Copyright 2004 Lincolnshire Echo
Lincolnshire Echo

February 25, 2004

SECTION: News; Other; Letters; Pg. 10

LENGTH: 1294 words

HEADLINE: OTHER NATIONS ARE NOW TURNING AWAY FROM THE TURBINES

BODY:
More and more energy companies are applying to erect land-based wind farms
throughout Lincolnshire, and it seems with the blessing of the East Midlands
Assembly. Nocton Fen (February 24) is the latest. The time has come for
every member of the general public to make themselves aware of the real
facts concerning this particular form of "supposedly" renewable,
sustainable, green energy - now that they have heard the "economically
truthful" propaganda being pushed by green energy companies.

Denmark was one of the first to embrace this technology, and is now against
it. Wind turbines produce electricity only when the wind is within a certain
speed range. Their output is intermittent, highly variable, and largely
unpredictable.

In all 30 per cent productivity is about the best we can expect from these
huge expensive machines.

When there isn't sufficient wind, power stations are needed to make up the
shortfall in power. Only nuclear power stations are CO2-free.

Denmark is not the only country to have embraced wind turbine technology and
found it flawed; Australia, Germany and the USA are also finding it is not
the answer to sustainable CO2-free energy.

In every country with wind turbines, people are driven to distraction by
blade noise in high winds and subliminal vibration travelling through the
ground which can be heard through the fabric of houses when people are
trying to sleep.

A GP in Devon has documented health problems from this very thing.

Wind turbines kill birds and bats, as well as millions of insects that are
food for them. Birds of prey are particularly susceptible. Red kites have
been killed in Wales. In other countries wind turbines have also been
responsible for interference with bird migration. This is the same scenario
worldwide.

Wind turbines are not sustainable, even the Government's own department
report had grave doubts on this very point. They blight beautiful
landscapes; they reduce house property values; they drive tourists away.

The turbines can break 40ft blades, flinging them miles away. Wind turbines
get ice build-up and sheets of ice can also be flung for miles.

Wind turbine footprints consist of thousands of tons of concrete sunk into
the ground, reducing ground absorption of rainfall and snow (house building
in the South East had this effect and floods were experienced).

Wind turbines will cost the tax payer and electricity consumer dear. Why?
The large subsidies being given to greedy entrepreneurs for green energy
from our taxes ensure plenty of takers.

Once the turbines are built, the extra cost of providing back-up power for
this inefficient use of transmission capacity is added to the bill, as well
as the rents paid to the land owner for use of their land. Hello expensive
electricity! The taxpayer will pick up the bill at the beginning, and again
when generating starts as bills rise above the present levels.

John Prescott knows there is resistance to wind farms, and so he is
proposing to change local and regional planning policies (PPS07 and PPS22)
to facilitate imposition of these monstrous white elephants, in a knee-jerk
catch-up reaction to the Kyoto agreement on reduction of CO2 emissions.

So because this Government has dragged its heels, the people are going to
suffer from yet another poorly thought out, less than best solution.

There are many alternative ways to reduce CO2 emissions, such as solar
power, wave technology etc.

If all the subsidies being given to these green power companies were given
in grants to householders for green energy instead, many homes could have
cheaper, more affordable electricity and heating, using the National Grid
less, and reducing CO2 emissions.

Oh, I forgot - that method doesn't make millions for power companies, does
it? Electricity should never have been privatised.

MRS JANE BIRKBY Jubilee Road, North Somercotes.

I am a strong believer in renewable energy and think the idea of using the
wind to generate power is a good one. However, I am very concerned about the
current proposals for Lincolnshire.

Turbines do create a low-frequency noise which can be disturbing, as well as
the flicker effect when the sun is reflected off the blades.

In a judgement in the Lake District recently a judge ruled that the
construction of a turbine within 500m of a housing area reduced the values
of property by 20 per cent (however residents would not be able to claim
compensation).

These turbines are best placed where there is steady wind, which means
exposed areas. This all indicates that the optimum location for turbines is
away from populated areas and not dotted around Lincoln.

Lincolnshire has plenty of wide open spaces such as at the coast and the
rural south of the county. Some of the currently proposed locations are near
major road junctions, for example the A46 and A158. There are therefore
serious road safety implications if drivers are distracted by the rotating
blades, which at a height similar to that of the cathedral would be seen for
miles.

What causes me most concern though, is the fact that Star Energy would like
to use the turbines to generate power from the wind to enable it to extract
extra oil from its pumping stations around the villages to the north-east of
Lincoln.

This is the reason for the turbines being sited at well heads rather than at
a more environmentally friendly location where they would have less impact
on the local population.

The extraction method proposed is to pump high-pressure gas from the North
Sea into the oil wells and use that to push out the oil. This technique has
not been proven to date in the UK. The oil already produces hydrogen
sulphide gas, which is highly corrosive, and when mixed with water produces
sulphuric acid. This is a very risky procedure as there is a real risk of
corrosion at the well head and a lethal gas blow-out.

It means in fact the villagers in the Nettleham, Welton, Scothern and
Sudbrooke area, as well as the people of north Lincoln, would be sitting on
one huge pressurised underground gas tank containing highly corrosive gas.

It seems to me that the public are being duped into supporting the Star
Energy turbines, believing them to be for green energy production. In fact
their true purpose is to enable the oil production company to produce more
polluting fuels from the almost exhausted wells, and thus make them more
profitable by reducing the cost of the electricity required.

JOHN EVANS Sudbrooke Lane, Nettleham.

The only point I can agree on with the correspondents from Welton (February
18) is that the wind turbines will not be linked to the National Grid and,
as such, should not be allowed, since they are clearly intended for sole use
by one company for its own requirements.

I cannot, however, agree with the other points. Having been to Mablethorpe
last summer, I did not find the two wind turbines intrusive, even taking
into account the flat area in which they are placed.

Since nobody has the "right to a view" and modern large turbines are
gearless and make a minimum of noise (not enough to cause a nuisance) and do
not interfere with television reception, I wonder what answers the
complainees would come up with as an alternative to the suggested power
source.

Perhaps they should be seeking, given Government policy for renewable energy
sources, that Star Energy makes provision for powering all the villages
where it wishes to place its turbines.

ALAN M. WADDINGTON Viking Way, Metheringham.

We say no to the wind farm at Nocton Fen, south of Lincoln. This is a great
place for wildlife, and there are not many places left! DEAN EADES Nocton.



LOAD-DATE: February 26, 2004