1) The site for the Turbine is Common Land, control of land will be handed over to a private interest energy company or companies.

2)The Turbine could be sited anywhere else and the energy transmitted by cable to Hackney in the normal way.

3) A series of smaller turbines would generate the same energy with reduced impact on the environment.

4) Hackney Marshes and the greater Lea-Marshes still provide an experience of a rural environment in close proximity to very dense housing conurbations. The open horizens and 'big sky' are a key element of this. A towering structure, combined with large-scale housing developments through the Lea Marshes will destroy this forever.

 The choice between football and the environment is a cruelly false one. It disguises the take-over of common land by private companies. It exploits people's capacity to surrender something for the greater good. For shades of things to come, go to Millfields Recreation Ground, E5, and see the land grab being carried out by the National Grid and EDF by their redeveloped power station.

The is a lot more to Hackney Marshes than football. They are part of the greater Lea Marshes, a semi rural space with wide horizens and open skies existing in close proximity to very dense housing conurbations. This space is threatened on all sides and is about to be cut through by high-rise housing developments, courtesy of Waltham Forest Council.

 If Hackney schools were teaching children the pleasures and the meaning of the enjoyment of the countryside, those same children would eventually be spending more time outdoors and less time indoors with the heating thermostat at maximum while they play at 'virtual outdoors' electronic games. This policy would also fit with the Government 'Horizens' project. This scheme aims to reduce personal depression among the adult population by ensuring that children have meaningful emotional experiences. No fast profits in  that though! is there?... except perhaps for the ecology and well-being of our shared world.

Ted of Hackney 739 days ago

If Hackney Council is allowed to get away with this it will set a precedent which will make common land throughout the country within the reach of energy and land equity companies. These predators are desperate to convert useless currency holdings into real assets.

Ted of Hackney 739 days ago

Unfortunately I fear the positive response to LBH's consultation says a lot more about how easy it is to rig consultations than the merits of an East Marsh wind turbine. Arcola are trying to organise a debate on this issue for their March Green Sunday and there is an urgent need for greater awareness of the pros and cons of wind energy. The more I find out the more I realise my assumption that it is all good was very naive. Aside from ecological impacts there are the specific limitations of building a turbine on the lowest ground in Hackney (e.g. very low wind speeds), sustainability issues (you need reserve generators for when the wind isn't blowing), and political issues (pretending wind is a green panacea that will save us from climate change is a dangerous red herring).
This is Olympics eco bling cleverly disguised as local renewable energy. Those who believe the hype have a responsibility to research the facts (e.g. what energy can a downsized 3.4kw turbine produce at that location and what percentage of new, post-Olympic legacy energy consumption does that amount to?) and convince concerned doubters that there is substance beyond the simplistic myth that wind equals good. Otherwise those desperate to believe in the easy, quick fix, no cost fantasy will be used to bulldoze us up another blind alley.

Russell Miller 721 days ago