PRESS

NAVIGATION:

• 'STOP PRESS' (A selection of recent stories)
• Index of selected stories:LOCAL
• Index of selected stories:GENERAL

STOP PRESS

‘MEETING 2020 RENEWABLE ENERGY TARGETS WOULD COST HOUSEHOLDS £4,000 A YEAR’

The Telegraph, Wednesday 25 June 2008.

‘The Government's reliance on wind power has been condemned as misguided, unreliable and expensive by a think-tank which claims meeting the 2020 renewables target would cost each household an extra £4,000.’

‘A Centre for Policy Studies report also claimed over-reliance on wind power and rising gas prices would drive six million households into fuel poverty.’

‘Wind turbines: ‘If the wind does not blow, blows too hard or does not blow electricity supply could be disrupted’’

‘It said Government wind energy proposals are overambitious and impractical claiming that the UK does not have the capacity to build the 3,000 new offshore wind farms required.’

‘The report published today is embarrassing for the Government coming 24 hours before ministers launch their “green revolution” that recommends building thousands of turbines.’

‘The widely trailed energy blueprint is expected to include a commitment for a 30-fold increase in off-shore wind power generation, new loans and grants for businesses to increase green energy supply and a compulsory measure on households to boost energy efficiency.’

The think-tank's document ‘Wind Chill: wind energy will not fill the UK's energy gap’ warned dependence on wind power would lead to electricity supply disruption “if the wind does not blow, blows too hard or does not blow where wind farms are located”.

‘Tony Lodge, an energy analyst and the report’s author, said: “Of all the resources available, it is the least reliable. Turbines are also a blight on the landscape. There will be trench warfare in the Town Halls over planning applications.”’

‘Mr Lodge said wind energy was two and a half times more expensive than other forms of non-oil and gas electricity generation in the UK.’

‘He added that the cost of meeting the Government's target of meeting 15 per cent of all its energy consumption through green means by 2020 would cost £4,000 per household.’

‘The calculation was made on the basis that the Government has estimated that the cost of achieving the objective would be £100 billion. Mr Lodge said increasing wind power would also prove to be a difficult political objective given the state of public opinion.’

‘He said there was little evidence to suggest that people were prepared to pay for wind power quoting research that said only 15 per cent of the public would be “fairly” or “very willing” to pay higher electricity bills to finance the move to renewables.’

‘Britain faces an energy gap of up to 32 GW as older coal and nuclear power stations are paid off. According to the report, Government proposals imply an increase in wind production of over 20 times by 2020 to meet that need.’

‘The Centre for Policy Studies claimed that the goal was “overambitious”. It also said that the National Grid would be unable to cope with the “enormous new strains” that would be imposed on it.’

‘At the moment, Britain gets less than five per cent of its electricity from renewables, most of that comes from wind power.’

‘The document recommended that in the future wind energy should “only play a negligible role in plugging Britain's looming energy gap”.’

‘Instead, it recommended the development of nuclear power, clean coal (including coal gasification) and other renewable methods, particularly tidal energy.’

‘A Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform spokesman said: “Wind is an important low carbon energy source and a vital part of the UK's diverse energy mix.”’

“We remain fully committed to hitting our renewable energy targets and this Thursday will publish our renewable energy strategy, which contains plans to further boost the current level of renewables.”

-----------------------------

See: The Telegraph. 25 June 2008.

---

‘LOSS OF WIND CAUSES TEXAS POWER GRID EMERGANCY

“If a system can go unstable in the winter because 1,500 MW of expected wind turns into 400 MW wind and then fossil has to scramble to come online -- and several of our plants had to scramble to fill the gap -- that's a big issue and there's going to be a big debate,” ... Wind power levels often tend to drop off as the morning load increases and then pick up as the evening load declines.
(See: Houston Business Journal. 29 February, 2008).

---

‘... Some observers have noted that the incident highlights the inherent challenges associated with the state's increasing reliance on wind power. Besides requiring the construction of expensive transmission lines,* the fickle nature of wind also means that the state cannot depend on the turbines to replace other sorts of generators. [Our emphasis].

‘Texas leads the nation in wind power production and is expected to dramatically increase that production.’

----------------------------

(See: Texas Star-Telegram, 1 March, 2008).

* Ofgem, the UK regulator, recently warned that customers will be paying an even heavier price for wind power generation in order to develop the infrastructure to connect to isolated wind farms. See: ‘Energy users face wind farm bill.’ The Telegraph, Money., 07/03/2008.

---

‘WE ARE JUST DUMPING GROUND FOR ANYTHING

‘People in a cluster of former mining villages fear they are about to be invaded by huge wind turbines after plans for a mini-windfarm on the Northumberland coast were approved by the Government.

‘Harworth Power – an offshoot of UK Coal, which owned nearby Ellington Colliery – will be allowed to put up three 110m turbines on the former coal stocking area next to the seaside village of Lynemouth.

‘Government planning inspector John Braithwaite has allowed the company’s appeal against Castle Morpeth Council’s decision last April to refuse planning permission for the structures.

‘Mr Braithwaite, who conducted a public inquiry in Lynemouth last month, has concluded that the turbines will not harm the look of the coastal area or hamper regeneration efforts.

‘Now disappointed villagers in Lynemouth, Ellington, Linton and Cresswell fear the decision makes it more likely that a bigger windfarm – of 13 turbines surrounding the nearby Alcan aluminium smelter – will also be approved by the Government.

‘The Scottish Power project for 121m turbines was also rejected by Castle Morpeth councillors last year, but the company has appealed and a public inquiry will be held in April.

‘Many local people have opposed the windfarms, saying they will bring no jobs and stifle efforts to regenerate an area still suffering from the demise of deep mining.

[...]’

(See full story: The Journal, 23 February 2008).

---

‘GERMAN UTILITIES WARN OF POWER BOTTLENECKS DUE TO WIND INTEGRATION

FRANKFURT (Thomson Financial) - German utilities are warning the government of bottlenecks in power transmission grids due to the difficulties of integrating higher shares of wind energy, Handelsblatt reported.

The paper cited reports on the state of transmission networks German utilities are required to submit to the German grid regulator by tomorrow.

The number of incidents has risen significantly over the past two years, the report said. Vattenfall Europe AG's transmission unit recorded 155 days where the situation was critical on grids last year, and 28 out of 29 days so far this year.

In their reports, utilities blame changed regional patterns of power generation. The German government over the past years has promoted the integration of wind energy into transmission grids, which is generated in northern and eastern Germany, while power consumption remains centred in the industrial and densely populated areas in the west and the south.

In addition, power volumes generated by wind parks are difficult to predict and force utilities to hold back conventional power generation capacities.

[...]’

(See full story: iam.cnbc.com, 31 January 2008).

---

TURBINES ‘WILL RAISE RISK OF AIR DISASTER’

‘THE risk of air collisions would increase if plans to build 59 wind turbines close to three radars in Northumberland are approved, the opening of a public inquiry heard yesterday.

‘The Ministry of Defence and Newcastle International Airport (NIA) say structures at three separate wind farms proposed in Tynedale would all be in direct line of sight of their air traffic control radars.

‘They claim the presence of turbines would impact on the operation of those radars – adding to the risk of collisions for pilots and passengers. The three-month inquiry, at Newcastle Airport’s Britannia Hotel, was told that there is a “history of incidents” in the busy air space close to where the wind farms are proposed.

[...].’

------------------------

(See full story: The Journal, 16 January 2008.
See also: Windbyte website for mapping of turbine sites in NE England and SE Scotland).

