Don’t have a problem with turbines

YOUR ‘No Homes for Turbines’ editorial piece in your October 1st edition seemed to me to be a journalistic rehash of Coalition posturing (replete with exclamation marks) with very little substance to back it up.

The article suggests that wind turbines are as threatening as mini coal/nuclear plants that will somehow compromise rural residential ‘amenity’ (loss of views/noise pollution) and the ‘viability’ of agricultural production.

Anyone who has travelled to places that take global warming seriously will have noticed wind and solar farms dotted all over the landscape, including inside town boundaries.

The article doesn’t even begin to explain why wind turbines compromise agricultural output, or is it just a cover story for NIMBYism and/or sour grapes at not being invited to profitably host turbines?

And what is wrong with offering to buy the farms of objectors and sell them on to people who do not have a problem with them, as long as the price is fair?

The process of setting out wind farm development zones should be no secret to anyone. It has been in the can for years that South Gippsland is a prime wind resource area. Wind farms in this area are not new. Most people have got used to them and don’t have a problem with them. Many regard them as aesthetically beautiful industrial sculptures that give us hope for the future.

Global warming is already happening and if we don’t want to face the consequences of a climate change runaway, we need to get a rapid move on, especially after so much ideological obstruction and sabotage of plans to do something about it, which has already delayed matters by decades.

Even if we had already completed decarbonization of our economy yesterday, there is still a lot of climate disturbance momentum already in play that will continue long after we have stopped putting billions of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year.

Christopher Nagle, Grantville