More interestingly, while factual and objective reporting seemed to have left the Spiegel building for a prolonged lunch in this article, I think the underlying observations (split in environmentalist groups, rise of local protests, the challenge of balancing the spread of building sites with complaints about noise, shadows or landscape change) remain worthy of continuous and decent discussion as long as wind on-shore activities expand. To my mind, such a discussion remains fundamental in relation to the public's consent on on-shore wind.

Trouble is that filtering the data out of the noise will cause more headaches, and I've plenty of them ahead already, so I'll pass today.