---

‘HOME WIND TURBINES DEALT A BLOW

‘The energy from some micro power equipment would not operate a lightbulb, says official study

‘Home wind turbines are significantly underperforming and in the worst cases generating less than the electricity needed to power a single lightbulb, according to the biggest study of its kind carried out in Britain.

‘An interim report revealed that homeowners could be being misled by the official figures for wind speeds because they are consistently overestimating how much wind there is - sometimes finding that real speeds are only one third of those forecast. [our emphasis] In the worst case scenario, the figures indicate that it would take more than 15 years to generate enough 'clean' energy to compensate for the manufacture of the turbine in the first place.

‘The study, supported by government and the British Wind Energy Association on behalf of the industry, is a setback for hopes of a big uptake in micro-wind turbines to help slash the carbon emissions from big power generation.

[...]’

(See full story: The Observer, 6 January 2008).

---

“THERE IS ALSO A REAL PUBLIC RESENTMENT AT LARGE, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS SUCH AS THESE BEING FORCED ON THE COUNTRYSIDE ... ”

‘One of Northumberland’s longest-serving councillors has given his evidence to the Middlemoor inquiry, after years of being ‘gagged’ by local government rules.

Political heavyweight John Taylor, who is county member for Longhoughton division and district representative for Hedgeley Ward of Alnwick District Council, was finally able to break his silence on Friday afternoon on the plans for 18 turbines near South Charlton.

He said: “Because of the councillors' Code of Conduct, I have been effectively banned from making any representation at the North East Assembly or the County Council on the Middlemoor proposals.

“This is the first time that I have been able to comment from a personal point of view on the matter.

“As I have said previously, I have lived and worked in Northumberland for most of my life and I feel very strongly that these proposals will have the most detrimental effect on the landscape.

“You will hear very eloquent statements from experts on planning policies, landscape, effect on the environment, and many others. I am speaking on behalf of the people who elect me to represent them and have told me recently what their feelings are.

“There will be no local jobs created by these proposals after the construction phase.

“The financial benefits will be reaped far away from this district, and the people who have lived here, are living here and need to live here in the future, will be left with the residue and the probable clean up process when it is proven that this method of renewable energy is in the wrong place.”

Coun Taylor, who is a former leader and currently deputy leader of Alnwick District Council, appeared on behalf of the eight parish councils in his county ward, an electorate of almost 4,000 people.

The majority feel very strongly that the proposed Middlemoor wind farm will affect their quality of life and also the immediate local economy which is now substantially based on supporting a tourism and visitor industry," he said.

It can be assumed that there are similar feelings and circumstances – as well as similar populations - across the wire boundary fence from the site related in Berwick Borough Council area.

“The feeling in the villages and hamlets of the Division against the application is very strong indeed.

“The proposed turbines will be 410' tall (125 metres) and will be visible for more than 30 miles in most directions.

“The necessity to build almost six miles of stone track to link the turbines for maintenance and construction purposes is bound to have an impact on the landscape, and the practical impossibilities of restoration when these monstrosities are on longer required beggars belief.

“The impact of underground power cables being laid during its construction period along a whole stretch of the A1 at its most dangerous points where accident rates and, indeed, deaths are very high indeed must be deplored.

And he added: “The blandishments being offered in terms of community benefit are regarded with a degree of cynicism among the public as the feeling is that these will not benefit the local populations in any form.

“It is almost patronising, in the extreme, to suggest otherwise.

“There is also real public resentment at large, industrial developments such as these being forced on the countryside by the Government and its agencies after the guise of so-called public consultation.

“This is not nimbyism rearing its head; it is ordinary people – farmers, villagers, householders and all who take such good care and preserve and maintain the countryside in which they live and share with all who use it.

“This is anti-democracy at its worst.”’

(See: Northumberland Gazette - Middlemoor Inquiry, Day 8).

---

HUGE EXPANSION IN OFFSHORE WIND

Onshore wind development likely to be rendered irrelevant.

The Sunday papers report Government briefings that they about to announce a massive expansion in the more viable form of wind power generation, with encouragement of the construction of huge arrays of giant offshore turbines.

As ever, the press are repeating wildly optimistic ministerial claims for the possible benefits of offshore wind. There are major problems with existing offshore wind installations which have failed to perform to forecasts. There is little sign that the huge numbers of turbines off the Baltic coast of Germany have had much effect in substituting for thermal power generation. There are also long-standing problems with the technology: leading offshore turbine builders Vestas have experienced major problems with the reliability of their offshore turbines and have now abandoned their flagship V90 turbine for offshore use, the role for which it was designed.

However, offshore wind power generation has to be welcomed as both more productive and having less damaging impacts than the present onshore Klondike windrush.

It will also, by its scale, tend to attract 'proper' power companies rather than the myriad, small speculative developers of the onshore business who have all too often demonstrated both a lack of experience in the power generation sector and any competence in handling large planning applications.

---------------------

See the full story:
The Sunday Times, 9 December, 2007.
The Independent on Sunday, 9 December, 2007.

---

'DOMESTIC TURBINES MAY INCREASE CO2'

'It has become the home improvement of choice for the environmentally aware, but erecting a wind turbine on the side of your house could create more carbon dioxide than it actually saves, a study into their performance will reveal today [30 November 2007].

'David Cameron led the trend for "micro-wind" this year when he installed a turbine on the side of his west London home. But he may have been wasting his time and money. The Building Research Establishment Trust, which advises the government and private sector, has found that in built-up towns and cities weak winds and turbulence mean turbines are likely to add to, not subtract from, a home's carbon footprint.

'The BRE took data from sites across Manchester, Lerwick and Portsmouth and analysed the likely performance of three models of turbine. In Manchester two-thirds of the 96 different options studied for siting turbines produced a carbon dioxide impact that could never be paid back. Building, installing and maintaining the units would, on balance, exacerbate global warming. The same was true in a third of cases in the coastal city of Portsmouth.

'"Small windmills may work in the outskirts of Wick, but the current generation do not work well enough in built-up areas," said Martin Wyatt, the chief executive of the BRE Trust. "People need more information to ensure they are not doing the wrong thing."

'After the energy used in manufacture from aluminium, steel, copper and fibreglass, the carbon footprint of the turbine is exacerbated by transportation to the site and the need for regular maintenance to moving parts which bear the strain of rapidly changing loads during heavy winds, the report found.

'The likely output of a micro-wind turbine on a pitched roof house in a large city such as Manchester would be less than 150kWh a year; 2% of the energy consumption of an average house.

'[...]'

(See full story: The Guardian, 30 November 2007).

---

‘GREEN POWER STATION LAUNCHED BY MINISTER

‘A WOOD-BURNING power station which fuels thousands of homes and helps reduce carbon emissions has been given the Government’s seal of approval.

‘Energy Minister Malcolm Wicks MP officially launched the Sembcorp Biomass power station at Teesside’s Wilton International manufacturing site near Redcar yesterday.

The £60m station uses 300,000 tonnes of sustainable wood a year to generate 30mw of electricity – enough to power 30,000 homes.

[...]

‘The intention to build the UK’s first 100% wood-to-energy power station was formally announced in March 2005. Work began later that year and following commissioning, full commercial production started in September this year.

‘The fuel for the station is made up of recycled wood, sawmill offcuts, small logs left on managed forest floors after tree-felling and a specially grown willow known as short rotation coppice.

[...]

‘Around 1,000 jobs were sustained during a two year construction period and the facility has created 15 permanent new jobs within Sembcorp Utilities UK, the Wilton-based utilities and services company.

