Interesting article over at Design Observer (via core 77) about the aesthetics of wind farms. The author makes a couple of interesting points about one of the main arguments over wind farms, which is the question of whether they're ugly or not. Personally, I think they're rather beautiful, and eventually he comes out with that opinion too, but on the way he makes some interesting points about how our perceptions of beauty are to do with our perception of order, and the orderliness of natural vs man-made systems. Ugliness, apparently, is fragmentation - who knew? Glad we got that sorted out.
I do disagree with him on a couple of things:
- It isn't our politico-economic system which doesn't place any value on nature, it's our economic one. That might seem like a fine distinction, but I think it's an important one. Politicians will value anything if enough opinion polls tell them to.
- I think his list of natural 'principles' is a basically a list of platitudes. Nature doesn't 'design', and it certainly doesn't have 'principles'. We can make observations about it, sure, but still, I don't know what "Nature exploits the power of limits" means.
One thing he does mention which rang true, though, was when he said that modernists were crypto-materialists (wow, long words). I have to say that rang true to me. I love the modernist aesthetics, and I have to admit to being pretty darn materialist. In fact, I have great difficulty relating to people who claim to be 'spiritual' - I tend to just ignore that side of things. This may explain at least one disastrous relationship. But to get back to the point... on the other hand, I think there's an underlying principle which Justin is ignoring, in that both nature and modernist design use the repetition of simple units to create a larger effect (as per this rather effective image I found). I think there's more homage to nature in modernism than he'd care to admit.
Anyway. Any thoughts? How do you lot feel about wind farms? Elegant, or hideous? Would you have one in your back garden?
11 comments:
On mature reflection, maybe what caught my interest about this article was this mention of materialism, and whether the appreciation of 'natural' systems over 'man-made' ones is something which is more associated with a 'spiritual' outlook, rather than a materialist one. Justin would certainly seem to be favouring the modernist view, which if you accept the connection then the materialist outlook is somehow superior to the spiritual one. It's tempting to peg this as a cultural thing, something inherent in materialist, western culture, but something in me rebels at that. Could be my Inner Materialist.
(I put 'natural' in inverted commas up there because, at least in this country, the entire landscape has been heavily managed by people since time immemorial and so one's definition of natural is kinda artificial anyway).
One word answers first : Pointless, Elegant, No.
Wind farms do have the advantage that they generate clean energy - stick 'em up, get 'em spinning and the megawatts flow into the national grid. However, individually, they don't generate that much energy per m2 of space and they have significant energy costs to build them.
The windier parts of this country are often the most remote. These areas are therefore often areas of outstanding natural beauty. As elegant as one bladed windmill is, as awe-inspiring as 100s of them in syncopated rotation are, they will never be as beautiful as the land on which they are built. Building the necessary access roads for servicing, and the connections to the national grid also serve to slice the countryside up.
And then there's the noise. Ever stood near one in full pelt? The drone of the blades whisping through the air is awful. The peace of the countryside is spoilt too
I guess my final answer makes sense : I wouldn't have one in my back garden since I believe their value to be questionable. I wouldn't wish one in *anyones* backgarden since they spoil the peace and beauty of our countries finer spots.
The answer to the energy crisis is nuclear. It's not popular, but it's the only one that generates enough wattage and operates between carbon-free and carbon-neutral in overall balance.
I live within 20 miles of 2 of Britain's nuclear power stations - I'm happy with that, I'd welcome more of them in my backyard.
Personally, I think the best answer to the energy crisis would be to get everyone to waste less electricity. I read somewhere that all the 'standby' LEDs in the USA require one power station just to keep them running. But that's almost incidental.
"they will never be as beautiful as the land on which they are built"... maybe I'm spoiled - I've lived in some beautiful parts of the country - but I just don't feel the rightness of that statement. If they were to spring up on every hill in Cornwall, then yes, I'd be upset. But at the moment, I feel uplifted when I see a wind farm.
I also have problems with the idea of 'areas of outstanding natural beauty', too. I realize that's controversial, and maybe that makes me sound like some sort of philistine, but it seems to me to be essentially arbitrary as to what parts of the countryside are beautiful or not. Stark, gentle, dramatic, plain, interesting, historic... these are adjectives I can use to subdivide my experience of the landscape. 'Beautiful' I have difficulty with. A canal path can be beautiful. Hell, wasteground can be beautiful if you catch it right. Don't get me wrong, I value those parts of the landscape which are (relatively) untouched by humanity - they are where I find peace - but this idea of calling them beautiful troubles me.
And I find myself wondering whether the fact that I'm relatively unbothered about 'natural' beauty stems from an impaired ability to perceive order in it, like some sort of borderline autism. Are those who admire wind farms as elegant more or less aesthetically aware than those who would defend 'natural' beauty?
Anyway, nuclear power plants are also often built in remote areas - what about Dounreay? ;)
There's the most spectacular wind farm near Palm Springs in the US. Something about the weather and the valley (I'm not a meteorologist, can you tell) means that the wind is almost constant, making it an ideal spot. A good argument could be made that the thousands of windmills there spoil the "natural beauty" of sand, scrub and blasted rock, but I think they're great. Very otherworldly, space-agey and a little unsettling, but great.
Nobody uses "space-age" as an adjective anymore, do they.
I'd quite like one, that fits on my desk and fans me.
Couldn't agree more - but even if we suddenly all became hugely energy conscious we would still be an energy hungry world and sadly wind power just ain't going to cut it.
The efficiency of wind turbines is tiny but more importantly a lifetime analysis shows that they can easily cost more carbon to build than they will ever save in their lifetime. It's the same (at the moment) with tidal power and solar power isn't much better.
If we want to stave off global warming our only viable option in the short to medium term is nuclear. Whilst we use that we need to invest heavily in renewable energy to develop it to the stage where it *is* viable in terms of carbon and production.
I do think that banks of wind farms can be rather beautiful, but we're going to need to cover the planet wiht them to make it worthwhile.
I think they look nice, and are very useful for grinding up grain.
Oh. You mean the new ones. I don't like them as much, but when you place them in places like central California in the middle of artificial farmland fed by stolen water and crisscrossed by freeways I think it actually improves the aestetics quite a bit.
Here, this picture was likely taken on the one week per year that the grass is green, after cropping out all of the cars, cows, and power lines:
I think underground nuclear power stations is the obvious answer.
That way they are out of the road and a meltdown merely necessitates tipping a shitload of concrete down the hole. If we can do U/G testing of nukes then digging a deep hole for nuclear power stations is equally clever. Finding a hole should be as simple as reusing abandoned mineshafts.
Smart thinking. You'd have to ensure that the geology was right and that groundwaters wouldn't be affected, but it otherwise seems do-able. Expensive, but do-able.
It would be equally safe as any deep waste burial site chosen, Jon, as far as I can tell.
Treehugger have an interesting article today about an organization dedicated to promoting wind farms as things of beauty. Can't say I go a bundle on the image they've chosen as an illustration, but that's probably just my modernist aesthetic sense getting in the way...
Post a Comment