THE request by your readers for Holyrood to issue hard facts on wind farms
in Scotland (Letters, August 18) will never be met as there is a wall of
silence on this topic. However, until the Growth Commission report is
issued, here are a few facts that may assist your readers to understand the
economics of renewable energy.
The first is that electricity is three times more expensive than gas, hence
replacing domestic gas will see a vast increase in energy bills for
Scottish consumers. In addition, electricity from offshore wind farms is
paid a subsidy of £100 per MWhour plus the current grid price, or three
times that from Combined Cycle Gas Turbines (CCGT) units.
If the data in a paper written by Professor G Hughes (of Edinburgh
University) are correct then wear and tear on wind turbine blades means
that the units only have a 10-year life instead of the design figure of 25
years with a further increase in the cost.
The cost of the Neart na Goithe wind farm is given as £5 million per MW
installed. Scots use six times more energy from gas than that from
electricity, hence phasing out gas means a £420 billion price to install
sufficient wind farms. MSPs have never indicated how Scottish consumers can
meet such a bill.
The final fact is that there is 12,000 MW of generation to meet a maximum
demand of only 5,000 MW yet MSPs have never explained why additional plant
is required. I trust these facts assist Lyndsey Ward et al in understanding
the financial impact the policies of our MSPs will have on their future
energy bills
Ian Moir,
79 Queen Street, Castle Douglas.
ROY Turnbull (Letters, August 17) uses cherrry-picked data to justify his
contention that global warming is ongoing but, granted, opinions differ, as
always, choice of time-years being an import cause of disparities in
conclusions.
However, science does not at all fully understand the multiple influences
on our always-changing climate. Decarbonisation of the world’s energy
generation might just induce some stabilisation, but at a devastating
global cost, which the “big emitters” have no intention of meeting. To
close down our own, trivial proportionate contribution would be like
failing to drain the ocean with a teaspoon. Those moved by some perceived
moral imperative discount more immediate, pressing demands on our efforts
and financial resources, including the vital need to repair our indebted
economy.
The scientific method consists of constructing hypotheses, then seeking
verification. There is no proof of causality in the CO2-climate change
relationship.
Politicians and scientists in the West have latched on to industrial and
domestic decarbonisation without considering the bigger picture, so we must
logically review these commitments such as targets for CO2 output.
Charles Wardrop,
11 Viewlands Road West, Perth.
Dr RM Morris (Letters, August 17) attacks your cartoonist Steven Camley for
using the title of Al Gore’s film An Inconvenient Truth in what he
describes as a denigratory way. Some might think Al Gore’s apocalyptic
claims are worthy of a little gentle satire.
Dr Morris then takes aim, apparently with a straight face, at “unnecessary
support to those who deny climate change”. I think he may mean, in his
denigratory way, people like me who question whether there is quite such a
direct human and catastrophic link to global warming as he and Mr Gore seem
to think. I don’t know anyone who denies that climate changes.
In order to evaluate his claim that solar energy is practical in Scotland,
it would be helpful to know the quantity of subsidies, in cash or kind, his
solar panels have generated over the years. Taxpayers have a legitimate
interest in that figure.
Councillor Cameron Rose (Conservative, Southside Newington),
Edinburgh City Council, City Chambers, Edinburgh.
Try the new Yahoo Mail
0 Comments