‘The station also creates additional job opportunities within the farming, forestry, wood recycling and transport sectors.’

(See full story: Journal article By Peter McCusker, 13 November 2007.
See also: Sembcorp website.

----------------------------

Comment:

This story gives the lie to the wind industry's frequent claim that onshore wind is the only renewable technology that can be quickly implemented. This station was announced after the 'Moorsyde' scheme and is already up and running, producing reliable and predictable amounts of green energy.

Your Energy Ltd. had a wind power station consented at Parham, Suffolk, in October 2005. Construction has still not started. First the company could not get turbines from suppliers who are unwilling to supply small speculative developers rather than the big players, then the company was mired in a legal objection to its attempts to change the terms of the consent in order to allow them to build bigger bladed turbines.

Many of the wind power stations consented in the north and west of Scotland are unlikely to be constructed and connected in any less time than it would take to design and build a major conventional power station, due to the difficulty in connecting them to the grid and the backlog of connections.

---

'NPOWER CARBON CLAIMS INACCURATE, SAYS A.S.A.

'An Npower newsletter promoting wind power broke advertising rules because its carbon offset claim was inaccurate, a watchdog ruled today.

[...]

'It said the energy giant's calculations were based on National Grid figures that are ‘no longer representative'. ‘We therefore concluded that the carbon offset claim was inaccurate and likely to mislead,’ the watchdog said. The watchdog told Npower to make sure any future carbon savings claims were based on a ‘more representative and rigorous’ carbon emissions factor.

'Responding to the ASA, Npower said its calculation used a carbon emissions saving figure for wind power-generated electricity which was recommended by the British Wind Energy Association.

[...]'

(See full story: 'Which?', 10 October 2007
See also: ASA adjudication).

--------------------------------

Comment

The BWEA's coal-only formula for calculating carbon offsets has now been thoroughly discredited by everybody from DBERR, the Carbon Trust and Ofgem to the ASA. Hopefully this will be the beginning of the end for the exaggerated claims we see every day from the wind industry.

One of these days we might get a judgement on the level of backup needed for wind power stations. Developers all claim that their power production displaces thermally generated power on a MWh for MWh basis. This is not true, as wind power demands back up from thermal power stations when it becomes a significant player, this explains the very small substitution factor experienced in countries with very large installed capacity.

---

YOUR ENERGY'S 'MISLEADING CLAIMS'

'The Advertising Standards Authority has upheld a complaint against Your Energy, the developer behind the proposal for ten 360 ft turbines between Felkington and Allerdean.

'The adjudication finds that Your Energy made 'misleading' claims about the supposed CO2 savings for their West Hinkley proposal in Somerset.

[...]'

(See full story: The Berwick Advertiser, 13 September 2007)

---

---

TURBINES STOP INVESTMENT IN RURAL COMMUNITIES

'Alastair Gilmour talks to one couple who risk watching their dreams being shattered by giant white wind turbines.

'It may look like a dilapidated farm steading at the moment, but an unremarkable group of buildings represents an enterprising future for Reg and Tamsin Watson.

The huddled settlement the couple are planning to restore is, in countryside measurements, two fields away from a proposed wind turbine that will, with its eight 'sisters' [correction - 9] at Moorsyde, dominate their view of north Northumberland and the Borders. Metric measurements come in at 600 metres, but when the mast and blades also take up 110 metres of sky, the structure will appear very close indeed.

[...]

"We hoped to invest in the area, to work here, to attract visitors to the cottages and develop other tourism opportunities. If we can't, it means the whole lot will collapse.

"It blights us directly. There has been no noise measurement done here at Southmoor. We're unusually in the prevailing wind from the West - eight houses in total - and we're completely downwind of a clutch of six turbines where there's much more chance of overlapping noise levels, plus vibration.

"The Moorsyde site can't meet the 35-decibel noise limit that the Environmental Statement demands and if they can't meet it, surely they should go away and think again. It all gets terribly technical.

The proposals at Felkington (the nearby farm which has agreed to host the turbines) are horrendous; they're far too close and if they followed planning guidelines, they'd be much further away."

[...]

"We're very 'green', we've got solar panels and ground-source heating planned; we eat organic food; my mother is a member of Greenpeace and I'm proud to stand up and say I'm a complete Nimby."

Reg is in complete agreement. "The council can meet its renewable targets in other ways without blighting so many people and destroying so much. The developers haven't done their homework; the landscape hasn't got the capacity to support wind turbines - and it's just not the right landscape to put them in. It's detrimental to the people who live here and to the people who visit."

[...]

Reg concludes: "We've got barn owls and merlins here. Planning permission requires us to put a bat loft in, but they don't seem fussed about huge turbines 600 metres away."

(See Journal article by Jane Hall - 'Wind of change blows too fast', 14 July 2007).

---

'NORTHUMBERLAND'S BIGGEST OWN GOAL?'

More stories about real people and the real local economy.

Why should we sabotage local enterprises just so that a Bahamas-registered, speculative developer such as Your Energy Ltd can cream off a huge income from subsidies by trashing our landscape with turbines?

Their so-called 'community fund' promises only £30,000 per year limited to 'energy efficiency and education' projects, with funds for appropriate projects being siphomed off into the coffers of the County Council. This is risible. The damage to investment in local tourist businesses already amounts to more than the entire package promised by Your Energy Ltd over 25 years!

(See Journal article by Alistair Gilmour - 'Northumberland's biggest own goal?', 13 July 2007).

---

'WIND FARMS MAY AFFECT LOCAL BUSINESSES'

'One couple's plans on hold because of wind farms. How many more local businesses are affected? Businesses heavily reliant on tourism are dismayed at proposals to erect giant wind turbines in north Northumberland.'

(See Journal article By John Lowdon - 'Wind farms may affect local businesses', 12 July 2007).

---

'TURBINES AND TOURISM DON'T MIX'

'The Plough Inn at West Allerdean is a country pub "with views to die for", according to landlord Trevor McArdle.

But those same views will lose much of their charm if a cluster of seven, 125-metre wind turbines [correction: ten 110 metre turbines] are allowed to march across the magnificent landscape that unfolds between the pub and the Cheviot Hills."

[...]'

(See Journal article by Alistair Gilmour - 'If the wind farms come, the tourists won't', 11 July 2007).

---

'OTHER OPTIONS OPEN TO NORTHUMBERLAND'

'There is a better range of energy options for Northumberland than 71 giant wind turbines planned around Alnwick and Berwick. So says Dr John Constable, director of policy and research at the Renewable Energy Foundation (REF) and one of the country's leading authorities on renewable energy.'

(See Journal article By Jane Hall - 'A future blowing in two directions', 10 July 2007).

---

PRO LOBBY PAIR SNUB DEBATE

(See Journal article by Alistair Gilmour - 'Pro lobby pair snub debate', 9 July 2007).

---

'GERMANY WIND POWER INVESTING, TILTING AT WINDMILLS

[...]

'Consider that Germany has by far the largest base of installed wind power capacity in the world, with more than 20,622 megawatts of generating capacity. To put that figure into context, the runner-ups are Spain and the US with a little more than 11,000 megawatts of generating capacity each; Germany is far and away the undisputed leader.

'But although I've long been aware of these statistics, I wasn't quite prepared for the sight of northern Germany's Baltic Sea coast. In the first day and a half of the cruise, we departed the German port of Travemunde and sailed close to the coast en route to Stockholm, Sweden.

