The fact that no one has done this suggests it's not 'easy' to just wander into a Nuclear power plant and blow yourself up.
Even if you did manage to get inside, I doubt you'd be able to carry enough explosive to do any damage.

4p · 5 Feb 2008 at 16:46

I thought Nuclear Power was bad?

Can someone briefly explain to me the good and the bad?

Posty · 5 Feb 2008 at 16:49

would be interesting to see this supposed evidence that a small windmill can create a blind spot

Energize · 5 Feb 2008 at 16:51

Thorpy said:
I thought Nuclear Power was bad?

It's the only viable option as I can see it.

Pros:

Produces far more power than renewable sources.
Billions of years fuel supply.
Total amount of co2 produced is 2/3 less than fossil fuels.

Cons:

Expensive
Waste

stevenazari1 said:
I think that they dont care about how safe it is these days - its the potential harm they can do if one was to go inside and blowthemselves up. doubt it would be hard tbh but I know nothing of nuclear factory security.

if I was a suicide bomber living in the uk - thats the first place I would go.

I think the armed guards may present a problem there. The power of the explosion you would require to cause a disaster would be astronomical considering how shielded the reactor is. If you had a device capable of doing that sort of damage there wouldn't be any need to blow up a power station.

Tefal · 5 Feb 2008 at 16:52

Thorpy said:
I thought Nuclear Power was bad?

Can someone briefly explain to me the good and the bad?

good-no C02 except in building/mining etc, - Much of the fuel comes from the decommissioning of nuclear arms, - large amounts of energy produced - very safe,- note a Japanese plant recently survived a large earthquake without breaching /damaging the reactor.

Bad- expensive - waste needs to be, glassified and stored, on site or special water tanks for a time before being moved off and buried. takes a long time to decommission due the certain components becoming mildly radio active overtime(not to a very harmful extent, but no need to put workers in danger), and others being heavily radio active, again glassified and stored.

However new plants are capable of reusing the waste, and some waste goes to make Depleted uranium rounds etc, and isotopes produced also go to research and to hospitals for chemo/radio treatment and other things.

Muffin` · 5 Feb 2008 at 16:55

You need somthing like seven bunker busters on some of the 80's-90's reactors

scorza · 5 Feb 2008 at 16:56

Thorpy said:
I thought Nuclear Power was bad?

Can someone briefly explain to me the good and the bad?

Good:

- clean, reliable energy source
- enough global Uranium resources to last hundreds of years if the spent fuel is reprocessed
- our biggest Uranium importer is in Australia, whereas most oil and gas seems to be in the middle east or Russia. Who would you prefer to do business with?
- Valuable engineering and manufacturing jobs for the UK.

Bad:

- large-ish carbon footprint to build them
- take ages to build (and de-commission)
- issue of what do we do with the waste
- potential for radioactive incidents with that waste
- not as cheap as gas at the moment, though gas prices are rising

Combat squirrel · 5 Feb 2008 at 16:57

SOooooooooo slap down a radar dish on the other side of the windfarms ?, just the dish, then wire it to the closest control station, problem solved, surely thats the easiest and cheapest solution, god I should run the country

fini · 5 Feb 2008 at 17:00

I don't know why they can't compromise and build radar on a poll above each wind farm - that way for each wind farm being built they actually increase the range/accuracy of their radar rather than diminish it.

EDIT: Hmm combat squirrel stole my brain waves whilst I typed

(must have some new radar thingy)

4p · 5 Feb 2008 at 17:01

Cheers for all of the replies

Seems viable at this point, with gas/oil being really gay.

Tefal · 5 Feb 2008 at 17:03

fini said:
I don't know why they can't compromise and build radar on a poll above each wind farm - that way for each wind farm being built they actually increase the range/accuracy of their radar rather than diminish it.

EDIT: Hmm combat squirrel stole my brain waves whilst I typed (must have some new radar thingy)

err i think its because the turbines would make the radar useless even if it was on top of them, and even if you put down a dish on the other side you have a nice big blind spot.

Greenlizard0 · 5 Feb 2008 at 17:03

Combat squirrel said:
SOooooooooo slap down a radar dish on the other side of the windfarms ?

I read The Times and thought the same thing?

Hodders · 5 Feb 2008 at 17:06

Fireskull said:
Surely it would be easier not to make our Security holes public lol

That is what Microsoft think too !