NEWS |
||||
Many people regard wind farms as generally being a "Good thing". After all, how can it not be "a good thing" when the wind farm companies say things like,
 |
 |
So you may be thinking to yourself..... "where's the harm?"
Well before you swallow this spin, Just take a minute to consider the following facts. You can check them out for yourself if you don't believe us.
Of course, it's not that the Wind Companies lie to you, (as if they would....) it's just that they don't tell you the whole truth... and there you were thinking that "Spin" was the job of the politicians!
5 MAIN REASONS WHY WIND FARMS ARE A FAILURE
1. They cannot provide a RELIABLE , CONSTANT and CONTROLABLE supply of electricity to the National Grid (More)
2. They FAIL to REDUCE CO2 emissions by an amount that can make any difference to climate change. (More)
3. They are not economically viable without large subsidies from the tax payer (More)
4. They have a huge environmental impact over massive areas of the country and the wildlife and will damage the tourist industry. (More)
5. They can potentially cause noise and light pollution. (More)
(1) The Supply.
NOT CONTROLABLE - It's 8.30pm on a Saturday evening. Millions of people are watching the final of X Factor or some other reality TV show. In a National Grid control centre sits a person (hopefully not Homer Simpson!) who knows that in around 30 minutes, at the end of the show, electricity demand is going to jump hugely as people get up and put the kettle on. What does he/she do? Pop outside to see if they can whistle up a bit more wind or notify XYZ power station to start cranking up their capacity?You probably will only care about one thing.... that the light switches on when you walk through to the kitchen and that the kettle works so you can have a brew.
That's the problem in a nut-shell.
NOT RELIABLE
Wind Turbines only work between wind speeds between 10-12 MPH and 54 MPH. Slower and there is insufficient wind to power the turbine; faster and the turbine has to shut down.
A typical 2.3 megawatt turbine will in fact only provide its maximum output between wind speeds of 26 - 54 MPH
Output curve for a typical 2.5 MW wind turbine.
Note that "full" output is only reached when the wind speed is 15m/s (34 miles per hour or F7)
A report published by ABS, an independent energy market research company, highlights authoritative evidence from other countries in Europe that shows how wind power actually works, as opposed to what is being claimed. For example:-
There is a mismatch of supply and demand. During periods of high pressure weather systems (ie: that bring those crisp cold winter days and still hot summer days), wind speeds are at low levels but demand is at its highest.
In other words, when demand is highest, wind power makes its minimum contribution.
NOT CONSTANT
As everyone knows the wind does not blow consistently. The graph below shows how the generating capacity can be affected within a very short time frame.
The force of the wind generally fluctuates considerably within the space of a few days and even a few hours.
Sometimes the wind can drop just when the demand for electricity is at its peak.
The graph, which documents the amount of electricity generated during the month of November in 2001, illustrates this point well.
The graph clearly shows that wind energy on its own is not capable of providing a reliable supply of electricity.
Regular power stations are required to smooth out the fluctuations in wind power output and need to be ramped up and down constantly as wind power output fluctuates.
This shortens their service life and causes them to consume more fuel-in much the same way as a car in city traffic. The higher specific fuel consumption produces higher CO2 emission levels, thereby negating some of the environmental benefit of wind power.
Can Wind Farms EVER replace conventional power stations? NO - Conventional power stations will ALWAYS be needed.
The UK has around 1900 operational wind turbines
Germany has over 20,000 (10 times the UK number) turbines
How many power stations has Germany been able to close? - NONE
(2) CO2 Emissions
We are told that we have to reduce CO2 emissions. The Government has targets for reducing CO2 emission and we know how governments "Love" targets as they provide more jobs for the bureaucrats.
But back to the important topic of CO2 emissions. Wind is Green, so surely generating electricity from wind will reduce CO2 emissions? No.. not really.
While it is true that the actual electrical generation process from a wind turbine does not produce any CO2, wind turbines do produce massive amounts of CO2 during their construction and from the ecological damage that is caused when developing a site, especially if that site is on peat moorland.
Electricity production ONLY accounts for around 30% of the UKs CO2 emissions, with the remaining 70% coming from other sources, such as transport (cars, trucks & planes) and manufacturing. (approximately 7% from the manufacture of cement.) A single Jumbo jet produces around 400t of CO2 on ONE flight from London to New York and there are 1000's of the planes in the skies every day!
At Cairn Uish, 22 turbines needed approximately 37400 tonnes of concrete which produced around 3000 tonnes of CO2 to make.
This is a turbine foundation ..how green is this?
Remember this concrete can never be removed once laid.
The amount of CO2 emissions a wind turbine can save is a matter of conjecture since there are no mechanisms in place to take accurate measurements. However, Denmark, the country with the most wind-generated electricity per capita, has shown no reduction in its overall CO2 emissions; in fact, Denmark’s CO2 emissions are rising.
Many wind farms are being proposed on Forestry Commission land. Building a wind farm on forested land involves chopping down vast areas of trees, which, if left standing, would absorb CO2.
Wind turbines, unlike trees, do not remove CO2 from the atmosphere.