'What was most striking was the prevalence of thousands of windmills located both onshore and offshore. We passed these offshore wind farms for hours; some were truly massive in scale.

'Germany's wind industry is the product of more than a decade of government subsidy. Specifically, the German government uses a feed-in tariff system that requires utilities to buy wind power and pay generous subsidized rates for that electricity. The result: Building wind farms in Germany is highly profitable. Check out the chart below.

'As you can see in the chart, Germany's wind capacity has grown tenfold since 1997. Much of that capacity is located along the Baltic Coast in the North for the simple fact that it's windier in this region than in most other parts of Germany. Because offshore winds are steadier than onshore, many farms are located on the water.

'Given that Germany's total installed base of generation capacity is about 125,000 megawatts, wind power plants account for about 16 to 17 percent of total capacity.

'At first blush, these facts suggest that the nation's energy policy and wind power industry are a smashing success. But that brings us to the clever marketing trick used by many alternative energy firms; there's a major difference between the terms capacity and generation. Namely, just because a utility may own a plant with 1,000 megawatts of capacity doesn't mean that plant is operating at that capacity at all times.

'In fact, that's highly unlikely to be the case, particularly for wind power. That's because the speed of wind in an area at a particular point in time is unpredictable. Moreover, even relatively small variations in wind speed can mean large changes in power output from wind turbines.

'The rated capacity of a wind farm is far less important than how much those wind farms actually contribute to the grid in the form of generated electricity. If we look at Germany in that light, we get a far less impressive picture. Only 5 percent of Germany's electricity generation in 2006 came from wind. Bottom line: As impressive as offshore wind farms may be to behold, those strings of thousands of windmills located on the Baltic just aren't a particularly important source of power for Germany.

'But all the hype surrounding alternative energies obfuscates two other important trends that are facing most of the countries I visited last week. First, when I see all those windmills in Germany or listen to Sweden's plans to build more high-tech wind farms, I don't see countries that are becoming more energy independent or reducing their carbon footprints. Rather, I see a rapid rise in the consumption of natural gas and rising dependence on Russia.

'And second, Germany and Sweden both state their goal is to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions. Paradoxically, however, both countries have undertaken the single most destructive policy with regard to that goal - a stated, national policy to phase out nuclear power.

'With regard to the first point, natural gas emits roughly 50 percent less carbon dioxide than coal. Gas plants are also a well-known technology that's reliable and can be counted on for always-on power generation. Because alternative energies can't be counted on to meet demand, countries like Germany install what's known as shadow capacity--generally gas (or coal) plants that can meet power demand when wind power output isn't sufficient to do so.

'Overall gas demand in Europe is projected to increase by nearly 4 percent annually between now and 2030, a total increase of more than 72 percent between 2003 and 2030. What's interesting is that's more than five times the 0.7 percent annualized growth in US demand; the Energy Information Agency projects that US gas demand will increase by only a total of around 17 percent in the same time frame.

'By far the biggest contributor to growth in European Union (EU) gas demand is the electric-power-plant sector. Demand for gas to fire Europe's electric plants is set to jump to more than 180 percent by 2030 and will total 11.9 trillion cubic feet annually by that year.

'Much of this gas will likely come from Russia. At the current time, the EU imports more than 4 trillion cubic feet of gas annually from Russia by pipeline alone. That works out to more than 11 billion cubic feet per day or around half of EU gas imports.

'With Europe's domestic gas resources in decline, the region will become increasingly reliant on imports; there are several new pipelines in the works to deliver gas from Russia to the continent. It should come as little surprise that Germany is the largest customer for Russian gas and among the most import-dependent countries in the world.

'To make matters worse, if Germany does decide to go ahead with the shutdown of its nuclear plants, gas import reliance will soar even more, as will emissions of carbon dioxide. Nuclear power accounts for around 27 percent of Germany's electricity supply and 19.5 percent of grid capacity. There's no way all that capacity can be replaced by alternatives.

[...]'

(See full story: Elliott H. Gue, The Energy Letter, The Market Oracle. Jun 30, 2007).

---

'TURBINE SWITCH OFF [WIND POWER IN ACTION]

The stillness of the three wind turbines at Grimshader in Lewis has a perfectly good explanation, it has emerged this week: they are not switched on.

Some Lewis residents have been using the ‘Gazette’ letters page to point out that while the turbines turn some days, others they do not — and it seems that the strength of the wind has little to do with this.

“Is it me, or does anyone else wonder why the three windmills on the Grimshader road don’t appear to work?” asked Alastair Fraser. “Enough power to boil several electric kettles is being wasted. Perhaps we don’t have the right kind of wind up here.”

However, Iain MacIver of the Stornoway Trust has confirmed to the ‘Gazette’ that the turbines are often switched off — because the National Grid is ‘problematic’. Mr MacIver contends that the Western Isles portion of the grid is not strong enough to make the turbines useful.

“If the large projects are going to go ahead, the first thing that would happen is that the grid has to be strengthened,” said Mr MacIver, adding that the expense of this may end up being the responsibility of the wind farm developers.

However, Scottish and Southern Energy (SSE), which maintains the grid, has stressed that any so-called ‘problems’ with the Grimshader turbines are not new, and were not unforeseen.

SSE spokeswoman Jennifer McGregor confirmed that because wind is not a constant reliable resource, the turbines are quite often switched off. “Because of the nature of the network arrangements on the island, there are times when energy is being imported and times when the island relies on the Battery Point power station,” she said. “The difficulty would be if the wind dropped and the extra generation of the windfarm would be very suddenly lost.

“Because a drop in wind energy would mean a drop in power to homes, SSE cannot rely on them without using the power station as a backup.

"This problem will exist as long as the grid remains in its current state. There are currently plans to upgrade the entire grid, including the Wester Isles, in 2012. However, there is no firm date for the Isles upgrade; and", the spokeswoman confirmed, it is certainly “some years down the line”.

She also confirmed that all this was fully appreciated by the developer before the turbines went up.

Richard Crosby-Dawson of the Oxfordshire-based firm FIM Services Ltd, the agent which manages the privately-owned development, disagrees.

“The grid is the problem. We are clearly dissatisfied with the situation,” said Mr Crosby-Dawson. “There is a strong pressure being brought to bear to get the damn things to work immediately.”

(See full story: by Eileen Bell, Stornoway Gazette, June 21 2007).

---

'TOO MANY TURBINES SPOIL THE LANDSCAPE

'Plans for a series of wind farms which would result in 26 giant turbines being erected in north Northumberland should be scaled down, according to a long-awaited report by independent consultants.

'Protest groups have been set up to oppose the controversial bids for three separate wind farms south and west of Berwick at Moorsyde, Barmoor and Toft Hill - amid claims they will ruin the landscape and harm the important local tourism industry.

''As well as the three live applications, wind farm developers are also interested in a number of other sites in the borough, such as Halidon Hill and Murton near Berwick and Bewick Moor near Chillingham.

'Now an independent study has concluded that the area can only accommodate about 10 to 15 turbines in total - around half the number currently proposed by green energy companies.

'Consultants Arup - who have been commissioned by the North-East Assembly to assess the impact of wind farm development on several landscapes in the region - say the Berwick area should only be asked to take up to 30 to 40 megawatts of generating capacity.

'Last night, anti-wind farm campaigners welcomed the results of the study and said it confirmed their claims that the landscape south and west of Berwick was too important and sensitive to accommodate the numbers of wind turbines being proposed.

