Â鶹´«Ã½

From John Etherington

Ralph Ellis’ letter points out only half the fallaciousness of British government policy relating to wind power (22 March, p 30).

The assumption that a small reduction in carbon dioxide emissions might influence climatic change has been the reason for deploying these machines. However, as spinning back-up is needed to cope with intermittency, the implication is that the back-up itself will generate a lot of CO₂. Back-up is provided by fossil-fuel plants running below peak output, and consequently burning fuel inefficiently, so making matters even worse.

In response to the consultation process leading to the White Paper, the Institution of Chemical Engineers told the Department of Trade and Industry that the back-up loss might exceed 50 per cent of the predicted CO₂ saving.

We in Britain pay a huge hidden subsidy to wind electricity through the Renewables Obligation and exemptions to the Climate Change Levy. However, if wind power does not significantly reduce CO₂ emissions, it will waste huge amounts of the consumer’s money, which would save immensely more CO₂ emission by investment in energy conservation.

Llanhowell, Pembrokeshire, UK