“Get the hell out of here!” Farmers to Wind Developer (Australia)
Aug 10, 2012
Print ArticleEditor’s note: At a recent “informational” meeting in Collector, Australia, the wind developer was told, “Pull up stumps and disappear off my land,” by Aboriginal Elder, Shane Mortimer—the man in the broad-brimmed hat, below. Mortimer then adding, “Get the hell out of here!”—in case the developer didn’t quite grasp the meaning of “disappear.”
Three cheers for a gutsy Australian! Why are not more people telling these bums to “beat it!”
Click anywhere on the ABC News video, below, to watch the entire scene. It’s fabulous!
Let this become the rallying cry against Big Wind, everywhere: “Get the hell out of here!”
.
.
Comment by Andreas Marciniak on 08/10/2012 at 11:01 pm
In this video clip its said , the after two years this wind Farm has paid for it’s self and after that it is free energy !how is it then ? that we the consumer keep on paying such high electricity prices ?, and what part of “NO” we don’t want you here! don’t say understand ?and isn’t it funny they all have the same old answers,(Geoff Dutton)and always say that Europe or the rest of the World, has “NO” problems reported that there is any link between Turbines and bad health, I know that there are hundreds of groups in Europe, thousands in the rest of the world, that have thousands of people in them with health problem dating back over 20 years, just more lies, lies and more lies.
Comment by Josie on 08/10/2012 at 11:34 pm
Same crap, different pile. One of theses days, someone is going to get angry enough and give these jerks just what they deserve. The sooner the better.
Comment by Harry Makris on 08/10/2012 at 11:35 pm
…It must be absolutely clear by “Now” that there is something terribly Wrong with the Wind farm roll out strategy in this State (SA) …..and nationally …..I suspect……
…What began as a feel good venture in theory.. (catching the wind),… has turned out to be an unmitigated disaster on the ground…all one needs to do is follow the ‘Curve” of the debate….ramping up to “shrill”….in all media, local, state, national radio, TV and the Internet…..and it is not going to go away.
The negative impact on communities has been exposed time after time, and at length…(see the responses/submissions to the Wind farm Interim Development Plan Amendment (SA), together with State(s) and Senate Inquiries into the matter)……However, the most troubling aspect for me (Right Here, Right Now)) is that of “Community Division”….which can make life intolerable.
It is important for Rural communities (distinct from the cities) to have a sense of community (safety/security and social cohesion) which has been the case, and also my experience, since I moved to the district (Keyneton) some 37 years ago…….but now…..with the proposal and application for a wind farm in the area,…. things have certainly changed. The “motherhood spin” of the Industry and Government is out of touch with Reality…continuing to present flawed information/presentations and implying benefits ($$) to “curry” favour.? .which will be of interest to the ACCC (Fact).
Now we have proponents for, and objectors to the proposal at each other’s throats over a multitude of concerns – (the list is endless, as I am sure will be revealed in the diversity and intensity of other submissions, and are real…!!, and not to be taken lightly) ….makes one sick that that this has to be Done……..
An effect/impact,…. the COST cannot be calculated…A true Tragedy (paradox).
The Keyneton wind farm proposal is an insult to intelligence, and exposes the gulf of misunderstanding between the Citi-centric and the Rural way of life. Accordingly, Rural communities have taken up the mantle to put an end to this Insanity by exposing how “bad it is”…and ..”how bad it can get”…that is, if reason does not Prevail…..
Already District Councils have joined State and Federal politicians in supporting the concerns of Rural Communities and have begun refusing approvals….. stepping up to the plate and demanding “clarity” into the effects of wind farms in their districts.
Simply put, the roll out strategy is Flawed….a waste, and a legacy for the Future to deal with….and frankly…in my humble opinion….the State Government has been “sucked in” and “has got into bed” with Big Wind Money..(Interim DPA amendment)….Why do I think that..?…..
…..”Because no one in their right mind would do what they are doing ”….Energy policy and electricity pricing Chaos, and outraged communities…get a Grip….
……..I mean…If governments always got it right…we would not need elections would we..?…Indeed…the price of Democracy is eternal vigilance…and if our elected representatives cannot be vigilant, then the citizenry must..
Seems as if Convenience (wind farm sites), and opportunities for huge Profits has given way to good sense, all at the people’s expense. Knee-jerk short term planning fuelled by self-interest….What else could one possibly think…..Feel free to destroy Keyneton since you do not live here…I trust that the Commission will visit Keyneton before making its recommendations to the Minister seated on high…..”with the Final Say”…. ..what’s the good of that… Accordingly, “I” would advise against the application…and let it be on the Minister’s head to ..”Approve” …
You are right…I am not happy…why should I be..?…..
When you challenge people’s Lives and Livelihoods, Expect some return mail.
……All it would take to arrest the situation and restore Peace, would be to build these installations on dedicated wind farm land of which Australia has ample.. ……together with dedicated Transmission Lines and corridors (strategically planned to address future State development) and then, hook up with the existing System…as in the Green Net (or similar) Proposition
In the Interest of all ….the Citizenry . .the Corporations.. .the Government…
…and importantly, the Future of the State/Nation….
………a Moratorium should be placed on any further wind farm development based on the current model…….
…I ask you to be mindful of the fact, that these projects have a minimum life of 25 years and beyond… (many terms, of many governments, of whatever conviction, seemingly to be “always” cleaning up the mess left behind by the last).