According to the Environment Agency, one acre of coniferous trees absorbs 3.5 tonnes of CO2 each year.
However, when trees are clear felled, the decomposition of vegetation that is left behind actually adds to the CO2 emissions problem.
Wind farm sites built on ancient peat bogs also contribute to significant CO2 emissions.
As the land is stripped off and drained, it releases stored CO2 and methane into the atmosphere. As the peat gradually dries out, it will continue to oxidise and release even more CO2.
On parts of the Dava Moor, for example, scientific analysis has shown that the dry matter of the peat is almost 50% carbon! Therefore excavating massive foundations on peat moorland is actually going to release huge amounts of stored CO2!
Far from reducing CO2 emissions, wind farms actually have the potential to be significant producers of CO2 from
According to DTI estimates, reaching the 2010 renewable energy targets would achieve a reduction of about 2 million tonnes of CO2 per year. Even if this were achievable, it is not impressive when viewed in relation to national and global emission rates. A 2-million-tonne reduction of CO2 is a mere 1.7% of total UK emissions (550 million tonnes) and 0.0004% of world emissions (24,000 million tonnes). Global emissions are expected to rise by 2% a year, mainly from China and India.
Remember that the power supply from wind farms is NOT constant or reliable and conventionel power stations ALWAYS have to be running in the background.
Constantly having to increase and reduce the generating capactity of a conventional power station causes them to consume more fuel-in much the same way as a car in city traffic. The higher specific fuel consumption produces higher emission levels, thereby further reducing what little environmental benefits of wind power there are.
Wind turbines can have no significant effect in reversing, or even slowing down, global CO2 emissions.
Remember...
The UK has around 1900 operational wind turbines
Germany has over 20,000 (10 times the UK number) turbines
How many power stations has Germany been able to close? - NONE
In 2005 the energy giant E:on stated that; " traditional power stations with capacities equal to 90% of the installed wind power capacity must be permanently on-line in order to guarantee power supplies at all times."
As any electricity produced by Wind Power is in ADDITION TO, not INSTEAD OF an existing supply, it follows that wind farms WILL FAIL to significantly reduce CO2 emissions from generating our electrical supplies.
(3) MONEY
"Never, in the field of British taxation, has so much been paid to so few for so little."
Apologies to Mr Churchill. It gets you thinking though.Companies planning and building wind farms get paid a great deal of money in subsidies, disguised in the form of Renewable Obligation Certificates (ROC) and Climate Change Levy (CCL).
The Renewable Obligation subsidy system pays for wind power at the point of generation, not delivery. This means that even the wind-generated electricity that is lost in transmission, or wasted because it is generated when there is no demand, is STILL rewarded with government subsidies.
The Committee of Public Accounts Report on Renewable Energy, published in September 2005, concluded that the Renewable Obligation subsidy system gives undue support to wind power at the expense of other renewable technologies. This report estimated that the Renewable Obligation subsidy system will be adding £1 billion a year to electricity prices by 2010. The expansion of distribution and transmission capacity needed to meet the government’s 10% renewables target will add another £1.5 billion to consumer costs.
From a local perspective, and just to give you an idea, the 5 operational wind farms in Moray and the 3 just over the boarder into Nth East Aberdeenshire receive approximately £17 million per year in subsidies... that's paid to just 6 companies.
"Wind farms get around three times as much in subsidy - a mixture of selling ROCS [renewable obligation certificates] and a share of fines paid by non-renewable plants - as they do from selling electricity" [Economist 18/3/04]
These subsidies (Approx £55 per Mega-watt hour MWh) are, of course in addition to the price the wind farm companies receive for their electricity. So you, the consumer and bill payer, are paying for this.... but you do not directly benefit.
Did you know that the two wind farms at Pauls Hill and Cairn Uish (Rothes) received, in 2006, over £11 million in ROC subsidies.... that is on top of any money they make from selling electricity... The Dorenell wind farm will be almost twice the size of these two and the developers could be looking at roughly £20 million per year if they get approval for 71 turbines.
£20 million x 25 years = £500 million from the tax payer for just one wind farm.... and you wonder why your electricity bills keep going up!
The landowner, on whose land the turbines are sited, will also do very nicely..!!
While the actual amount received depends on the size of the turbines, a landowner could receive anything from £3000 to £30,000 per year per turbine for the life of the wind farm
Interestingly, in the case of the Dorenell Wind Farm, the company says that the wind farm will only be there for 25 years, then, according to current plans it will be dismantled.
Can you spot the problem yet??
The problem is money - In 25 years we will still need electricity but the Subsidy scheme (ROC) does not (yet) extend so far into the future.... so no taxpayer money = no or very small profits, so .... no wind farm..
Wind farms are more to do with profit than "saving the planet".
Wind farm developers do not care about the local landscape or the folk that live there... "Hey, for £500 million, we're quite happy to destroy your landscape..!"
(4) Environmental Impact
(a) First and foremost, wind turbines are BIG. To give you some idea, check out the graph below.
(b) Visually, turbines have a huge spatial foot print and can be seen for miles.
