The profile of Phil Dykes, the Development Director of Banks Renewables, (Yorkshire Post, September 11) offered further propaganda opportunities to the electricity consumer-funded wind industry lobby.
I was delighted to hear that Mr Dykes is keen to have open discussions on his company’s developments, and I would be very pleased to publicly debate with him the real impact of onshore wind developments on the stated aim of reducing carbon emissions. Perhaps we could also debate the real impact on house prices within five miles of his developments? Name the time and place, Mr Dykes!
He seems surprised that people oppose his schemes before they know the details. Perhaps it is because people object to subsidising such developments through their electricity bills, when the developments are going to require equivalent fossil fuel back-up capacity, save no carbon, and destroy the housing market for miles around. No hard sell and pro-wind propaganda can change those facts.
Has Mr Dykes studied the pattern of wind output in this country before stating that it is quite unusual for the UK to be becalmed? I do study the figures and can inform him that over the last four months, the electricity output from wind turbines metered by National Grid has been below five per cent load factor for 440 hours with an average load factor of less than 20 per cent. He puts great reliance on the future storage of electricity. What makes him think that effective methods of mass electricity storage will be available within the 25-year life cycle of the current crop of wind follies? Progress since Faraday’s work over the last 180 years doesn’t make me very hopeful.
The planning system is already heavily loaded in favour of onshore wind installations because the inspectors are bound by the ludicrous targets and planning strategies of the last government. This biased process still takes too long for Mr Dykes. This is not because the proposals are bad sites in a bad location, but because wind energy as a major electricity source to save carbon is a thoroughly bad concept.
I look forward to Mr Dykes’ response, particularly in the public forum he seems so keen on.
Ian W. Murdoch, Spring Hill, Welbury, Northallerton.