Accordingly……a New (bi-partisan} model for “Essential Infrastructure” should be developed, one which is viable (balanced) and can accommodate the interests of all parties….. …that.. is the role of Government.
Even though it is a Mess to say the least……it does in fact represent the timely opportunity to get things “right”….alternatively, they can only get “worse” which is now apparent…. and of no benefit to Anyone.
Thank you for your time.
Respectfully
Harry Makris ….Keyneton
Comment by Mtumba on 08/11/2012 at 4:55 pm
Josie – here, here! The sooner the better.
Comment by Jackie on 08/13/2012 at 7:01 pm
When Acciona was trying to secure an installation here in South Australia’s South East at Allendale East, we were asked by them what we wanted because they didn’t know!!!!!!!!! This was after a very long period of opposition by the local population.
Our answer was for them to GO AWAY and leave us alone, and it was said in unison with gusto by all those at the meeting.
None of these companies will ever accept the truth.
Comment by Nick Valentine on 08/16/2012 at 5:34 am
Mr Marciniak
I am afraid you are mistaken. The question asked by the interviewer was regarding carbon emitted during construction and transport and the answer given was, “Wind turbines pay themselves back environmentally in terms of carbon, if you want to do it that way, within one or two years, and after that it’s all totally free energy with no carbon implied.” I was witness to the interview and the journalist has spliced the footage out of context.
Your inference regarding the economics of the project is misplaced.
Please contact me on 0417 219 465 if you would like further clarification.
Regards,
Nick Valentine
Comment by Wanda on 08/18/2012 at 7:21 am
I commend Mr Shane Mortimer for standing up to them and standing his ground. They keep telling the same lies to all communities. As for the medical research council, have they ever spoken to anyone who lives near a wind farm? I bet the answer is “no.”
Community survey most probably the same as they did in our community, with all the surounding postal codes, just not the ones closest to the turbines. What about the environment and wildlife—the impact 700 wind turbines will have on the great dividing ranches?
And the health effects on the people living near the turbines: Do they even care? Not when there is money to be made.
The electricity they generate does not cover the towns where they are built.
All we do is suffer and pay higher and higher elec. bills.
As far as jobs are concerned, they exist only while they are being built, and even then most workers do not come from the towns; they come from the cities and out of state, and after that there is merely a handful of workers.
Do you realise that the profit goes overseas? The only money that stays here is the wages the workers get.
Comment by Paul Hodgkinson on 10/02/2012 at 5:26 am
The public meeting was the Collector launch of Ratch Australia’s Environmental Assessment. Like Nick Valentine I too was an attendee at the Collector event presented on ABC’s 7:30 Report.
I can confirm that RATCH Australia Pty Ltd, “the Proponent” of Collector Wind Farm, is silent on the issue of the permanent loss of soil carbon due to road building and hardstand areas.
There is one solitary sentence referring to the significance of agriculture having a role to play in carbon offsetting citing the CSIRO (p177 EA). It is not at all enumerated in the EA presented for public comment in August 2012.
The significance of organic matter, humus, phytoliths and charcoal are notably omitted from the report and appendices.
The loss of soil carbon is obliquely assessed in terms of hectares of land clearance. The numbers of trees potentially bearing hollows suitable for nesting sites for birds and arboreal mammals is significant but so too is soil carbon.
The carbon sequestration potential dissipated by the permanent land clearance is unaccounted for in the report. At the very least there should be some reference to mitigating the loss by, for instance, specifying a management regime on surrounding land that improves the soil carbon storage and could be seen to be making up for the 47 hectare loss for roads and hardstand areas.
The significance of the loss is seriously wanting because soil carbon is an even greater sink than living vegetation and animals
The life cycle assessment by Martinez et al (2009) that the Proponent refers to in the EA does not include soil carbon lost during the lifetime and continuing to impact as a permanent loss.
The Proponent makes it clear that the loss of vegetation is permanent and lacks the understanding to acknowledge that the loss of soil carbon and sequestration potential is also permanent. Should NSW Planning be insisting on improved soil carbon sequestration in the offset area?
This is dependent on the abilities of the landholder and subsequent landholders to manage for soil carbon accessions.
A Soil Management Plan that addresses soil carbon is an obvious omission that FOC seek remedy for from the Proponent.
The Draft NSW Planning Guidelines: Wind Farms (DoPI, 2011) requires that “sufficient information must be provided to the community so that it has a good understanding of what is being proposed and of the likely impacts…aimed at identifying and considering options for eliminating or reducing impacts”.
The Proponent RATCH Australia Pty Ltd has declared that the most likely scenario for the offset area is to simply remove sheep and cattle grazing and manage noxious weeds.
This is not management that will contribute to marked improvements in soil carbon. The Soil Carbon Handbook (2011) details that active managerial involvement is necessary for successful results in increasing soil organic matter content. Defoliation especially for grasses produces root sloughing that when digested by fungi and other soil micro- organisms accumulates as soil organic matter. This maintains a healthy soil structure, contributes to favourable soil chemical properties and locks carbon from the atmosphere in the soil for a period sufficient to describe as sequestration.
The Proponent RATCH Australia Pty Ltd has not included soil carbon in its life cycle analysis, so therefore is misleading in its comments in the 7:30 Report about the payback time in terms of carbon.