Sir, - Your readers should feel that their intellects have been insulted by the meretricious statistics listed by the chief executive of the British Wind Energy Association ("High winds not bad news", D&S Dec 28). May I put his claims in perspective?
1 There are 853 wind turbines generating clean, green electricity in the UK. Fact: together they produce fewer than 8m units of electricity a year; UK demand is 300,000m units a year.
2 They provide enough power to provide electricity for more than a quarter of a million homes. Fact: they can never be more than an intermittent and unreliable supplement to other sources of electricity, otherwise these homes could easily have been without their Christmas turkey or their central heating over the holiday because, for large parts of the year, there is too little or too much wind for a turbine to operate.
3 A single modern wind turbine can provide the electricity for 1,500 households. Fact: the biggest wind turbines being erected, 300ft high, can, on their average output, boil 150 kettles. I hope all those households don't want a nice cup of tea at the same time.
4 By the middle of next year wind power in the UK will have saved the emission of 1m tonnes of carbon dioxide. Fact: in the ten years that wind turbines have been providing electricity, UK Co2 emissions have totalled about 1,600m tonnes. One combined cycle gas turbine power station reduces Co2 emissions by 11m tonnes a year, a third of the UK target for emission reduction.
5 2,500 turbines will "only" cover 0.2pc of the UK land area. Fact: Carno wind farm in Mid Wales covers 1,500 acres of formerly unspoiled wilderness and is visible for 20 miles. It has an average output of ten megawatts of intermittent, unreliable power. Baglan power station, the most efficient and cleanest gas power station in the world, will cover 15 acres and produce 500MW of reliable, continuous power.
6 Over the next few years we are likely to see several thousand new turbines on land and offshore. Fact: offshore possibly, though the technology is tricky and untried except in the shallowest coastal water, but we are highly unlikely to see many more turbines on shore unless we allow ourselves to be conned by the wind lobby's misleading use of statistics.
The huge majority of proposed turbines have failed the planning process because, as a planning inspector said, "demonstrable harm would be caused to the appearance of the landscape (while) the amount of energy generated would be small and the pollution savings correspondingly few".
ROBERT WOODWARD
Vice-chairman
Country Guardian,
Twickenham
Make your voice heard
Sir. - Once again Mr Nick Goodall, chief executive of the British Wind Energy Association, has pulled a quantity of unverified statistics out of his voluminous hat in an attempt to persuade us that wind turbines are useful generators of electricity (D&S letters, December 29).
When will he learn that the British public cannot be coerced in this childish way, but demands intelligence and hard evidence? In this case the salient fact is that his members have been trying for ten years to provide a significant contribution to our energy needs with wind turbines and, in spite of generous subsidies, guaranteed markets and the choice of the windiest sites, they have succeeded in achieving only 0.2pc of UK demand.
Mr Goodall claims that a further 3,815 on and offshore turbines will enable him to meet his target by 2010. This would mean building and commissioning 424 turbines a year, 35 a month or more than one each day during the next nine years. How could this be done by an industry which has averaged only 8 turbines a year over the past decade?
And if, by some miracle, it could be done, would we be any better off? Would so many turbines solve any problems? Would they slow down climate change?
Another proven fact provides a clear answer: wind turbines are the most useless generators there are. Good for making money for developers, certainly, but they don't save enough carbon dioxide to make any difference to the atmosphere; they produce their minuscule energy only when the wind is blowing at the right speed so their performance is intermittent and cannot be relied upon; they can never render any conventional generator redundant as they need their back-up when not performing, and they are hugely objectionable for many reasons, including noise and scenery down-grading.
Do indeed find out about proposals near you, as Mr Goodall suggests - and then object to them. Your voice is effective; many more projects have been refused planning permission because of local opposition than have been granted. For more information, visit the website http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/windfarms.
JOHN F DODDS
Newcastle
Sir. - Nicholas Rhea wrote (D&S Times, December 29) that the penalties for hunting would be draconian.
In the very sad event of hunting being made illegal, I hope the penalties for cruelty to pet animals, which is unfortunately very common in the North-East, will be reviewed and brought into line with the penalties for taking part in the traditional activity of hunting.
Dare one suggest that people who take part in hunting will probably vote Tory, whereas people who inflict gratuitous cruelty on pet animals are unlikely to vote Tory?
The Burns report suggests that the abolition of hunting will do nothing for the welfare of the fox, which will be subjected to cruel and indiscriminate methods of control.
If hunting is made illegal, many people will lose not only their jobs, but also their homes, with no compensation from the government which has put them out of work.
What will happen to the thousands of hounds? To let them go to pet homes, with the occasional walk around an urban park on a lead, would be a fate worse than death.
MILES GARNETT
The Old Rectory,
South Otterington,
A wonderful meet
Sir. - It was once again very encouraging to see the record support given to the Hurworth hunt on their Boxing Day meet in Northallerton at a time when hunting is so threatened.
Our thanks to the Golden Lion for a wonderful meet as always and to the many supporters and onlookers who made the day so special for us all.
The hunt would also like to thank North Yorkshire police, who were so helpful as always.
On behalf of the hunt we wish you all a happy and prosperous new year.
KEITH BALBACH
AND PETER DENNIS
Joint masters,
Hurworth hunt
Their number's up
Sir,. - Mr Hague MP expresses concern over 600 Richmondshire households not registering for voting.
Would he also like to similarly respond over Richmondshire District Councils' decision to reduce parish councillor numbers on several parish councils and despite parishes objecting?
And on the one hand, Richmondshire District Council wants more democratic participation and on the other hand it is denying it.
And again, why did the leader of the council refuse to support a proposal for Catterick Village to remain at 11 and not be reduced to ten? Mere number games is not a good enough answer.
COUN TONY PELTON
Joiners Cottage,
High Green,
Catterick
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article