Fracking Nimbys

[singlemalt]

I’ve recently watched the protestors in Sussex opposed to the fracking and thought, how many of you locals were actually jumping up and down shouting in the same manner with the people of Lancashire when they were doing the same thing up there?

Where I live the once tree lines horizon is now (over the last 2yrs) peppered with industrial units. The building work is still ongoing and actually looks to be expanding, another billboard announcing more units has just appeared.

I’m not averse to this development but I do only rent a property here. Might I feel very differently if I owned?

Are we all NIMBYS to a degree?

There are half a dozen huge wind turbines about 10miles from where I live. I occasionally go out to look at them. I actually think they’re quite majestic. Again however might I feel quite differently if there were at the bottom of my garden?

I don’t think there’s a silver bullet to solving all this but do think that in this modern world we all need to share some downside be that noise pollution or an altered vista or more road or air traffic or more houses around us. I also think that the people most affected should also have some tangible upside maybe a reduced council tax subsidised by the entity that’s brought about the change.

[The Knimbies who say No]

I’ve recently watched the protestors in Sussex opposed to the fracking and thought, how many of you locals were actually jumping up and down shouting in the same manner with the people of Lancashire when they were doing the same thing up there?

Where I live the once tree lines horizon is now (over the last 2yrs) peppered with industrial units. The building work is still ongoing and actually looks to be expanding, another billboard announcing more units has just appeared.

I’m not averse to this development but I do only rent a property here. Might I feel very differently if I owned?

Are we all NIMBYS to a degree?

There are half a dozen huge wind turbines about 10miles from where I live. I occasionally go out to look at them. I actually think they’re quite majestic. Again however might I feel quite differently if there were at the bottom of my garden?

I don’t think there’s a silver bullet to solving all this but do think that in this modern world we all need to share some downside be that noise pollution or an altered vista or more road or air traffic or more houses around us. I also think that the people most affected should also have some tangible upside maybe a reduced council tax subsidised by the entity that’s brought about the change.

Toxic debate really. Some objections to development may be quite reasonably grounded, eg poor design of access roads etc, or eg the fact that much newbuild housing seems to have been sited on flood plains recently. Those applications should have been refused in many instances imo.

All too often though the issue seems to be that people with the view that no development of any sort should take place, and a suite of mostly-bogus reasons will be offered up to achieve that aim. Sad really, it's the biggest issue if the day and all parties are opposed to building enough, essentially. It shouldn't be beyond us to provide sufficient housing.

edit some typos.

Edited August 6, 2013 by cheeznbreed

[@contradevian]

Biggest complaint I here from NIMBY's where I live is that the local schools are rammed with pupils and can't take any more.

[fluffy666]

Biggest complaint I here from NIMBY's where I live is that the local schools are rammed with pupils and can't take any more.

.. in my area, usually followed up with protests against school expansion..

[houses-do-my-head-in]

i think we are. in my home town there are plans for 1200+ new homes, mostly built on greenland/cricket pitches and on the rural urban fringe...places i used to play on as a kid and have memories of. they are now springing up.

got me thinking about how on the one hand we clammer for more housing to be built, and on the other these new wendy houses look a fk up to be honest.

the problem of high prices/ housing shortage wont be alleviated if we build more housing, as we will just get more people to fill them, meaning we need more, more more!!

half of the problem is the number of people and the quality of housing, not the number of houses.

immigration policy and a 2 child policy IMO is the way forward. if the population of the earth keeps on going like it is we are all doomed

people are the biggest threat to the earth and its resources, locally(with housing/infrastructure etc) and globally (food/energy)....im a malthusian :-)

[@contradevian]

i think we are. in my home town there are plans for 1200+ new homes, mostly built on greenland/cricket pitches and on the rural urban fringe...places i used to play on as a kid and have memories of. they are now springing up.

thats the second boomer excuse against building. "..but but we played in those fields as kids" or "we walk the dogs there." A local dog toilet in other words.

[fluffy666]

thats the second boomer excuse against building. "..but but we played in those fields as kids" or "we walk the dogs there." A local dog toilet in other words.

It's not impossible to leave some areas as parks, either.

Well, not impossible if you have a sane planning system.

[swissy_fit]

It's also not impossible to build high-quality apartment buildings that are a pleasure to live in so people can be housed pleasantly in a lot less space, but UK builders don't seem to know how.

