This is a great idea – starting an online debate. To be honest, aren’t we all Nimby’s at heart? I might not feel too strongly about a wind turbine in my neighbourhood, but I don’t want it disturbing my sleep or spoiling my view. I would hope that the planners would put them as remote as possible from houses and settlement.

Same goes for nuclear power stations or garbage plants. They should be far away.

So I am a Nimby, but not a BANANA – build absolutely nothing anywhere near anyone.

Well, me too I would love to see beautiful cardinals peacefully flying in the Appalachians skies rather than wind turbines (which I actually find pretty beautiful to look at and certainly nicer than nuclear plants.) Well too bad or too late. Numbist is probably a more appropriate term when you are too selfish to see that we will have to make sacrifices (and this doesn’t seem like a big one) to avoid major environmental disasters that will affect us all.

Well let me get this party started. Obviously this is clearly people taking a very shallow, short-term and ultimately ill-informed view of the world. They (and may you or me) want to have cheap energy, oil and water available all year round, but without having to look at a power plant, dam, reactor etc. Wind turbines are the least of our worries.

The NIMBY hypocrisy is very much related to environmental racism and environmental justice. Consider this statistic I pulled from here:

http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cfm?DR_ID=44219

“In California, 81% of residents who live near toxic or hazardous waste facilities are minorities”

While I think we can see the disparities in our own countries, what we might miss are those across the globe whether it’s the oil fields of the Niger Delta or the bare rainforests of borneo. If it’s not okay for us, then why is it okay for others less fortunate?

Sacrifices (eg ugliness, perhaps noise) have to be made. The key is to say “I will make those sacrifices, even if you don’t”.

“In California, 81% of residents who live near toxic or hazardous waste facilities are minorities”

While I think we can see the disparities in our own countries, what we might miss are those across the globe whether it’s the oil fields of the Niger Delta or the bare rainforests of borneo. If it’s not okay for us, then why is it okay for others less fortunate?”.

- I completely agree with this statement. Why would the well to do worry about cleaning up the environment, when they don’t have to see the ugly side of pollution? (garbage dump sites included). And they will be the ones most voiciferous if a ‘green energy’ site is located in their neighborhood.

It is really sad that “ugliness” was what squashed the bill. But this example of NYMBYsm raises an important point that we must all reflect on.

A few months back I remember reading an article in the newspaper about how a local town close to a windmill was feeling the adverse affects of its proximity. Supposedly a frequency was emitted which was affecting people’s sleep, stress levels, and over all health.

If this had been a real concern of the people in NC then I would be more understanding… and I don’t even know what they are talking about. Whenever I’ve driven by wind farms along the highways in California, I think they are beautiful mesmerizing site. Who ever argued the case of the windmill surely did not do a very good job explaining how the benefits outweigh the aesthetic factor.

I think you can look at NIMBY in another direction, perhaps it may appear shallow, greedy, arrogant, etc. to assume that we want the best with the least amount of disruption of our daily lives, but perhaps ignorance can play a vital role. For example, I have heard this whole wind turbine debate all throughout college. I even got a chance to visit one when I was studying abroad in Costa Rica. Through the class, I learned that turbines really weren’t in the way, they spun at a speed that most birds could avoid and they (in my opinion) exuded a kind of beauty in their own way. Due to the massive amount of information diffused through our society, I would strongly believe that often things are misinterpreted, jumbled to together or just plain false. Perhaps it’s the optimist in me, but many people just don’t know about the full implications about alternative energy. I believe if mandatory education is strictly enforced about environmental issues, alternative energy should be discussed, thus everyone could see the full spectrum of benefits and costs. Perhaps it’s not NIMBY, perhaps it’s WIMBY (What’ in my backyard).

Like anyone else, I like my surroundings to be beautiful. But I think we all need to learn to adapt! Anything to make our planet cleaner and greener is A-OK by me!

I’m interested why nobody is considering the possibility that the NIMBYist’s ugliness protests may have been co-opted and enlarged by lobbyists all too eager to play up the concerns of those who, as Jade points out, are likely not too well-informed.

Now I am not one normally prone to conspiracy theories, but has there not been a lot of stuff coming to light lately about how powerful and sneaky those with vested interests in “good ole oil” are?

Well, nothing new about some Americans, this NIMBY syndrome is a pure case of arrogance, they are egotistical people, who are not able to see the good it would represent these windmills for their own environment. I don’t see how it would bother them to have them on the mountains, since not too many houses, or communities live there, honestly. Those mountains are almost empty, so why not to use them for something really usefull? I don’t see anything ugly in the windmill, ugly is their soul.
You see, when the politicians, probably on the big oil/coal corporations’s payroll, take advantage of the ignorance, that’s what is happening. Again, nothing new under the sun, unfortunately.

Casting aside NIMBYism as being self-centered while perhaps true, doesn’t get us closer to finding acceptable solutions to energy problems. I think part of changing nimby-ism with regard to wind turbines involves education and citizen engagement.

Engaging citizens in an honest discussion in citizen workshops to discuss what the options are might be the way. Fossil fuels, nuclear power, coal? Is destroying a mountain better than a field of wind turbines? What about the impact on the watershed, plant and animal life? This could affect farmers, tourism etc. Would you rather live near a wind farm or near a nuclear waste facility?

The discussion needs to be honest about the tradeoffs about wind turbines AND the other options on the table, not just on wind turbines or not. Such a discussion may not favor wind turbines at the end of the day, perhaps a community will accept dealing with nuclear waste to have nuclear power. If that happens so be it, it may not be my first choice but at the very least it is an informed decision and environmentalists, community members, business and government interests have had the chance to interact and share their ideas/point of view, and perhaps even come up with new innovative solutions.