'Andrew Joicey, who farms at Cornhill-on-Tweed and is a member of the Save Our Unspoiled Landscape group, said: "The study is very thorough and it concludes that this area does not have the capacity for development of the scale being put forward by many developers.

'"Action groups will still look to fight individual applications which they feel are inappropriate, and there are planning reasons why each of the current proposals should be refused.

'"This report might just make wind farm developers think that their plans are not so viable economically."

'A spokesman for the Moorsyde Action Group said they welcomed the study's findings that poorly designed turbine arrays that were not properly scaled and located would have major adverse impacts on the landscape and living conditions of local people.

'Berwick MP Alan Beith said: "The findings of the study underline how impossible it is to deal with these applications separately. As I have argued all along, there should be a single public inquiry at which they are all considered together."

'Berwick borough councillors are due to finally consider the Moorsyde, Barmoor and Toft Hill wind farm applications in September. They are also facing an application for 10 turbines at Wandylaw near the border with Alnwick district, but this area has been examined in a separate wind energy study by Arup.

'Last night, borough council director of regeneration and development, Shona Alexander, said: "We welcome this study, which gives us an objective view of the impact which wind farm developments could have here in Berwick borough, where we have some of the most beautiful landscapes in the country.

'"We will now include the study in our assessments of all wind farm planning applications currently being considered."

'Malcolm Bowes, deputy chief executive for the North-East Assembly, said: "This cutting edge study provides an objective assessment of the impact that wind farm development would have on the south and west of Berwick landscape and has concluded that high levels of development would not be appropriate."'

(See full story: by Dave Black, The Journal, Jun 20 2007)

---

'COUNCIL UNDER FIRE OVER TURBINES FILES

'Papers 100 miles away with consultant

'A North council has broken planning regulations by handing over public files to a consultant based 100 miles away.

'Berwick Borough Council’s handling of the planning row over a series of wind farm developments means local people cannot “easily access” papers dealing with the controversial developments.

'They include plans for 10 turbines at Moorsyde, near Allerdean, nine at Barmoor, near Lowick, 10 at Wandylaw, on the boundary with Alnwick District, and seven at Toft Hill, near Grindon.

'The authority – the second smallest in England – has no planning officers of its own capable of dealing with the applications. Instead, it has hired a planning consultant from Darlington to handle the huge workload – and he has the papers in his possession.

'A Planning Inspectorate spokeswoman confirmed that Under the Town and Country Planning Act of 1990, they should be openly available for public scrutiny in Berwick.

'A spokesman for Moorsyde Action Group said: “The days when Berwick had a planning department with officers who knew the area and felt a responsibility to local communities seem to be over. The planning department now appears to be run by consultants from outside the county, who are not accessible.

'“Local people are being denied access to public files.”

'He added: “We had the same problem in November 2006, when the Planning Unit repeatedly told us, without any explanation, that the Moorsyde case file was ‘unobtainable’. We only discovered later that the council’s consultant had removed it so he could work at home.” Senior planning consultant Rod Hepplewhite, of Darlingtonbased Blackett, Hart and Pratt, yesterday confirmed that the papers were currently in his possession.

'He said: “The important thing is that the application documents themselves are still at Berwick, but I do have the response bundles here in Darlington.

'“If anyone wants to see the papers, I can deliver them up to Berwick myself, or have them sent by overnight courier.”

'Borough director of regeneration and development Shona Alexander said: “There is no problem. If anyone wants to see the files, we will make them available.”

'But a spokeswoman for the Planning Inspectorate said: “The regulations state that these documents should be readily available for public inspection at the principal planning office.”'

(See full story: By Robert Brooks, The Journal 17 May 2007)

---

'COUPLE SPURN £6M

'A couple who turned down a potential £6m to have a wind farm built on their land because of the effect it would have on the community and the landscape could still end up surrounded by turbines built on neighbouring farms.

'Frank and Clare Dakin say they moved to Northumberland for the "unspoilt and special" landscape, and have refused a number of lucrative offers from energy companies looking to erect turbines on their farm in Duddo, Northumberland.

'They say they also want to protect the integrity of two sites of extreme historic importance on their land - the ancient Duddo Five Stones and the Duddo Tower.

[...]

'And despite turning down the cash Mr and Mrs Dakin could end up hemmed in, with 26 turbines within a few square miles of their farm.

'Mr Dakin, 46, said agreeing to the turbines would be "selling the soul" of the farm.

'He said: "We don't blame those people who have gone for the wind farms - we were sorely tempted ourselves. But it is an issue of how it effects the wider community and the whole landscape. It is the effect that the turbines would have on people living here that concerns us.

'"The visual effect would be to spoil what is a special and splendid piece of land."

[...]'

(See full story in the Journal, 8 May 2007).

-----------------------------------

See also BBC Look North video.

---

THE NORTH EAST'S KLONDIKE WIND RUSH

FOUR-PART SPECIAL REPORT BY THE JOURNAL ON THE WIND RUSH IN THE NORTH EAST

Read - 'Wheels of Fortune', 26 April 2007.

Read - 'Wind-rush of ill will and bills', 27 April 2007.

Read - 'The noise that drives us mad', 28 April 2007.

Read - 'Millions thrown at the turbines', 30 April 2007.

Scroll down from the first story on 30 April to read:

'Opponents blast council in planning row'

'A tiny North council which is set to rule on three major wind farm applications has admitted having no planning officers of its own capable of dealing with them, The Journal can reveal.

'Berwick Borough Council has instead resorted to hiring planning consultants to cope with the mammoth task of handling the bids, which are all due to be decided at the same meeting on May 29.

'A tiny North council which is set to rule on three major wind farm applications has admitted having no planning officers of its own capable of dealing with them, The Journal can reveal.

'Berwick Borough Council has instead resorted to hiring planning consultants to cope with the mammoth task of handling the bids, which are all due to be decided at the same meeting on May 29.

[...]'

---

'ALBERTA TURNS TO NATURAL GAS AFTER WIND LESSENS RELIABILITY

'Alberta power utility Enmax Corp. said yesterday it is building a huge new power station in Southern Alberta fired with natural gas, partly to help boost the provincial grid's reliability after Alberta's aggressive expansion into wind energy made it vulnerable to power disruption.

'"We now have so much windpower generation that we need to fall back on reliable sources of power," said Peter Hunt, an Enmax spokesman.

'"The problem with wind power is that the wind doesn't blow all the time, so the greater percentage of the system depends on wind, the more vulnerable to disruption the system becomes when the wind stops blowing."

'The 1,200-megawatt station, which industry sources say would cost about $2-billion, would produce enough power to supply two-thirds of Calgary's needs.

'Alberta expanded into windpower generation aggressively since deregulating its electricity industry eight years ago. With more than 4% of its power coming from wind farms in the southern part of the province, it is the national leader in the green-energy source.

'But the growth turned out to be too much of a good thing and the provincial grid operator, Alberta Electric System Operator, slapped a ban last April on the construction of any more wind farms until the reliability issues are resolved.

[...]'

(See full story: National Post (Canada), 21 April 2007)

---

'WIND TURBINES 'NOT RELIABLE'

'Supplies of electricity from wind turbines are highly erratic and cast doubts on their reliability as a source of power, official figures reveal.

'Just weeks before the Government publishes its energy review White Paper, a research paper by National Grid shows that on some days, even in winter, wind turbines are virtually motionless.

[...]

'But, according to the National Grid, in the period between October 2006 and February 2007 there were 17 days when output from the existing 1,632 windmills was less than ten per cent of capacity.

