Wind power isn’t answer

AS an avid M.E.N. reader for many years I read with interest some of Claire Green’s points on nuclear safety (Viewpoints, August 25).

Yes, there was a fire at Windscale in the 1950s, but a study in 2010 of workers involved in a clean-up had no significant long-term health problems. Sellafield is also an older plant and has now been decommissioned. Modern nuclear power plants have much greater safety levels.

She supports poorly performing alternatives to nuclear energy as though they have no dangers.

However, wind turbines kill millions of birds, bats and raptors annually, and cause many health problems for local residents; some people living near wind turbines report symptoms such as dizziness, headaches, sleep disturbance and depression.

Also, this mention of tons of concrete in construction of new nuclear power stations – yes, of course it would take lots of concrete to build a nuclear power station but nowhere near the amount needed to continue building wind farms.

Each modern 400ft wind turbine has a concrete base of a thousand tons of concrete and steel rebar.

A quick calculation can reveal just how much in total; there are currently around 7,613 wind turbines in the UK, times that by the amount of concrete and it weighs in at a staggering seven million, six hundred and thirteen thousand tons of concrete! As Claire admits to making mistakes about mudslides; she also mentions that 97 per cent of ‘those who should know’ are clear that human activity and fossil fuels are causing ‘potentially’ catastrophic climate change.

Perhaps we could have an explanation of who are the 97 per cent; and how they came to that conclusion when concentrations of carbon dioxide have been much higher than today in previous colder times?