[houses-do-my-head-in]

thats the second boomer excuse against building. "..but but we played in those fields as kids" or "we walk the dogs there." A local dog toilet in other words.

my point is that if you build more homes, its only a matter of time before you need to build more, and more and more and more, not a good idea IMO. the UK would end up as one big concrete jungle. i mean look at london, leeds, notts, horrible places, and ppl pay £300k for a flat! they may earn huge salaries but i really do pity many of them.

and i dont know about you but i quite like having lots of open space and countryside. the other half of the solution is to limit the number of ppl.....making it less financially rewarding to have 3+sprogs, and selective immigration policy.

im 30, rent and enjoy life, dont know what the fascination is with "owning" your own ploperty is tbh.

[(Blizzard)]

...

Are we all NIMBYS to a degree?

...

There's a difference between not wanting something, and trying to enforce that opinion on other people. I ******ing hate football, does that give me the right to get it banned?

It is the greatest good to the greatest number of people which is the measure of right and wrong - Jeremy Bentham

It's not really surprising, or even notable, that people are opposed to developments that affect them in a negative way, what's surprising is that the government listens to them.

Of course, the real cause of NIMBYISM is the massive amount of wealth that even tiny areas of land represent.

As a result, a new development next door isn't just an annoyance, it's a massive financial loss that might never be recouped.

Our feudal economy leads us to act as if land was precious, and therefore people will go to great lengths to protect their treasure. If houses traded at cost, then anyone offended by a new wind turbine or a school would just move.

[CrashedOutAndBurned]

I can sympathise with NIMBYism to some degree. In most regards the standard of living and quality of life was better for the majority of people 30 years ago. Less traffic. Less job insecurity. More space. Lower housing costs. We had fewer consumer products but they tended to be more durable and something you would repair rather than throw out.

Where I lose patience is when middle-class boomers start making life impossible for people who can't even remember those more laid-back times and just need a half-decent affordable home in the tougher, fast-paced world we're now forced to live in. Millions have to suffer for someone else's fond memories. Nuts.

As for fracking, though. That's just plain bonkers. The fact it's even being considered, quite out the blue, probably reveals the desperation over peak-fossil fuel.

Edited August 7, 2013 by CrashedOutAndBurned

[fluffy666]

my point is that if you build more homes, its only a matter of time before you need to build more, and more and more and more, not a good idea IMO. the UK would end up as one big concrete jungle. i mean look at london, leeds, notts, horrible places, and ppl pay £300k for a flat! they may earn huge salaries but i really do pity many of them.

and i dont know about you but i quite like having lots of open space and countryside. the other half of the solution is to limit the number of ppl.....making it less financially rewarding to have 3+sprogs, and selective immigration policy.

im 30, rent and enjoy life, dont know what the fascination is with "owning" your own ploperty is tbh.

UK average fertility is 1.8, so without immigration we'd have a slight population decline.

But look on Google maps.. there is a LOT of countryside in this country. You could build a lot and still leave plenty. Never mind building decent quality flats in cities for people who want to live there.

[Hail the Tripod]

I’m not averse to this development but I do only rent a property here. Might I feel very differently if I owned?

Maybe get a big payoff from the poisoning. Not sure how this can have any legal basis though:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/aug/05/children-ban-talking-about-fracking

Two young children in Pennsylvania were banned from talking about fracking for the rest of their lives under a gag order imposed under a settlement reached by their parents with a leading oil and gas company.

The sweeping gag order was imposed under a $750,000 settlement between the Hallowich family and Range Resources Corp, a leading oil and gas driller. It provoked outrage on Monday among environmental campaigners and free speech advocates.

The settlement, reached in 2011 but unsealed only last week, barred the Hallowichs' son and daughter, who were then aged 10 and seven, from ever discussing fracking or the Marcellus Shale, a leading producer in America's shale gas boom.

The Hallowich family had earlier accused oil and gas companies of destroying their 10-acre farm in Mount Pleasant, Pennsylvania and putting their children's health in danger. Their property was adjacent to major industrial operations: four gas wells, gas compressor stations, and a waste water pond, which the Hallowich family said contaminated their water supply and caused burning eyes, sore throats and headaches.

Gag orders – on adults – are typical in settlements reached between oil and gas operators and residents in the heart of shale gas boom in Pennsylvania. But the company lawyer's insistence on extending the lifetime gag order to the Hallowichs' children gave even the judge pause, according to the court documents.

