I quote.............................................
The case for producing more of our power through renewable means is well-made. Even without the threat from climate change, the pollution and waste thatgoes with burning fossil fuels is not sustainable in the long term. A more varied mix of generating options must be sought, as we move through the 21st century.
But wind energy, particularly when generated using marine wind turbines is a controversial answer to the question of how we keep the lights on when traditional forms of powergeneration are no longer considered viable. And today’s report from the Renewable Energy Foundationdetailing the subsidies and the shortcomings of wind turbines, ought to make everyone who is concerned about the environment and our power needs sit up and take notice.
It shows, in very stark terms, the shortcomings of wind turbines and makes a compelling case to suggest that but for the very generous subsidies available, no one would be investing in wind because it simply does not make sense to do so. The subsidies skew the energy market place and actually discourage funding for other, potentially more effective forms of renewable power.
At the heart of this argument, which has been raging for several years, is the relative inefficiency of harnessing the wind for energy. Impressive claims about the generating capacity of the average turbine begin to look decidedly shaky when average wind speeds are factored into the equation. Most turbines operate at just 27 per cent of full power, slashing a potential generating capacity of one turbine from 3 MW down to little more than 800kW
When you add in the fact that in 2006-07 subsidies totalling more than £217 million were paid to wind farm developersand operators, a picture begins to emerge of an industry supported not by the brilliance of its technology and the effectiveness of its generating capacity but by handouts that, ultimately, push up the cost of electricity to all of us.
Of course the Renewable Energy Foundation, (REF) which carried out the research and produced this report, is not entirely unbiased and nor, it has to be said, is the Council for the Protection of Rural England, which helped to write it and publicise its findings. REF has been opposed to wind energy and specifically to new turbines in attractive parts of the Westcountry for several years; the CPRE sees protecting the rural landscape as its raison d’etre.
But the figures are hard to deny and the big danger is that while wind energy is attracting all the cash, because of the subsidy available, other forms of renewable energy, plus the potential to develop better nuclear powerplants, are being overlooked. The stark truth from this report is that if we had to rely on wind to keep us powered we would soon be in trouble. That’s not a happy position to be in. It is surely time to take a more realistic attitude towards whatis beginning to look like an energy con-trick.
Tch thch tch tch, strong language indeed. There are many that agree though.