'During that period there were five days when output was less than five per cent and one day when it was only 2%. In the whole five months, the wind turbines were operating at only 35% efficiency.

Jeremy Nicholson, director of the Energy Intensive Users Group, whose members include big energy users such as Corus, said: 'These figures show how necessary it is that the UK has a balanced energy policy. We simply cannot over rely on any one energy source.

[...]'

(See full story: Financial Mail, 15 April 2007)

---

'SCOTLAND'S BEAUTY WILL BE SACRIFICED TO 'RENEWABLE' FANTASY

'Although there is little interest south of the border in the lacklustre campaign for next month's elections to the Scottish Parliament, something so odd is going on there that it has implications for us all.

'Fired by the fashionable obsession with global warming, the Scottish parties are all vying to see who can make the most extreme promises about how much Scotland should rely on renewable energy. The Labour-led Scottish Executive is already pledged to produce 40 per cent of Scotland's electricity from renewable sources by 2020, twice the target figure, set by the EU, to which Britain as a whole is signed up.

'At present, the Executive claims, nearly 12 per cent of Scotland's energy comes from "renewables", almost all from large hydro-electric schemes built in the 1950s. To raise that to 40 per cent can only mean a massive increase in wind turbines.

'Scotland now has around 640, providing barely 2 per cent of the country's power. Even if all the 6,000 turbines currently proposed get built, they would only generate around 3,300 megawatts of electricity, equivalent to the output of the power station at Didcot in Oxfordshire. This would leave a huge shortfall when, within a few years, Scotland loses three nuclear and coal-fired power stations, which currently produce well over twice that much energy.

'Even on paper, to reach that 40 per cent target would require at least 8,000 giant turbines, many as tall as 400 feet, covering 2,000 square miles, equivalent to 7 per cent of Scotland's total land area. Other parties go still further: the Lib Dems want Scotland to be totally dependent on renewable energy by 2050.

'What none of these politicians appear to have grasped is that - unless they are happy for Scotland to return to the age before electric light, computers and Tesco - they will also need to build enough conventional power stations to provide back-up for the three-quarters of the time (averaged out) when the wind is not blowing at the right speed to generate electricity. Since none of them seem prepared to countenance replacing the country's two existing "carbon-neutral" nuclear plants, that will mean new coal and gas-fired stations, running 24 hours a day to cover for those unpredictable moments when the wind decides not to blow. In other words, all that destruction of a unique landscape with thousands of heavily-subsidised turbines will not reduce Scotland's "carbon footprint" at all.

'The politicians are so carried away by this idiocy that they still insist that schemes such as that to erect 181 giant turbines on the island of Lewis, on which the Scottish Executive has the final say, have popular support. Yet Allan Wilson, Scotland's Deputy Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning, recently had to admit that, of 11,546 representations so far received by the Executive, only 59 were in support of the Lewis scheme, with 11,397 against.

'The fact is that the Scottish people - as opposed to their politicians - are waking up to the realisation that wind power is one of the greatest hoaxes of our age. But, lest we feel insulated from the tragedy about to befall the Scots, we must recall that this is only a more extreme version of a collective self-deception which now has almost all our politicians in its grip.'

(Christopher Booker's Notebook: , Sunday Telegraph, 8 April 2007)

---

Developers frequently point to Swaffham as an example of how people with experience of large wind turbines really love them. However, it now seems that Swaffham doesn't want any more of them:

'TOWN UPSET BY PLANS FOR 6 MORE TURBINES

'SWAFFHAM'S "love affair" with wind turbines could be stretched to breaking point by green energy firm Ecotricity's plan to build six more on the town's outskirts.

The town has been generally supportive of the two giant turbines standing either side of its A47 bypass and forming a landmark gateway to West Norfolk.

But when the latest plan to build six more of the same size on the Sporle side of the bypass, next to the one put up in 2003 at the request of Swaffham residents, was discussed at the last town council meeting councillors decided enough was enough.

They are opposing the plan because of its potential noise, flicker effect and visual impact on the surrounding landscape – and looking to formulate a policy on future wind turbine applications.

[...]'

(Full story in the Lynn News, 30 March 2007).

---

'GERMANY PLANS BOOM IN COAL POWER PLANTS

'Everyone in Germany is talking about climate protection -- everyone, that is, except for energy companies. They're planning to build dozens of new coal-fired power plants -- with the support of the governing coalition in Berlin.

'[...]

'[the Social Democrats] want the planned power plants to help bridge the electricity gap that will inevitably arise in coming years due to the phasing out of nuclear energy. Germany's previous governing coalition between the SPD and the Green Party decided in 2001 that Germany would abandon nuclear energy -- and Gabriel and his colleagues will not allow the decision to be reversed. If the SPD were to question the construction of new coal-fired power plants, it would inevitably have to rethink its schedule for closing down Germany's nuclear power plants.

'[...]

'Merkel and Gabriel seem confident that in the end, it will all fit together somehow: the new power plants, securing jobs and climate protection goals. The future will sort everything out, they hope.

'Gabriel plans to use sophisticated technology to curb the emission levels of the new coal-fired power plants. The assumption is that modern power plants will be able to channel their CO2 emissions into giant subterranean deposits within 10 years at the latest. Such "clean coal" technology, as it is called, would then be made mandatory for all coal-fired power plants. But Gabriel knows very well that Germany is still a long way from an across-the-board use of the new technology.

'Merkel also likes to talk about clean coal. But unlike Gabriel, there is a second exit strategy available to her: If she wins the national elections in 2009, she could join forces with Germany's Free Democratic Party (FDP) and make the construction of numerous new coal-fired power plants superfluous -- by abandoning the plan to phase out nuclear energy.'

(Full story in Spiegel Online, 22 March 2007).

---

'FARMER OPTS OUT OF WIND FARM

'A farmer has pulled out of plans to site wind turbines on his land as he does not want to profit at his neighbours' expense. Steve Ellsmoor was approached by energy firm Nuon Renewables about allowing part of a wind farm on the Staffordshire-Shropshire border to be built on his land.

'The 49-year-old, who lives at Dorrington Hall Farm, said he initially considered the proposal, but later pulled out when he began to have doubts about the project.

'His comments come ahead of a meeting this week to consider the first part of the plan.

'He said: "I showed interest as I didn't know what was involved. Then people started to worry about property prices and I decided it wasn't for me.

'"I don't want to make money out of someone else losing money on their property. I have still got to live here."

'He said he also had concerns about how Nuon Renewables was going about the scheme.

'He said he had been told by a Scottish wind farm developer who visited the site that it was best practice to make sure the turbines were at least 1,000 metres away from any houses.

'Nuon Renewables wants to erect nine wind turbines on land near Knighton and Bearstone and if the plan goes ahead some will be closer than 1,000 metres.

'Mr Ellsmoor said: "If you measure 1km from where the turbines will be, there are many houses in that circumference."

'And he said his own farm would be just 800 metres from the turbines.

'He said: "I think it's a scandal that these wind farms can come in so close to people's houses.

'"We could have problems with noise, which could make our property unsaleable.

'"I had a valuation done on the farm and if this proposal goes ahead, our property could be worth 15 to 20 per cent less than it is now.

'"If you equate that to all the properties in the area there will be millions of pounds knocked off property prices. I am very disturbed about the whole thing."

'He said the landowners who had decided to allow the turbines on their land were under a lot of pressure from villagers who were worried about the scheme.

'Mr Ellsmoor said: "They have been offered a lot of money if it goes ahead, and I'm not sure it will.