[@contradevian]

my point is that if you build more homes, its only a matter of time before you need to build more, and more and more and more, not a good idea IMO. the UK would end up as one big concrete jungle. i mean look at london, leeds, notts, horrible places, and ppl pay £300k for a flat! they may earn huge salaries but i really do pity many of them.

Dunno but when I drive from Leeds to London I see mainly fields, the same as when I get the train from Leeds to London or Sheffield to London or Manchester to London.

The only exception over the past few decades are places like Northampton, which has now expanded so much it has encroached beyond the M1, with industrial estates and housing.

If you were to DOUBLE the amount of housing in the UK (which no one is asking for and isn't required) I'm sure the view would still be mainly fields!

A lot of this so called "country side" is not that special or good.

[@contradevian]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-23693775

Miranda Aston, from Marton, which is close to the proposed drilling site, said: "This is shocking news - sometimes I think some people will not rest until all of our countryside has gone."

Patricia Greensall, from High Street, Marton, said she was worried that if the project goes ahead it will devalue her property. She added: "Had we had this information we would not have bought in Marton.

"Obviously that is how most potential buyers will now think."

Its a good job we are not trying to re-open the pits, thats all I can say! And the classic?

Anti-UCG campaigner Gareth Herd, from Rugby, said: "It will be a blot on the landscape. We need to get over our addiction to fossil fuel."

Giving up the car, and planting some wind mills then?

[MrPin]

Its a good job we are not trying to re-open the pits, thats all I can say! And the classic?

Giving up the car, and planting some wind mills then?

Fantastic! I'll bet even people in pretty villages have washing machines, and other electronic tat!

[Cosmic Apple]

Fantastic! I'll bet even people in pretty villages have washing machines, and other electronic tat!

And of course the 4x4s for the 2 days it snows and they absolutely need to go to the nearest big town to shop at M&S... and in case there are cows on the road..

[The Masked Tulip]

Oddly enough, when I visit the Home Counties I often think "Hmm, they've never had a pit or heavy industry here!". Well, looks like that is going to change.

[@contradevian]

Oddly enough, when I visit the Home Counties I often think "Hmm, they've never had a pit or heavy industry here!". Well, looks like that is going to change.

Really? We have nice countryside here, but I do know that in the 18-19th centuries it was intensively mined and quarried.

Derbyshire used to have one of the highest concentrations of population. What is now National Park was criss crossed with quarry's, mines and railways.

And we are talking about sinking a well, which is a relatively mature technology, now despoiling the countryside with slag heaps.

Where on earth do people think their gas, energy, oil comes from? We would be well fed up with the Saudi's if they decided they no longer wanted dirty oil wells everywhere.

Edited August 15, 2013 by aSecureTenant

[campervanman]

There used to be coal mines in Kent.

[@contradevian]

There used to be coal mines in Kent.

In the East Midlands as well. Leicestershire as well as Nottingham.

[The Masked Tulip]

Really? We have nice countryside here, but I do know that in the 18-19th centuries it was intensively mined and quarried.

Derbyshire used to have one of the highest concentrations of population. What is now National Park was criss crossed with quarry's, mines and railways.

And we are talking about sinking a well, which is a relatively mature technology, now despoiling the countryside with slag heaps.

Where on earth do people think their gas, energy, oil comes from? We would be well fed up with the Saudi's if they decided they no longer wanted dirty oil wells everywhere.

Since when did Derbyshire and Yorkshire become the Home Counties? What on earth are you talking about?

[tonytramcar]

In the East Midlands as well. Leicestershire as well as Nottingham.

And in Somerset.

[@contradevian]

Since when did Derbyshire and Yorkshire become the Home Counties? What on earth are you talking about?

From around the time Warwickshire did which is what the OP was about!

[stormymonday_2011]

Oddly enough, when I visit the Home Counties I often think "Hmm, they've never had a pit or heavy industry here!". Well, looks like that is going to change.

The Weald used to be the centre of UK iron working and charcoal production right up to the Industrial Revolution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealden_iron_industry

Most of the cannon used by British Royal Navy ships up to the Napoleonic era and most of the timber that built the ships that created the British Empire came from there

Edited August 15, 2013 by stormymonday_2011