In questa città ci sono molti manifesti che si oppongono allo sviluppo di parchi eolici per motivi ambientali.
Questa posizione è tipica di una visione focalizzata sull’ambiente qui, o questi attivisti si stanno semplicemente appropriando del linguaggio della preoccupazione climatica per promuovere un voto conservatore?
https://www.reddit.com/gallery/1qzb3sa
di Norman_debris
12 commenti
Luddites.
No, thats typical NIMBY attitude, not real concerns for the environment. In my town they are even trying to stop a new railway track. Lunatics.
NIMBYs
you got that right. It is usually green washed conservatism / nimbyism.
People also tend to say no to new rail tracks running through their area though rail transport is much better for the environment than road shipping…
They are anti windpower on basis of conspiracy theories.
Normal environmental groups are all pro wind
Both, kinda. Mostly it is older people with the time and ressources to prosecute such a campaign and who will not really have to deal with the long term consequences.
Opposing something that might cause a local environmental disturbance, but is part of a bigger picture transition and will provide local economic activity and jobs…is a lot easier if you don’t need a job. You are retired, your money comes from…idk the taxes of your 0,7 kids I guess. And those don’t need jobs, they can just rent out the properties they will inherit from you.
Conservation once was a conservative issue. Many of the founding persons of environmental movements were deeply conservative.
But those are just the usual NIMBYs, more concerned with their property values than any ecological interconnections.
stupid ass mofos be like “MY POWER is too expensive”
grrr windfarm in the forest i only visit once every two years because my stupid ass kids wanted to hike…we could just take our city tank but noooooooooo we gotta hike
So in general there are interests by fossil based companies to keep our dependency on oil, coal, gas. So they are spreading misinformation (e.g. wind turbines kill birds, “infraschall”, wind turbines consuming massive amounts of oil for lubrication,…)
And unfortunately there are lots of folks who like to believe this misinformation. In parts NIMBYism, or in parts there are people keeping the status quo (we’ve always done it this way) and some people just seem to love stupid shit.
I’d wagert that most of the people are not opposed to sealing the environment when it’s about building parking or streets for cars.
this is not all NIMBY, there are also a lot of inviromental NGOs(NABU, BUND etc.) that are against windfarms, because trees need to get cut, or birds tend to live in the area.
It’s like claiming to be against renewable energy because wind turbines kill birds or something.
There is no such thing as “perfectly clean” energy. Every energy system has an environmental, material, and systemic cost. The relevant question is not whether there is impact, but how large the impact is per kilowatt-hour and where it occurs.
Wind power is often presented as emission-free. Operationally, yes—there is no combustion. But the system is not impact-free. Turbines require large quantities of steel, concrete, copper, composites, and in some cases rare earth elements. Foundations for modern onshore turbines involve massive reinforced concrete bases. That permanently alters soil structure, increases compaction during construction, and requires access roads capable of handling heavy transport. In forested or sensitive areas, clearing is necessary. The land between turbines can often still be used agriculturally, but the ground directly beneath and the construction footprint are irreversibly changed.
Maintenance is not trivial. A turbine is a large mechanical system exposed to continuous dynamic loading. Gearboxes, bearings, yaw systems, pitch mechanisms, and power electronics are all failure points. Blade erosion from rain and particulates reduces efficiency over time. Offshore systems face corrosion and difficult access, which drives maintenance costs higher. Major component replacements require specialized cranes and logistics. These factors affect lifecycle cost and availability.
In countries like Germany, turbines require certification and periodic technical inspections (e.g., TÜV) to ensure structural integrity and operational safety. That reflects the mechanical complexity and the real risk profile of large rotating structures. Inspection and compliance are necessary, but they add operational overhead…. So pick your poison. To just called NIMBY bahavior is correct bc they have solid agruments.