Turbines tragedy
Just why does the SNP Scottish Government persist in allowing yet more and increasingly bigger wind turbine s to de face this beautiful country, cause damage to wildlife, harm our tourism economy and increasingly our health and well- being? According to a recent report for the Centre for Policy Studies, in the last three years Britain’s electricity imports have increased by 52 per cent and are projected to increase tenfold by 2030, putting our national energy security at risk.
Wind, which is both intermittent and variable, cannot provide a base load, even if the numerous problems enumerated in Celia Hobb’s letter (24 October) continue to be dismissed or ignored by our elected so- called representa-
As the first offshore wind farms are decommissioned it’s clear they have not proved to be effective alternatives to fossil or nuclear- fuel electricity. Few have been able to pay off the cost of their construction and even the most successful failed to break even when the cost of their maintenance is included.
For a typical fossil- fuel plant, effective energy revenue return on input cost is of the order of 15: 1 whereas a nuclear plant’s ratio is even higher. The lesson learned from these early wind farms is that such Heath- Robinson devices cannot power a modern economy unless assisted by substantial fossil- fuelled energy.
The secret of the fossil fuel success is its high calorific value. A ton of coal has an energy return on energy invested ( EROEI) of 10: 1 while a therm of natural gas has an EROEI of 15: 1. For the foreseeable future, fuel- less technologies are simply not going to get anywhere near this level of efficiently.
Global economic growth is very sensitive to the cost of energy. Energy cost spikes in the mid- 1970s and 2010 form the boundaries between the 5 per cent growth rate from 1950- 1975, the 3 per cent from 1980-2008, and the 2.5 per cent since 2012. There’s a lot at stake in the choice between cheap fossil fuels and expensive renewables.
JOHN CAMERON Howard Place, St Andrews