Your Say - Wednesday October 24

Source of debate: One reader says claims made about wind turbines are wide of the mark
Source of debate: One reader says claims made about wind turbines are wide of the mark
Share this article
Have your say

Wind turbine claims ‘inaccurate’

A RECENT letter (letters, October 17) about wind turbines contains many inaccuracies which need correcting.

Wind turbines generate electricity most of the time: 70-85%. Over a year an onshore turbine generates about 30% of its theoretical maximum output.

It’s higher for offshore turbines. The load factor for conventional power stations averages about 50%.

All power plants, including nuclear ones, are stopped for breakdowns and maintenance. No power plant generates 100% of the time. Much energy is lost in transmission whereas turbines often feed electricity directly to farms and factories with little transmission loss.

Variability of supply is manageable through the National Grid and other technologies.

David Milborrow’s report Managing Variability shows how this can be done. One-for-one backup for wind farms is not needed. Wind turbines are actually very efficient.

The letter quotes two foundations which are both notorious wind power opponents. The Global Warming Policy Foundation is a climate change sceptical lobby group chaired by Lord Lawson, well known for his climate change denial views. It’s hardly an objective source for wind turbines.

The Renewable Energy Foundation is another privately-funded sceptical group which lobbies against wind turbines. Who funds them and why?

The unsupported claim that wind turbine investment will cost 10 times more than a modern power station is very unreliable. The waste management cleanup costs for the UK nuclear industry are estimated to be nearly £100 billion.

Costs for gas and fossil fuel generation, including CO2 capture and fuel transport, are considerable. There are no expensive resource wars for wind energy. Wind turbines have a design life of about 25 years. They can be dismantled and recycled with far fewer long term costs.

The inventor of ‘wind turbine syndrome’ Dr Nina Pierpoint is not a ‘world health expert’. She’s a New York paediatrician. Her study was based on a small self-selected sample. It was not peer-reviewed scientifically or published in a reputable medical journal. The authoritative NHS Knowledge Service states that there is no conclusive evidence for ‘wind turbine syndrome’.

South Ribble Council’s planning decisions should be based on objective scientific, medical and legally sound evidence. They should seek to support local firms trying to reduce energy costs in a demanding recession. They should encourage growth and employment for the borough’s hard-pressed young people. They should welcome new high-tech engineering jobs. They shouldn’t be handcuffing local companies with red tape and planning decisions possibly based on biased misinformation.

Marion Seed,

Central Lancs Friends of the Earth

Authorities have no integrity left

The BBC has no integrity concerning the Jimmy Saville allegations, is bias towards the Palestinians against Israel, is bias towards evolutionists.

The truth concerning these subjects and others need to be exposed, instead of half truths which are damage limitations.

The rich men in the shadows run the politicians, the politicians dictate to the TV and radio stations and the newspapers etc, thereby programming or manipulating the minds of the people.

It is all about controlling the masses towards an agreed agenda.

If you said to a cricketer more spin, he would understand you, if you said to a politician more spin he would understand you, if you said to a evolutionist more spin he would understand you, in fact TV and radio stations etc would perfectly understand you.

No wonder there is fear and despair within nations as those in authority have no integrity.

the plans of mice and men come to nothing inevitably.

NW Threlfall,

Cambridgeshire, via email

Look at Preston for link road work

Regarding the Heysham M6 Link (LEP, October 23), transfer the project to Preston which right now is a bottle neck.

It only takes one accident and traffic grinds to a halt for many miles around because it is all routed through the city.

Brenda Leyland,

via LEP website