Feeds

Feed Letters RSS/ATOM

Windfarms or nuclear power?

Possibly related articles

Energy saving the answer - Sir - I was pleased to read of the commitment by East Riding of Yorkshire C [...]

Wind farms vital to future - Sir - I read last week's letter by 'Resident of Eastrington' regarding wind [...]

Blot on the landscape? - Sir - How can Keith Wilkinson (Readers' Page, October 4)describe wind turbi [...]

Are turbines a tourist turn-off? - The flurry of potential windfarm activity in the area continued this week w [...]

Also in Letters

Classroom memories from 1956 - This photograph takes us back to 1956 and was sent in by Joan Higgins, nee [...]

Glorious Britain for all to see - Sir - Last week I watched a Military Tattoo at Edinburgh. All the militar [...]

Calling all Goole AFC supporters - Sir - At the end of Saturday's F.A. Cup game I was approached by a local s [...]

Well done to the HHAG - Sir - Congratulations to Holland House Action Group (Goole Times, issue Au [...]

Sir - Are wind farms the answer to our energy problems or a sop to the green environmentalists?

Having spent some years in the Power Generation Industry, I am naturally interested to see where the future is going. I must, however, confess to being somewhat sceptical about the proposed claims of the would-be suppliers of these giant structures at Sixpenny Wood (near Laxton) and their impact on the countryside, the contribution to current supplies, and costs in terms of value for money invested.

Whilst clean, renewable energy is attractive and indeed desirable to most right-thinking people, one must not forget that both industry and household demands need to be met not just this year but also in the future. Indeed, politicians should not lose track of their responsibilities to future generations to get it right now.

On reflection, I personally do not believe that building wind farms will fulfil the needs of society in the future, bearing in mind that even if they were able to make a reasonable contribution to the energy, currently estimated at five per cent of total output, they have a limited (approximately 20 years) operational lifespan and there are real costs to the taxpayer.

By real costs one needs to consider that they will apparently work only in certain conditions, i.e. they will not work in high winds or light winds; there are high maintenance costs, as well as land purchase or rental costs. Maybe I am missing something, but to me I feel that we need to find another solution. It seems to me that we need to look again at nuclear power.

Those who say a definitive no to this should consider that a large proportion of the power used today is nuclear and a great amount comes from over the Channel at some considerable cost. Drax Power Station currently supplies a great contribution to our needs, but at what cost to the environment? The so-called carbon footprint must be considerable.

We should also consider that there is a limited supply of fossil fuels available to the world. Without question, the next generation will need to address the diminishing availability of oil and gas.

I suppose that the main problem people perceive with the use of nuclear energy is the disposal of nuclear waste. Having worked on the Chernobyl Feasibility Study in 1997 (the study was financed by the E.E.C. to find a solution to the restoration of the area to a safe environment) and on subsequent studies and implementation operations, I am now able to say that engineers and scientists have some if not all of the answers to the problems envisaged.

Other countries are building nuclear power stations successfully and this applies to the up and coming nations in particular. If we do not react positively to the challenge we will become a third-world country.

Finally, wind farms are not the solution to our problems. I wish that nuclear power was not, but I remain convinced that it is.

Brian Greenwood

The Meadows, Howden

Published on 27th September 2007 in Letters.

Add to: Digg | del.icio.us | Reddit

Comments

There are currently no comments

Comment

All comments are subject to moderation (during normal office hours) and may be amended.

Email addresses are required for administration purposes only.

By contributing your comments, you accept our terms and conditions.