> you're very unlikely to hit only ones where not most/all of the land already is already allocated to some purpose

Thats is the wrong problem - numerous farmers in Britain want wind turbines, they want extra source of income and they are willing to put in their own money. They know the turbines dont take any land away from farming - only fraction of a percent.

They are not allowed to install wind turbines on their own land from their own money, because the british government has banned turbines over a certain, non-viable height, on land.

Even when you want a small turbines installed, it takes 4 years of planning permissions and legal battles.

If we allowed every farmer to install windfarm of their land without interference, we'd solve half the problem.

We are dooming ourselved to disaster out of purely aesthetic concerns.