Time to Ditch Meaningless Medieval Wind Power & Embrace Modern Nuclear Power

Wind power was abandoned centuries ago, for pretty obvious reasons, known to kite flyers and sailors, since the beginning of time. Sure, in medieval times, when there was no alternative, harnessing nature’s energy make sense. But not now.

It was coal that dragged Europe out of the Dark Ages, by providing around-the-clock power, not windmills.

It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to explain the relationship between total collapses in wind and solar output and sunset and calm weather.

True enough the political intelligentsia have done all they can to have the masses believe otherwise but, anticipating that the mob will surely revolt if left freezing in the dark for any length of time, the focus is now on power that can be delivered on-demand, come what may.

And if coal-fired power is off the menu, there really is only one game in town: nuclear.

Ex-Cabinet minister Lord Frost says there is no evidence world is facing ‘a climate emergency’ and Britain should end focus on ‘medieval’ wind power and go all in for nuclear and fracking
Daily Mail
Greg Heiffer
9 August 2022

Ex-Cabinet minister Lord Frost has insisted there is no climate ’emergency’ and urged the next prime minister to move away from ‘medieval technology’ such as wind power.

The former Brexit negotiator, who is backing Liz Truss for the Tory leadership, hit out at a ‘totally unrealistic approach to climate and energy policy’ over the past two decades.

He demanded Britain change tack from ‘managing demand’ for energy and instead put greater emphasis on fracking and nuclear power, as well as carbon capture and storage (CCS).

Calling for a ‘pragmatic’ response to climate change – which the Conservative peer said was just ‘one of the many’ problems facing the UK – Lord Frost blasted an approach that asked the public to ‘up-end the whole way our societies work’.

Lord Frost’s support for Ms Truss during the Tory leadership contest has prompted speculation he could return to the Cabinet – or become the new PM’s chief of staff – should the Foreign Secretary win the contest to replace Boris Johnson.

He was Mr Johnson’s chief Brexit negotiator before being given a Cabinet role in March last year. But Lord Frost quit the Government last December with a swipe at the ‘direction of travel’ of Mr Johnson’s administration on Covid restrictions, net-zero ambitions and tax rises.

During the Tory leadership contest, both Ms Truss and her challenger Rishi Sunak have said they would support fracking in Britain if local communities supported it.

This has left open the possibility of a change of direction in UK energy policy under a new PM, with Mr Johnson having used his premiership to call for Britain to become the ‘Saudi Arabia of wind power’.

Mr Johnson also banned fracking in England within months of taking office, although he has paved the way for a reconsideration of the moratorium on shale gas extraction amid the current energy crisis.

The outgoing PM also pledged to build a nuclear power plant a year following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which has forced Western countries to end their reliance on oil and gas from Moscow.

In a new essay for the Policy Exchange thinktank, Lord Frost outlined how a new PM could alter the Government’s approach as he hit out at the ‘insidious effects of 20 years of a totally unrealistic approach to climate and energy policy’.

‘The current evidence does not support the assertion that we are in a climate “emergency”,’ the Tory peer wrote, as he delivered a fresh swipe at Mr Johnson’s climate policies.

‘Rather, the effects of climate change are a problem, one of the many we face, and should be tackled in that pragmatic way rather than by asking us to up-end the whole way our societies work.

‘Western society, and indeed world civilisation, depends on copious supplies of energy.

‘Yet the prevailing mood is one in which individuals are asked to restrict their use of energy and in which unsatisfactory renewables technology is touted as the best solution to our problems.

‘Instead of focusing on technological solutions that enable us to master our environment and get more energy in a more carbon-efficient way — nuclear, CCS, fracking, one day fusion – we have focused on managing demand so we can use medieval technology like wind power.’

Lord Frost despaired at how Britons are told by climate activists to ‘stop travelling, live local, eat less, stop eating meat, turn our lights out, and generally to stop being a burden’.

‘As most of us are generally reluctant to do this as individuals, the state has had to step in, with smart meters, heat pumps, LTZs (limited traffic zones), unsatisfactory electric cars, tailored taxation measures, and “nudges”,’ he added.

‘We have all gradually got used to this, and indeed internalised it, so that it seems normal to be lectured about the moral aspects of virtually every choice in our everyday lives.’

The peer said this had led to a ‘further loss of trust in free market economics’ but argued there was ‘overwhelming evidence that socialist systems have worse environmental outcomes’.
Daily Mail

The way we were: power poor and miserable.

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 Crawfordgold's Blog.

  2. New technologies see geothermal energy 50 times faster. To a depth of 5000 meters. For example. Depth 4200 meters. Rock temperature = 360 degrees Celsius. Storms 2 wells. Connect. Fill (antifreeze). Above already = 360. Above is a power plant. Power 100 Megawatts = 150 million Euros.

  3. There is hope for environmental sanity in the UK after reading this well written narrative. One might ask why France is so quite….. not an issue with over 35 Nuclear power plants operating.

  4. At last the TRUTH based on COMMON SENSE !!!!! How much of our hard earned cash do you want this useless government to throw away into the wind ??? Renewables be damned – bring on NUCLEAR.

    • Terry Conn says:

      Absolutely correct Sylvia. We need to upend the restrictions on ‘nuclear’ tomorrow and get on with it – there is no reason to make it a slow procedure, just ‘bring on nuclear’ and do it now.

  5. Rafe Champion says:

    Of course nuclear power is the way to go and the first step in Australia is to make it legal. Still, it will take many years to be operational and in the meantime coal power is indispensable and indeed desirable for several reasons.
    It is clear that the flight from coal has gone as far as it can in Australis and any further erosion of coal power capacity will be catastrophic. This can be demonstrated using publicly available evidence on wind droughts and the lack of grid-scale storage.


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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: