'The Wind Farm Scam' by John Etherington. Published 2009; paperback, 198 pages. Reviewed by Michael Jose, UKIP, EFD Group, European Parliament

Overview

Author Dr John Etherington was Reader in Ecology at the University of Wales, Cardiff until retirement in 1990. He is a Thomas Huxley medallist (Royal College of Science), and former editor of the Journal of Ecology.

• Climate scares and EU targets drive the industry. Part of the agenda is to create a common EU power grid using wind power as a Trojan horse to force change. In conjunction with the EU 20/20 legislation, Tony Blair bound the UK to energy and greenhouse gas reduction targets which may mean the UK will be forced to join a European supergrid to prevent blackouts.

- The 'ABS Windpower Report' (2006) noted that 'Wind power has been promoted for politico/environmental reasons and wind developers have benefited from substantial subsidies, leading to exaggerated claims. A reality check is needed.' (p.152)

- Conclusion: the UK will be at the mercy of European power supply if we join such a grid. Leaving the EU will be made economically highly dangerous and damaging for us if this occurs.

• Wind power cannot supply predictable and reliable energy to the national grid as the wind stops and starts. The electricity is not stored and must be used as produced and supplied to the grid, thus making grid regulation more complex.

• As wind power varies, all wind power which is relied on must be backed up with equivalent and expensive conventional rapid response power stations kept on standby, these are gas and coal-fired stations normally. Blackouts in Spain and the USA have occurred where this has not been the case (p.68)

• Wind power is very expensive to build and run. This extra cost is hidden by the legalised RO (Renewables Obligation) subsidy, and tax breaks which are added to every electricity bill in Britain.

• The UK government exchequer actually benefits from the 'green' tax of renewables collected by the 'Non-Fossil Purchasing Agency', and has done since at least 2005. Some is used to promote renewable energy, the rest goes into the Consolidated Fund (p.150), estimated at about an extra £1 billion in 2010.

• So much money is available for subsidy that in Italy the mafia tried to enter the market for wind power (p.187)

• Wind power excess cost per household per year was over £80 in 2008 (p.81)

• Wind power does very little to reduce emission of CO2, the reason it was initially pushed. The amount it does save is grossly exaggerated by its proponents. Whether manmade CO2 is bad or not is a moot point in science.

• The visual impact on the landscape reduces tourism, damaging jobs and income in areas such as Wales, where tourism contributes about 7% of GDP.

• A Spanish study found that the huge EU subsidies given to create 'green' jobs such as wind power destroys 2.2 existing jobs by displacement per 'green' job created (p.147)

• The irrational and deceitful 'green' opposition propaganda to nuclear power in the UK is one of the reasons people are afraid to oppose wind power. France gets 80% of its electricity from nuclear power and has a superb safety record. Britain buys off-peak nuclear power electricity from France because it is such reliable baseload supply. Finland and France are both currently building large (1,600MW) pressurized water design nuclear reactors (p.190)

• Protected species of birds such as golden eagles and red kites are regularly killed by the rotor blades in Germany, the USA, and Sweden, violating laws protecting these species (p.103-9). Bats, also protected species, are killed by lung damage and shock when hit by flying in the blade vortices (air-wake of the rotor).

• The thumping noise and earth vibration of wind 'turbines' is unique and these effects are still being studied. Many people react badly to the low frequency hum (infrasound), which cannot easily measured physically by any of the decibel scales, the effect is psychological as much as physical. The sound and vibration effects penetrate easily into dwellings. The visual flicker effect of the rotor can be psychologically disturbing and is very intrusive inside dwellings. Reductions in Council Tax ratings have been won on the basis of reduced property value (p.119)

• As common sense would predict, property values near even small wind 'farms' decline, a reduction of about 50% has been recorded (p.143)

• The MOD have often successfully blocked planning applications for wind 'farms' as they interfere with military radar (and commercial radar), and jets on low-fly exercises may hit the rotor blades.

• The commonest danger of rotor blade failure, and other dangers such as friction fires igniting oil sumps, falling ice, lightning strike, and electrocution are downplayed. The life of a wind generator (so-called 'turbine') is about 25 years, but few if any have usefully run for their lifetime to assess the full hazards and maintenance costs.

Sections and chapter headings

Foreword by Christopher Booker

Author's preface

Introduction

1. Wind turbines
2. Wind generated energy
3. No wind, low wind - intermittent generation
4. Financing the impossible
5. Do wind turbines abate carbon emission?
6. Landscape degradation and wildlife
7. Noise, shadows and flicker8. Danger and nuisance
9. Property, tourism and employment
10. Misrepresentation and manipulation
11. Climate change and Kyoto - is it all necessary?

Glossary of acronyms and abbreviations

Index


Book review by Michael Jose, United Kingdom Independence Party, EFD Group, European Parliament.