A Wellingborough Councillor has been reported as saying that if there were 17,000 wind turbines approximately 75' high across the country, they would provide us with all the energy we need. Is this true?

No. The wind factory proposals for Airfield Farm, Nun Wood and Emberton are all for turbines much higher than 75' - five times higher in fact at 410’ (125m). Even using this bigger turbine size this figure is way off the mark. The UK consumes about 400,000,000MWh (Megawatt hours)of electricity each year. The most you could expect from 17,000 turbines that are 4 times that size (ie those at Burton Latimer) would be about 282,948,000 MWh. However, for this to happen, the turbines would have to generating at maximum output at all times.

How much does the wind blow in the United Kingdom?

Northern Ireland and Scotland have higher wind speeds than England, and coastal sites are obviously windier than those inland. The DTI claim that over a year, a wind turbine in the UK will produce, on average, 27% of the energy possible (100% is where the turbine would be generating at maximum output at all times). This claim is of course meaningless when trying to establish the merits of a specific site. In any case, the unreliability of wind turbines means it would still not be possible to supply the country with its needs. On December 25th 2005 for example, almost no wind turbines were turning anywhere in the country!

How much does the wind blow in Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire and Northamptonshire?

Well below the national average. For instance the wind factory in Burton Latimer is providing very little energy indeed. The figures for May, June and July 2006 show that Burton Wold produced energy, on average, 11.84% of the time. The figure for July 2006 was just 7.66%. According to the figures from the National Met Office the average local wind speed in Bedfordshire, Buckingham and Northamptonshire is so low that a wind turbine would generate its rated output, on average, for around just 15% of the year. Obviously the wind does not always blow at a time convenient to consumers; much of that small amount of energy would have been generated in the middle of the night. If the whole country had as low a wind speed as we have in our area, it would require 160,217 turbines to meet the national need, but this would be only for some of the time.

How much space should be required to accommodate 160,217 wind turbines?

The land area required for this many wind turbines would be 9 counties the same size as Northamptonshire. But don't forget, we would still be left in the dark much of the time because the electricity would not be generated on demand.

Can the electricity be stored?

No. There is no reliable or economically viable way of storing electricity generated by wind factories.

How are the figures arrived at when people talk about the number of households that will benefit from wind energy generation?

Figures are often used to simplify difficult explanations. The trouble with this is that they can be misleading. For instance, it is said that the average household consumes 4,800 kWh per year. This is a very optimistic figure based on everyone making huge efforts to save energy in the future. But assuming we are all trying to do our bit for conservation, let's keep to that. If a nearby wind factory (23MW) were generating electricity 27% of the time, it would theoretically be providing energy to 11,333 households but only when the wind was blowing. Of course, in Bedfordshire, Northants and Bucks this figure would drop to 7,400.

What is the main complaint that people have against wind power?

Although we are all keen to do whatever we can to support renewable energy - and wind power sounds like a good idea - large onshore wind factories are very inefficient and make a huge negative impact on fragile rural environments. With mounting concern about global warming, it goes against the grain to see vast sums of money spent on a form of energy generation which brings such small returns. It seems wasteful. Even David Milliband, then Secretary of State for the Environment, Food & Rural Affairs stated "...wind energy will never supply base load requirements." Put another way, it doesn't matter how many turbines you put up, we still have to have another source of energy running 24 hours a day as back up because wind power is unreliable, unpredictable and uncontrollable.

Would one solution be to have some of the nation's energy generated by wind as a supplement to other sources?

You can only supplement with wind energy by turning off another power source and this is difficult. Scientists admit that because wind energy is so intermittent, it is often impossible to plan ahead in order to accommodate it on the National Grid. This means other sources of power which are more reliable become surplus to requirements and are – literally – wasted! This results in higher carbon emissions and unnecessarily higher costs to the consumer.

There must be a role for wind factories – why else are they being built?

Developers find it very profitable to develop onshore wind factories because electricity providers are obliged by government to buy a percentage of renewable energy which is much more expensive than electricity generated in other ways.

What about off-shore wind factories?

In a recent poll, Peter Bone MP asked his constituents their opinion on off-shore wind factories and 89.2% were in favour of them. It is certainly true that very large wind farms, many miles off-shore, connected to the grid with high voltage direct-current cables would increase the efficiency of wind power. However this is very expensive. It would require massive government support to make off-shore wind factories as commercially profitable to developers as those built on-shore.

How much CO2 does a wind farm save?

It obviously depends on the wind farm. Large scale wind turbines like the ones proposed at Airfield Farm will actually generate large amounts of CO2 during their construction and it will take months to neutralize their carbon deficit. Once the turbines start generating electricity, wind factory developers usually take the 30% capacity (or load) factor recommended by the British Wind Energy Association (BWEA) as the relevant measure of wind turbine efficiency, electricity generation and carbon emissions avoided. It is now public knowledge that electricity generated and homes provided for are, at best, about 65% of that claimed. Carbon emissions avoided are likely to be about 40% of those claims. However, there are other complications to consider. Wind Factory developers claim CO2 emissions savings based on the assumption that their wind energy will only substitute for coal-fired generated energy. This was declared a false calculation by the UK's Advertising Standards Authority on December 21, 2005. If the UK were to phase out nuclear there would be no saving of CO2 emissions by wind energy. If we take the full energy spectrum, developers regularly claim 2.5 times the carbon emissions savings that can be expected.

Is it possible to generate reliable non CO2 emitting electricity?

Yes. Nuclear power does not generate CO2 and it already meets 20% of Britain’s electricity needs. Hydro electric schemes are efficient and reliable and tidal energy in the right places could make an important contribution. There are also big strides being made in domestic generation. Geo thermal (drawing heat from the ground) heat pumps, solar panels and micro wind turbines are available. When the government fulfills its promise to support these innovations, individual households will be able to take more responsibility for generating their own renewable energy.

What is CLOWD saying to individuals who support renewable energy development and are committed to playing their part in the fight against global warming?

The Campaign to Limit Onshore Wind Factories wants to see a responsible policy implemented by local authorities that combines the provision of a reliable, controllable and predictable low carbon energy supply with adequate protection of our fragile environment, countryside and communities.