'"At first I thought if it was going to go ahead I might as well look at having them.

'"But I wouldn't like to think anyone else was losing money because of my actions."

[...]

(The Sentinel, 18 February 2007).

---

---

'WATCHDOG URGES OVERHAUL OF GREEN ENERGY SCHEME

'Developers of renewable energy schemes such as wind farms are profiteering from the Government’s drive to curb carbon emissions by making customers pay more for their electricity than is necessary, the energy regulator Ofgem warned yesterday.

'Publishing figures which reveal that the cost of the so-called “renewables obligation” is at least eight times greater than other schemes designed to combat climate change, Ofgem called for a wholesale shake-up of the current arrangements.

'The obligation works by requiring energy suppliers to buy a certain proportion of their electricity from renewable sources or buy certificates to cover the shortfall. The cost of this is then passed on to the end customer.

'Ofgem calculates that since the obligation was introduced in 2002 customers have been overcharged by £740m. The scheme adds £7 to the average annual bill at present, but by 2015 this will have risen to £20. At present, 5 per cent of the UK’s electricity comes from renewable sources, but this is due to rise to 20 per cent by 2020.

'The regulator said the way the scheme worked meant that customers paid more even if renewable generation projects did not get built or were delayed, for instance by planning problems.

'It also said that because the level of subsidy under the scheme was not linked to the wholesale price of electricity or the market price of carbon, developers were benefiting at customers’ expense, as electricity prices rose. “This is leading to much higher returns for current renewable generators than investors expected or required.”

'The regulator calculates that it costs between £184 and £481 to cut a tonne of carbon under the renewables obligation. This compares with a cost of between £12 and £70 under the European Union’s emissions trading scheme and £18 to £40 under the Climate Change Levy.

'The Department for Trade and Industry last night rejected Ofgem’s criticisms, saying: “The Renewables Obligation is here to stay.” However, it is proposing changes to the obligation so that subsidies are banded according to the type and cost of technology involved.

'Ofgem said this did not go far enough, and called for a new scheme under which the level of subsidy is linked to the wholesale electricity price and long-term contracts are auctioned to guarantee renewable developers a fixed return.

'Alistair Buchanan, chief executive of Ofgem, said: “We think that a review of the scheme could provide more carbon reductions and promote renewable generation at a lower cost to consumers who are already facing higher energy bills.”'

(Michael Harrison, Business Editor, 23 January 2007 Independent.co.uk)

---

'AN ILL WIND BLOWS FOR UK TURBINES

'The UK is not as windy as the British government thought. The country’s first generation of wind farms are delivering less power than predicted, according to an analysis of official data on their output. The finding dents government hopes that wind turbines could generate up to a fifth of the UK’s energy by 2020.

'While Scottish and offshore wind farms generate more than 30 per cent of their theoretical capacity, no English region does better than 26 per cent, 4 per cent below government predictions. However, the national average of 28.4 per cent, while disappointing, is still the highest in Europe, says the report, which was released on 8 December.

'The study is published by the Renewable Energy Foundation, which represents many local groups opposed to the [onshore] construction of wind turbines. It blames the extreme variability of wind, coupled with the fact that power generated is a function of the cube of wind speed, which magnifies the difference in output between windy and calm days.

'Most worrying for government strategists, though, may be the discovery that a network of wind farms across the country would do little to even out total wind-power production. Much of the time, the weather is either calm or windy across the whole of the UK. So on some days less than 10 per cent of capacity would be produced, and on others above 90 per cent - making it tougher than expected to compensate for the vagaries of the wind.'

(New Scientist magazine, 19 December 2006)

---

'DANES GO COLD ON WIND FARMS

'The nation that leads the world in wind-farm development is going cool on the environmentally friendly source of power.

Since the boom year of 2000, when as many as 748 turbines were erected, the number being built in Denmark has steadily fallen. So far this year, only six new wind turbines have been put up.

While many countries around the world are clamouring to buy Danish wind turbines, Denmark’s government is finding it difficult to convince its own population to accept an increase in the domestic use of the green technology.

Describing turbines as “poorly located, noisy and unsightly”, a number of local authorities, backed by grass-roots campaigners, are rejecting plans for new wind farms.

The situation has not been helped by a 2004 decision - the architect of which was Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the Danish prime minister - to remove state subsidies for wind power, leaving it to market forces.

[...]

(Full story in The Scotsman. 1 November 2006.)

PS Official figures show that 9 turbines were installed in Denmark during 2006.

'MOORSYDE'/TOFT HILL/BARMOOR/WANDYLAW/MIDDLEMOOR ...

• Northumberland Gazette, 23 November 2007. “There is also real public resentment at large, industrial developments such as these being forced on the countryside.”
  ‘One of Northumberland’s longest-serving councillors has given his evidence to the Middlemoor inquiry, after years of being ‘gagged’ by local government rules.’



• Berwickshire Today (Berwick News), 26 September 2007.
  'Wind farm activists paid by developers'
  "Windfarm activists from England were in Eyemouth last week, drumming up support for the proposed Coldingham Moor wind farm on behalf of the development company P M Renewables who admitted paying their expenses to travel to Berwickshire."



• Berwick Today (Berwick Advertiser), 13 September 2007.
  Your Energy's 'Misleading Claims'
  "The Advertising Standards Authority has upheld a complaint against Your Energy, the developer behind the proposal for ten 360 ft turbines between Felkington and Allerdean. The adjudication finds that Your Energy made 'misleading' claims about the supposed CO2 savings for their West Hinkley proposal in Somerset."



• The Journal, 9-14 July 2007.
  A week of special features:
  'Wind of change blows too fast', 14 July 2007.
  'Northumberland's biggest own goal?', 13 July 2007.
  'Wind farms may affect local businesses', 12 July 2007.
  'If the wind farms come, the tourists won't', 11 July 2007.
  'A future blowing in two directions', 10 July 2007.
  'Pro lobby pair snub debate', 9 July 2007.
  



• The Journal, by Dave Black, 20 June 2007.
  'Too many turbines spoil the landscape'.
  "Plans for a series of wind farms which would result in 26 giant turbines being erected in north Northumberland should be scaled down, according to a long-awaited report [Arup study - Berwick area] by independent consultants."



• The Journal, by Robert Brooks, 17 May 2007.
  'Council under fire over turbines files'.
  "A North council [Berwick] has broken planning regulations by handing over public files to a consultant based 100 miles away."



• Berwick Today (Berwick Advertiser), 17 May 2007.
  'Wind farm decisions deferred'.
  "THREE wind farm proposals which were due to be determined at the same meeting later this month have been deferred by planners.
  "Berwick Borough Council has confirmed that it will not discuss the Moorsyde, Barmoor and Wandylaw applications at its planning meeting on May 29."



• The Berwickshire News, 9 May 2007.
  'Action group will oppose Coldingham windfarm plan'.
  "Coldingham STAG – Stop the Turbines Action Group- has been formed in a bid to halt the building of 22 turbines on Coldingham Moor."



• The Journal, by Ben Guy, 8 May 2007.
  'Couple say no to £6m'.
  "A couple who turned down a potential £6m to have a wind farm built on their land because of the effect it would have on the community and the landscape could still end up surrounded by turbines built on neighbouring farms.
  "Frank and Clare Dakin say they moved to Northumberland for the 'unspoilt and special' landscape, and have refused a number of lucrative offers from energy companies looking to erect turbines on their farm in Duddo, Northumberland."



