Brits Belted by Insanely Expensive and Utterly Unreliable Wind Power


When I stack it this high, it really starts to smell.


Britain’s political betters have set it up for one enormous gamble.  Britain is wagering its entire economic future on its – out of control – wind power boondoggle.

Back in January, The Economist reported on the INSANE cost of delivering offshore wind power – where generators are guaranteed obscene returns – being able to charge “three times the current wholesale price of electricity and about 60% more than is promised to onshore turbines.”

The Economist reported that “offshore wind power is staggeringly expensive” and “among the most expensive ways of marginally reducing carbon emissions known to man”.  But that is merely to compare the insane costs of onshore wind power with the completely insane costs of offshore wind power (see our post here).

Now Britain’s House of Lords has weighed in with an inquiry into their runaway wind power policy – a policy which promises to not only put them in the poor house, but to leave them in the dark. Here’s the Daily Express with the latest on Britain’s wind power debacle.

UK’s wind farm ‘folly’: Electric bills to soar by £1000 thanks to reliance on wind power
Daily Express
John Ingham
15 October 2014

HOUSEHOLDERS are facing soaring energy bills and winter power cuts thanks to the “folly” of relying on wind power, experts said last night.

The green crusade of successive governments is set to double electricity bills for households and cost homes £26billion a year by 2030, it was claimed yesterday.

The cost of renewable energy and carbon taxes will put an extra £983 a year on household bills by then, compared to relying on a mix of nuclear and new gas-fired power stations, three experts told a Lords committee.

They also said the “foolhardy” green policy will do little to cut emissions of the greenhouse gases blamed for global warming.

The Scientific Alliance report highlights warnings by the regulator Ofgem that the margin for electricity production for the 2015-16 winter will be at an all-time low of 2 per cent compared to the pre-privatisation requirement of at least 20 per cent.

It means that in times of high demand, such as during very cold weather, Britain would be at risk of power cuts.

The alliance argues that wind power – which is the main renewable energy source depended on by Government – is unreliable.

One of the experts, Sir Donald Miller, former chairman of Scottish Power, said: “The blind reliance by successive governments on unreliable, intermittent renewable energy has reduced the margin of safety to a critical level.

“This has brought the country to a position where power cuts could become a regular feature of cold winters for several years.”

The written report has been submitted to the Lords Science and Technology Committee’s inquiry into the nation’s electricity infrastructure.

At the inquiry’s launch its chairman, the Earl of Selborne, said: “We are set to see our safety cushion between demand and supply drop to particularly low levels over the next two winters.”

And yesterday’s report stated: “The foolhardy policy of replacing reliable and efficient gas, nuclear and coal power stations by expensive and inefficient wind turbines and solar farms has raised energy prices while doing little to cut emissions of carbon dioxide.

“The total costs are some £12billion per year more in 2020 than an optimum programme of gas turbines and nuclear, and almost £26billion per year more by 2030.”

The alliance calls for new nuclear power plants to help plug shortfalls caused by the closure of ageing coal-fuelled power stations and rising demand.

The report was released as former Environment Secretary Owen Paterson prepares to deliver a lecture tonight urging the Government to stand up to green bullies and go nuclear.

Last night Dr Benny Peiser of the Global Warming Policy Forum said: “The irony is that energy prices around the world are falling, particularly for oil and gas. But households are not profiting because Government policies are making energy more expensive.”

The wind energy body RenewableUK said the study was “out of line” with other research.

The Department of Energy and Climate Change said onshore wind is cheaper than coal, gas or nuclear energy when the costs of factors like air quality, toxicity and climate change are taken into account.

“Our policies are designed to keep the lights on, cut energy use and reduce polluting emissions, at the lowest possible cost to gas and electricity customers.”
Daily Express

Predictably deluded ramblings coming from RenewableUK and the Department of Energy and Climate Change. We’d love to see the evidence to support the story about wind power reducing CO2 emissions.

DECC’s wild claims about wind power reducing “polluting emissions, at the lowest possible cost” is, well, nothing more than hot air.

Nowhere in the world has the wind industry produced a shred of evidence to support its – long on emotion and short on facts – claims about cutting emissions in the electricity sector. Probably because all of the evidence that’s been properly gathered points in the opposite direction – ie, that trying to incorporate wildly intermittent wind power into a gas and coal-fired grid results in an increase in CO2 emissions (see our post here).

If DECC was serious about reducing CO2 emissions in the electricity sector, it would be pushing for massive investment in nuclear power plants: nuclear power plants, which run at about 90% of capacity, avoid almost four times as much CO2 per unit of capacity as do wind turbines, which run at about 25% (although they can’t tell you just which 25% of the time that might be) and at a fraction of the cost (see our post here).

As DECC says it’s all about reducing “pollution” (although we’re pretty sure they’re talking about CO2 gas – an odourless, colourless, beneficial trace gas essential for life on earth – plants are lapping it up, right now) – but their perverted ideology means they can’t see the gas for the trees.

STT has long held the view that if governments were seriously committed to reducing CO2 emissions to avert “climate change” (formerly known as “global warming”), they would have started building nuclear power plants at a cracking pace 20 years ago, when the alarmists started wailing “climate catastrophe” at every available opportunity.

But, no. Instead they’ve redirected $billions of subsidies to wind power outfits – filched from unwitting taxpayers and power consumers – to support a “technology” that will never be any kind of sensible alternative to anything (unless freezing or boiling in the dark are your kind of thing) – let alone a substitute for coal, gas, hydro or nuclear power (see our post here).

Luckily for Brits, the House of Lord’s inquiry is being presented with some of these (unavoidable) facts about the cost and pointlessness of wind power.

As the second leg of a ripping “Daily Double”, here’s the Editor.

Costly, ineffective and ugly: It is time to confront wind power
Daily Express
15 October 2014

ENERGY sources should be cheap and reliable but wind power is neither.

A Lords committee was told by energy experts yesterday that our “foolhardy” reliance on wind energy will double electricity bills for households by 2030 so it cannot be considered cheap.

And because they do not work when there is too much or too little wind they cannot be considered reliable.

The experts say this unreliability has left us at risk of power cuts.

In fact wind power does not even have a significant impact on reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Due to their extreme unreliability, conventional power stations have to be kept on standby, burning coal or oil all the while to make up for when wind turbines are out of action.

Hitting us in the pocket may be bad enough but wind farms have also ruined huge swathes of our most picturesque countryside as well as being deafeningly loud and presenting a significant danger to various forms of wildlife.

These facts mean nothing to the green lobby who will continue to forcefully oppose shale gas exploration and the building of nuclear power plants even though these sources could provide us with reliable energy at a fraction of the cost of wind power.

The Government needs to stand up to environmentalists, stop listening to their misleading claims and start putting our energy security first.
Daily Express

Hear, hear!!

house of lords

About stopthesethings

We are a group of citizens concerned about the rapid spread of industrial wind power generation installations across Australia.


  1. Reblogged this on Wolsten and commented:
    Eventually even “the man in the street” will start to notice this in his pocket and then perhaps he’ll stop worrying about immigration.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: