WHEN will Government Ministers and Prime Ministers take note and listen to “independent” advice based upon long-term evidence and not just take the submissions of establishment advisers?
In this respect a great number of us have known for several years that wind turbines are a highly inefficient and highly costly method of generating electricity/energy.
The former energy adviser to the World Bank, Professor Gordon Hughes of the University of Edinburgh, recently determined that after a decade’s operation, the contribution of the average UK wind farm to meet electricity demand drops by a third and where he found that many costly onshore turbines wore out prematurely.
But added to this, research from data collated in the UK and Denmark indicated that they last between 10 and 15 years – and not the 20 to 25 years projected by the industry.
The Renewable Energy Foundation (REF) charity that commissioned the review stated that it had applied “rigorous statistical analysis to years of actual wind farm performance data” to quantify the efficiency of these turbines.
REF stated that rate of decline means it is “rarely economic to operate wind farms for more than 12 to 15 years” after which time they need replacing.
Indeed, REF director John Constable stated that the study confirmed long held suspicions that decades of generous subsidies to the wind industry had not encouraged the innovation needed to make the sector competitive and where “bluntly, wind turbines cost too much and wear out far too quickly to offer the developing world a realistic alternative to coal.”
Why then, after yet another deplorable exposé of this rotten energy policy, do politicians still support this inefficient and highly costly way of spending the taxpayers’ money when there are far better perpetual energy sources? (Yorks Post.)
The former energy adviser to the World Bank, Professor Gordon Hughes of the University of Edinburgh, recently determined that after a decade’s operation, the contribution of the average UK wind farm to meet electricity demand drops by a third and where he found that many costly onshore turbines wore out prematurely.
But added to this, research from data collated in the UK and Denmark indicated that they last between 10 and 15 years – and not the 20 to 25 years projected by the industry.
The Renewable Energy Foundation (REF) charity that commissioned the review stated that it had applied “rigorous statistical analysis to years of actual wind farm performance data” to quantify the efficiency of these turbines.
REF stated that rate of decline means it is “rarely economic to operate wind farms for more than 12 to 15 years” after which time they need replacing.
Indeed, REF director John Constable stated that the study confirmed long held suspicions that decades of generous subsidies to the wind industry had not encouraged the innovation needed to make the sector competitive and where “bluntly, wind turbines cost too much and wear out far too quickly to offer the developing world a realistic alternative to coal.”
Why then, after yet another deplorable exposé of this rotten energy policy, do politicians still support this inefficient and highly costly way of spending the taxpayers’ money when there are far better perpetual energy sources? (Yorks Post.)