In Scotland, where Tourism is hugely important for the economy as a whole, having the countryside and amazing natural scenery, polluted by massive machines is seriously bad news from the point of view of attracting tourists. In this tiny, overcrowded little island of ours, the big sky and wild open scenery is one of the biggest attractions for visitors who wish to escape, just for a week or two, from their cramped, fast paced, noisy lives.
While the wind farm development companies promote their surveys showing that tourists don't mind wind farms, there is a good deal of evidence to suggest that, given a choice, tourists would prefer to come to an area unaffected by wind farms. Indeed a 2002 VisitScotland survey suggests that around 25% of visitors would NOT return or NOT like to come to an area with wind farms. SOS Moray will be conducting a very detailed survey in 2008 within the Moray region.
However it's not just about spoiling the natural scenery..... there's more.
(c) Killing flora & fauna.
You might think that erecting a turbine is as simple as plonking a tube into the ground, bolting on 3 blades and plugging it in to the mains.
Wrong.. A single 400 Foot turbine needs massive a reinforced concrete foundation upwards of 350 - 400 cubic meters. It needs a proper road that is capable of carrying the massive trucks and cranes needed to bring the parts on site. It needs 1000's of tonnes of gravel and hardcore to make the concrete and the roads.
To build a wind farm on virgin peat & heather hillsides is tantamount to environmental vandalisim on a massive scale, yet this is what is being routinely proposed. Scotland has 90% of the remaining peat & heather eco-systems remaining in Western Europe. You hear a lot about the rain forest in Brazil being chopped down, but is the Government sponsored destruction of Scotland's most famous natural habitat any less important?
Indeed scientific studies now suggest that building these machines in such a fragile habitat may cause very serious long term damage.
In 2003, wind farm construction in Derrybrian (Ireland) caused a half million tonnes of peat to slide, burying a home and roads. The resulting mess cost taxpayers and individuals dearly.
Similar peat degredation is ALREADY evident at Pauls Hill in Moray and at another site in Thurso and academic reports are being prepared.
To put this simply:-
Any machine that moves causes a vibration. (Turbines rotate, gears grind, mechamisms move!).
Such vibrations have wide ranging frequency and power levels and are impossible to predict in advance.
Academic studies have shown that in peat eco-systems, this vibration actually kills the microscopic life in, and on, the peat causing it to lose its structure, collapse and rot.
This dead rotted material is then washed into the water ways where it has a devastating impact on fish and aquatic life as well as businesses such as whisky and bottled waters.
Make no mistake, this pollution is not like when the Spey runs dark with peat after heavy rain; that's just particles of peat in suspension in the water. This will poison ALL water it gets into and cost serious money to purify.
Interstingly, none of the authorites are prepared to deny that this might happen.
All this is laid out in an academic paper to be published early 2008 in the International Journal Energy and Environment Vol 19(2) by Professor D. Dean.
(d) Effect on Birds & Mammals.
Wind Turbines will KILL birds, especially our rarest birds of prey, whose home is Scotland's wilderness.
A White-tailed sea eagle killed by a wind turbine at the Smola windfarm, Norway
Granted, it depends to a large extent on where the turbines are sited, but as more and more developers cast their eyes towards the remote hills and glens of Scotland's remaining wilderness areas, the threat to Scotland's wildlife will increase.
Also what about other mammels? From the magnificent Red Deer to the humble, rarely seen vole.
What is "Green" about a policy that destroys habitats and eco-systems that have been around for millennium, just for a short term (25 year) gain?
(5) Noise & Light pollution
New research in Portugal published in May, 2007, demonstrates that wind turbines in the proximity of residential areas produce acoustical environments that can lead to the development of Vibro-Acoustic Disease (VAD) in nearby home-dwellers.
Other medical studies indicate that onshore wind farms can be a health hazard to people living nearby because of the low-frequency noise. Low-frequency noise travels further than audible noise; it is ground borne and felt through vibrations, which can resonate with the human body. For some people there is no effect, but for others it can be very disturbing. According to a report by Dr Geoff Leventhall, a fellow of the Institute of Physics and Institute of Acoustics, 'Low-frequency noise causes extreme distress to a number of people who are sensitive to its effects.'
Research by Dr Amanda Harry showed that all but one of the 14 people living near the Bears Down wind farm in Cornwall had experienced increased incidents of headaches, and 10 said they had problems sleeping and suffered from anxiety. According to Dr Harry, a local GP in the area, there was a range of reported symptoms from headaches, migraines, nausea, dizziness, palpitations and tinnitus to sleep disorders, stress anxiety and depression.
The Danish government has stopped erecting onshore turbines because of the health problems associated with noise.
Light pollution can also cause problems due to the strobe effect when sun is behind the rotating blades. This can, according to medical opinion, cause dizziness, headaches and trigger seizures. Shadow flicker and reflected light from the blades can also cause problems. These light disturbances are experienced inside the home as well as outside.
So... Is there an alternative??
There has to be since even if we covered the whole of Scotland in Wind farms, and totally destroyed Scotland as a tourist destination and one of Europes last remaining wilderness areas, we would still need Conventional power stations.
