Ask Lemmy

It's difficult to consider them pollution even if we were to accept the subjective opinion on displeasing aesthetics.

The pollution we're all concerned about tends to be:

• Physically harmful
• Difficult to confine/localize/avoid/reverse
• An externality the economy doesn't sufficiently account for
• A burden that's unevenly/unfairly distributed across society

Even light pollution, which is arguably barely physically harmful, has all of the remaining qualities (or nearly) for sure.

If these qualities even apply wind generators at all, they do so very weakly. They can be moved/unbuilt, the "free market" is pricing them cheaper by the day, and if you really don't like looking at them, it's not impractical to avoid them.

BS. I wanted to build one on my property, but here in Germany you need a permit if you wanna build a birds house (I'm not kidding, in some areas you do), I didn't get one, neighbors and shit, so I sold the house, we're moving to Denmark this year. No neighbors, no problems. Especially not German neighbors! As long as you have a Danebrog (Danish flag) on your property, you can build a lot. It's your property at last.

Dude, the windows in my apartment just look at the wall of another apartment. I would much rather see a god damn wind turbine.

No

No, I like them. They bring some variety to landscapes. Many people here hate them though.

Yes. Do does most things humans build. Certainly better than a power plant, shopping center, warehouse, or even many houses and office buildings.

Yea they massively change the views in the local area. How ugly they are is probably the top complaint in the UK about them

As unlike a lot of the American commenters here saying we don’t have huge sprawling areas of nothing (Except Scottish highlands) just waiting to be filled with something. So for rural voters that live in the countryside for the views damaging/changing the views is unsurprisingly not that popular.

In 2015 because of lots of local opposition the government made it easier to object to wind farms in your areas but people have since said that those rules make it too easy to get planning permission rejected.

Recent polls seem to suggest people care less now though lack of increase in planning permissions for onshore wind seem to show that people like it more in theory than when the wind turbines will be built in their view.

There are windmills all over the place here and I love seeing them. To me this is what the future should look like. Poeple have used windmills for centuries, why stop now?

There is a beautiful lake close to where I live and if you are there in late evening you can see lights from the nearest wind farm blinking on the horizon. You can also see them on top of historical castle mounds my region is famous for which cheapens the experience of visiting them. I am all for renewable energy, but I understand the argument.

Isn't it sound pollution instead of visual pollution, though, if anything? I'd rather have that than coal anyway

What, you don't find them strangely unnerving?

https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/alternative_energy_revolution.jpg

On a scale from 1 to 10, they're like a 2.

Only if there would be one casting a shadow of spinning blades on my face every day. Otherwise I don't mind them.

I love looking at hill ranges covered in wind turbines. The swiss disagree though.

I would much rather the visual pollution of a windmill than the combined pollutions of fossil fuel based power plants.

There are 2 windmills not far from my place and they are a good point of reference for where you are.

I've never seen a wind turbine in person but I'd imagine no more than buildings and a lot less than most other power sources.

No.

I'm not a coal industry propagandist, so the only opinion I have on wind turbines is to build more of the fucking things.

Yes, but not much more than any other man-made construction. I can see windmills from my appartement and they have never even bothered me a little. However if my view was a beautiful tolkienesque landscape they probably would stand out like a sore thumb.

I do think they're visual pollution and I don't like looking at them at all. That said, I do understand they are needed.

Just wish they'd find a way to stop birds from flying into them all the time.

I think they look dope as hell.

Please define "visible pollution". I think you mean something like "ugly". So there's not really much of a discussion to have, because it is opinion. Of course some people feel that way.

But anyway, since you asked, I'd rather look at wind turbines than the smog around, let's say, Chicago or Los Angeles. But still that's opinion.

Well they look farrr better than coal mines and plants and smoke plumes. Even beyond that I think they just look plain nice though, like when I rarely get to see some it makes me happy.

Yes, in the form of dead birds and bats.

Personally, I think wind turbines look cool.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_pollution

the visible deterioration and negative aesthetic quality of the natural and human-made landscapes around people

All human activity creates "visual pollution" of all kinds. It is completely unavoidable. By the textbook definition, farmland, barns, barbed wire fences for livestock, all could qualify as visual pollution.

Wind turbines are no different. They could technically be defined as visual pollution, but they are quite benign in the grand scheme of things. They are typically designed with smooth edges and sweeping curves, and don't give off a cluttered look, and as such do not really "interrupt" one's environment. They do move, which can be a bit distracting, I guess.
They're certainly much nicer to look at compared to the average nuclear/coal/nat.gas power plant