We read it in The Standard first! ‘Wind energy lacks peak puff’ (The Standard, December 6).
So if the “hundreds of wind turbines scattered across the south-west” ran at only eight per cent of capacity when demand hit its peak, why does the state’s energy minister persist with this folly?
And this, when electricity demand overall has fallen in the last three years.
Some simple research on the topic of comparative energy output reveals what many have long suspected: that wind energy is capable of producing electricity – but not enough of it and not reliably enough to meet the demands of large, sophisticated, industrialised societies like ours. Beneficiaries do not include local communities – the promises of jobs are empty, as manufacture and construction is outsourced; the promise of “renewable” is laughable given that the component parts, including the towers, have a life-span of 20 years.
However, wind farm companies avoid answering awkward questions, including the main concern: cost-effectiveness.
But then, they don’t need to. Canberra is desperate that the states will meet its renewable energy targets and offers lavish subsidies to wind farm companies willing to take on the challenge. And who pays for this? Why, you and me – the taxpayer and the consumer who pays for ever-increasing, unsustainable costs for domestic electricity use.
Oh, and the rural communities pay extra: they can look forward to seeing massive, rusting white-elephants right here in their own backyard!
The answer to these concerns is on The Standard’s front page: use the gas-fired power stations (already proven to be cleaner and greener than coal) to supplement existing power sources and divert those subsidy dollars to research solar as the only truly viable, alternative energy source in Australia.
Sharyn Anderson, Mill Street, Mortlake
|Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding