Your Say - Wednesday October 17

Power: 120m high turbines of Barrow Offshore Wind Farm seen from Anchorsholme promenade
Power: 120m high turbines of Barrow Offshore Wind Farm seen from Anchorsholme promenade
Share this article
Have your say

Expert analysis on wind turbines

As a professional environmental engineer, may I acquaint writers who support wind turbines with the correct facts.

1) Wind turbines are the most inefficient form of power generation as they only produce electricity for 27% of the time, compared to 100% with power stations. Would their supporters be happy having electricity for only 27% of the time? Remember the winter of 2010-2011 when for weeks on end temperatures fell below 10C and the wind turbines stood still.

2) As it is not possible to control when wind turbines will produce electricity, power stations cannot be made redundant and some of them will have to tick over on low efficiency levels resulting in unnecessary extra cost.

3) Take note of the experts, Dr Benny Hill, of the Global Warming Foundation, who said: “Wind farms are a complete waste of money and a huge burden on the consumers who have to pay for them.” John Constable of the Renewable Energy Foundation said: “The scale of the policy for wind, proposed in the UK is technically and economically reckless. This is not the right way to develop the green future.”

The Foundation says: “More than half the annual income of an onshore wind farm comes from subsidies.” The Wind Industry received £7.3bn from Renewable Obligation Subsidies between 2002 and 2011. Because of these subsidies and other benefits, we have to pay an extra £350 on our energy bills.

4) Investment in wind turbines will cost 10 times as much as a modern power station.

5) World Health expert Dr Nina Pierpont has studied the effect on health of people living near wind turbines and has found direct noise, infrasound amplitude modulation, vibration, flicker etc. has resulted in numerous health problems. She says wind turbines should be sited at least 2km from the nearest residents.

6) Scottish Planning Policy Guidance, parts of Wales, Europe and USA have responded and imposed limits of between 1.5km to 2km from wind turbines to the nearest property.

7) Denmark, one of the earliest advocates of wind turbines has stopped onshore installations because of all the problems. They have the second highest energy costs in Europe and have not closed one power station.

Trying to intimidate South Ribble Council with threats of going to appeal shows desperation for a flawed case and is futile.

Thomas Sutton C.Eng, FICME, MIMechE, Walmer Bridge

Profits are being made overseas

Prime Minister Cameron was quite right when he told the Tory Conference Britain was world number one for “off-shore wind”.

In fact, Britain has more off-shore wind farm capacity than the rest of the world combined: 2.7 gigawatts, compared with a global total of 5.0 gigawatts.

What Cameron did not tell conference however, was that although we do have wind farms, these are being built by Germans and Danes. British consumers are paying subsidies to import a great deal of costly foreign-made equipment; the same applies to the construction of Britain’s on-shore wind farms. Surely it is time for us to begin to rebuild our own industrial infrastructure ?

Nature also provided Britain with the world’s second greatest tidal range and huge potential wave power. We should be harnessing these with British equipment. Off-shore wind farms are hugely expensive, but are being built because of senseless opposition to - cheaper - on-shore wind farms. Don’t their opponents know that, even if it cannot be seen, fresh clean air is a much more important part of the environment than the landscape, which, in many cases , they falsely claim is spoilt?

Ron Atkins, James Street,

Look to Oldham for city revival

Recently plans were approved in Oldham for their old town hall to be incorporated into a leisure destination of a cinema and restaurants.

I was thinking, how about incorporating the fine Art Deco Lancastria House into any proposed leisure development by the market. It could have a sleek and decorative glass screen facing revamp markets. The outdoor markets could be enclosed with glass screens and become an indoor market. Could be on to a winner I reckon.

S P Webberley, via e-mail