Some will argue this is too costly to do prior to an election, but how much money is spent on campaigns for/against such measures? Could this money be channeled into funding education and real debate?

I live in Scandinavia and there are wind turbines everywhere here, people accept them in Denmark, Sweden, and also in Holland it seems. Perhaps getting an understanding of how the wind turbine acceptance has been brought about in these countries would be helpful.

In general Americans tend to have a very individualistic view of the world, rather than community based. So the solution to the turbines (and lots of other initiatives) will only come when someone (Obama?) reshapes the way they see the world around them. I think Carmen was trying to say the same thing but calling people arrogant and egotistical just misses the opportunity to encourage people to grow and change.

Methinks the rules of the game would change very quickly if wind turbines (and other environmental initiatives) significantly boosted the local economy. News flash, N.C.: cigarettes aren’t pretty!

Regarding Carol’s comment, I certainly would expect Big Oil to try to influence community opinion — but only if they felt sufficiently threatened. My impression (and it’s only an impression) is that wind energy is not yet big enough to be a serious competitor. Forgive this weird analogy, but it took Microsoft about 30 years of “competition” against Apple before they started to go after Apple with negative advertising.

Great discussion and thanks for the invitation Megumi
Well we are all in this together right? I learnt a while ago that nothing is about me.I am but one of millions of people that are the result of 2 people getting together and procreating say 2000 years ago.A tiny cog in the whole wheel.
So I just give out all I can and continue on my goal of becoming the biggest agent of change in history.I am achieving this by leading social media marketing teams that promote causes through conversation marketing.
Imagine for a minute if more of us had that goal?
As for wind turbines we will all be used to them soon.I love how the Japanese place them strategically around the place even though they may not necessarily be hooked up to the grid.This serves 2 purposes.It gets people used to them and it also promotes constant consciousness that we must lead “greener” lifestyles
Friend me on Facebook so that we can support each other and share resources and learning
Michael

Carol’s example reminds me of an extensive public debate in Germany’s “green capital” Freiburg, whether to install wind generators in the nearby mountains. I remember that even deputies of the green party voted against this project to preserve the beauty of our cityscape and the mountains. It was clear that we expected our energy to be produced ‘invisibly’, that we were not prepared to exchange the beauty of our backyard for the clean energy which almost every ‘Freiburger’ demanded. The following solar cell boom and the large-scale construction of zero-energy houses however showed something else: that eco-friendliness doesn’t necessarily need any compromising in the backyard. People now started to buy solar appliances, neighbors competed to get the bigger panels on their roofs – people now wanted energy production to become visible even in their own homes. From this example I think the key to tackle NIMBYism is making sustainable technology more attractive, to get to a point where people can say – yes, please, in my backyard!

http://www.350.org is a movement to reduce Co2 from the current 390ppm to a sustainable level. Its the planet’s only chance.On 24 October there will be a massive worldwide party to promote consciousness about this.If you ever tweet about about the environment please simply use this hashtag to link with other like minded people and promote this initiative.#350ppm

Well this for me personaly is a mixed bag. Since people like me who kite allot (Kitesurf etc) and enjoy the REAL WORLD(sunsets etc) view- the kind you get from looking outside your window. pay the price by having their view and earea of play being taken away in favour of the people who sit in front of computers & T.V’s and dont go using their body what its for… For me im from holland our sea’s are full with wind turbines but those are way out shore. As for turbines on land we have special parcs for those, where the least amount birds / flying wildlife will get disturbed. For me i am more concerned for what all that breaking of the winds or using it does in long term.

Very interesting to hear about other more renewable-forward countries. Thanks all!

I think that a big problem is the “traditional idea” of bringing your electricity from far away.
Everybody should generate their own electricity at home!

I live in Iowa, just 30 minutes away from fields full of wind turbines. I've certainly heard the arguments about “ugliness”, ruining the scenery, etc. I always reply with 2 things. 1) It's Iowa. There's no scenery to ruin. and 2) Wind Turbines are not ugly, but beautiful. A wonderful combination of nature and technology standing as modern monoliths, benefiting our world.

However, when I recently drove through Oregon (I think), I saw these same wind turbines at the top of a nearby mountain ridge and I said to myself, “now THATS ugly!” There's plenty of wind in Iowa. Leave the “good” scenery alone. IMO.

Interesting to see that the Mayor of Doncaster in the UK is encouraging the public to oppose windfarms. He says “These [wind farm] developments have little or no benefit in terms of contributing to decreased energy consumption, nor do they have any beneficial effect on the planet's climate in response to the great global warming scam.”

“I would certainly not want one of these monstrosities anywhere near my property, nor do I want to see them blotting the landscape of the English countryside and waterways and causing grief and concern to local people in terms of noise and the blocking of sunlight.

“I therefore urge the public to oppose these developments through legal means provided so that good old-fashioned English justice and common sense may prevail.”

See more in the Guardian – http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/sep/...

I notice that the former British Deputy PM John Prescott has taken a shot at Windy Nimbys in Bedford, England – the same bunch who were showcased in the Age of Stupid film. In fact he gave them the first 'Age of Stupid' award.

http://www.24dash.com/news/Local_Government/200...

Harder to find are current political leaders willing to lead their constituencies.

I am proud to be from NC and proud to be a NIMBY. We are actually so well educated, that is frightens the people trying to railroad commercial wind plants on to our mountain ridges. That is why we care called names. It is not about the view, wind plants do nothing to help. They are a waste of tax payer money. A scam, a fraud. Nope…my mountains are not for sale. We can do more with conservation and energy efficiency than we can ever to with giant turbines. I do not want cement poured in to my mountains! GO NIMBYS as we are the protectors of the ridges!