Wind power is not the solution

Share this article
Have your say

I was interested to read Jacob Stuart’s guest column (Journal, September 28) regarding the proliferation of wind farms in the area.

I applaud his enthusiasm for having them in Grantham itself, though once they have moved in and tower over his home, spoiling his concentration by day and keeping him awake at night, this enthusiasm may wane.

Mr Stuart quotes an American report “that it is viable that at least half the world’s energy needs could be provided by wind turbines”.

If it is viable now, why is it not happening? Perhaps because it does not work! Simply put, when the wind doesn’t blow and Mr Stuart wants to make a cup of tea, a conventional power station has to provide the electricity to boil his kettle.

That power station cannot be fired up instantly and so it has to be run constantly, producing more harmful emissions than if it were running at maximum efficiency.

As Mr Stuart dismisses our beautiful, historic landscape as “muddy fields” I fear he has little or no understanding of the rural environment and our duty to protect it from plans to despoil it.

This area is not particularly windy but we are apparently seen as a ‘soft touch’ by foreign power companies, seeking to exploit our Government’s hugely generous subsidies for inefficient wind power, paid for via our inflated energy bills.

Even the pro-wind Professor Jacobson, quoted by Jacob, does not identify the Vales of Belvoir and Trent as a suitable area, favouring the Gobi and Sahara Deserts instead!

I applaud the county council’s stance on wind turbines and the “questionable science behind them” but also welcome the research being carried out into practical low carbon energy.

Why are we doing this research? Because the scientists accept that wind power isn’t the answer.

I do agree with Jacob that we must “follow in Isaac Newton’s footsteps” and “explore new ways of thinking”, but the great scientist would turn in his grave if he thought his name was being used to promote a concept that science itself has proven to be a fallacy. New ways of thinking should, as Jacob says, benefit society and not

line the pockets of rich landowners and greedy companies.

I wish Jacob well and I hope he enjoys his cups of tea in the future, even when the wind isn’t blowing. On a brighter note, when he cannot sleep due to the incessant noise from the 400ft high turbine next door, I’m sure a ‘cuppa’ will hit the spot.

R. Thornton