• Hexham Courant, 3 May 2007.
  'County objects to windfarm proposals'.
  "THE multiple applications for windfarms in the Knowesgate area should all go to one single public inquiry.
  That’s the view of Northumberland County Council planners, who on Tuesday lodged formal objections to two of the latest applications for sites in the heart of the Wanney hills."



• The Journal, 26-30 April 2007.
  Four part special feature on the North East wind rush:
  'Millions thrown at the turbines', 30 April 2007.
  'The noise that drives us mad', 28 April 2007.
  'Wind-rush of ill will and bills', 27 April 2007.
  'Wheels of Fortune', 26 April 2007.
  



• Berwickshire Today (Berwick News), 19 April 2007.
  'Opposition to windfarm near historic battlefield'
  "Windfarm developers are investigating a site less than a mile from a historic battlefield with a view to building seven huge turbines. Renewable Energy Systems Ltd (RES) are carrying out a scoping exercise just north of Halidon Hill, site of a famous 14th century battle where the Scots were routed by the English."



• The Journal, By Robert Brooks, 17 April 2007.
  'Action group campaigners say three into one just won't go'
  "Campaigners in north Northumberland have hit out at Berwick borough planners, who want to decide up to three controversial wind farm applications at the same meeting."



• The Journal, By Robert Brooks, 17 April 2007.
  'Protest at gale force'
  "Anti wind farm protesters reacted with anger last night as plans for another 35 turbines were unveiled for the Northumberland horizon."



• The Journal, By Robert Brooks, 11 April 2007.
  'Report backs plan for huge wind farm'
  "Protesters fighting plans for the region's biggest wind farm [Middlemoor] have been dealt a major blow, after a long-awaited independent study [Arup] backed a 28-turbine development on moors in Northumberland."



• Berwickshire Today (Berwick News), 5 April 2007.
  'Majority against Coldingham windfarm plan'
  "A RESOUNDING rejection of the proposal to build a windfarm [by PM Renewables in partnership with Your Energy/Mistral] on Coldingham Moor was made at a packed public meeting in the village on Friday night."



• The Journal, By Robert Brooks, 8 February 2007.
  "'Decision on wind farm is delayed'. "Planning chiefs are now seeking more information on 10 turbines proposed in Northumberland - just weeks after the authority said it had all it needed to make a final decision."



• Berwick Today (Berwick Advertiser), 25 January 2007.
  'Windfarm action group surprised at decision'
  "MOORSYDE Action Group (MAG) has expressed surprise at Berwick Borough Council's decision not to wait until a new study is published before making its decision on a wind farm application."



• The Journal, By Robert Brooks, 18 December 2006.
  "A windfarm developer is paying an eco-warrior from Yorkshire to boost support for a 10-turbine scheme in Northumberland ['Moorsyde']. Seasoned Greenpeace campaigner Richard Claxton last night confirmed he is working as an agent for Your Energy Ltd."



• Berwick Today (Berwick Advertiser), 17 August 2006.
  Wind farm campaigners hit out at 'last gasp PR fiasco'
  "CAMPAIGNERS have dismissed the decision to reduce the size of the proposed Moorsyde wind farm as 'a last gasp PR fiasco'."



• Northumberland Today (Northumberland Gazette), 09 February 2006.
  'Take your wind farms elsewhere.'
  "RESIDENTS came out in force this week to object to plans to build the North East's most powerful wind farm near North Charlton."



• Northumberland Today (Northumberland Gazette), 22 December 2005.
  'New wind farm sites spark fears for future."
  "TWO new sites for potential wind farms have been identified in north Northumberland, prompting more fears the area will be swamped by turbines."



• Berwick Today (Berwick Advertiser), 6 October 2005.
  'BERWICK MP Alan Beith has led calls for a public inquiry into the proliferation of wind farm proposals in the pipeline across north Northumberland."



• Berwick Today (Berwick Advertiser), 22 September 2005.
  'Plans for fourth wind farm [Wandylaw] revealed'.
  "BATTLE lines were being drawn up last week as the details of another wind farm — the fourth proposal in Berwick borough —were unveiled."



• Berwick Today (Berwick Advertiser), 30 June 2005.
  'Wind Farm Protestors Raise Water Supply Fears'.
  "WIND farm protesters have raised concerns that Berwick's water supply could be harmed by the proposed 14 turbine development at Moorsyde, near Shoresdean."



• Berwick Today (Berwick Advertiser), 9 June 2005.
  'Protesters welcome meeting with wind farm developers'.
  "WIND farm protesters have welcomed the prospect of talks with the company behind the Moorsyde proposal, near Shoresdean, for 14 turbines over 100 metres tall. Moorsyde Action Group (MAG) hope discussions with Your Energy managing director Richard Mardon will lead to a revised planning application."



• The Journal, 4 April 2005.
  'The wind of change'.
  "Plans for a massive windfarm capable of powering 40,000 homes have gone on public display in North Northumberland this week."



• Berwick Today (Berwick Advertiser), 10 February 2005.
  'More wind farm plans unveiled'
  'Plans for two more wind farms in north Northumberland have been unveiled.'



• Berwick Today (Berwick Advertiser), 20 January 2005.
  'Wind farm plans face a stormy reception'.
  "THERE are good wind farm developers and bad wind farm developers. This crowd are a bad wind farm developer," a protestor against the proposed Moorsyde Wind Farm said this week about the company applying for the scheme.



• Berwick Today (Berwick Advertiser), 18 November 2004.
  'Packed hall voices objections to proposed wind farm'.
  "Well over 100 people packed Shoresdean Village Hall last Wednesday to object to the proposed Moorsyde wind farm."



• BBC News Thursday, 21 October, 2004.
  'Plans to build a large wind farm in Northumberland have been unveiled.'



• Berwick Today (Berwick Advertiser), 20 October 2004.
  'Plan announced for wind turbines at Ancroft. Wind turbines 110 metres high could soon be a feature of the north Northumberland landscape after plans were announced for a £20 million development.'
  "The main considerations for us are the access and this site is relatively easy to get to - the B road off the A1 is fairly straight forward."  Bill Richmond, [ex-]Chairman of Your Energy.

GENERAL

• National Post (Canada), 21 April 2007.
  'Alberta Turns to Natural Gas After Wind Lessens Reliability'.
  '"We now have so much windpower generation that we need to fall back on reliable sources of power," said Peter Hunt, an Enmax spokesman.
  "The problem with wind power is that the wind doesn't blow all the time, so the greater percentage of the system depends on wind, the more vulnerable to disruption the system becomes when the wind stops blowing."'



• Financial Mail, 15 April, 2007.
  'Wind Turbines "Not Reliable"'.
  "Supplies of electricity from wind turbines are highly erratic and cast doubts on their reliability as a source of power, official figures reveal.
  "Just weeks before the Government publishes its energy review White Paper, a research paper by National Grid shows that on some days, even in winter, wind turbines are virtually motionless."



• Der Spiegel, March 21, 2007.
  'Germany Plans Boom in Coal-Fired Power Plants - Despite High Emissions'.
  "Everyone in Germany is talking about climate protection -- everyone, that is, except for energy companies. They're planning to build dozens of new coal-fired power plants -- with the support of the governing coalition in Berlin."



• the Sentinal (Staffordshire), 18 February, 2007.
  'Farmer Opts out of Wind Farm'.
  "A farmer has pulled out of plans to site wind turbines on his land as he does not want to profit at his neighbours' expense.Steve Ellsmoor was approached by energy firm Nuon Renewables about allowing part of a wind farm on the Staffordshire-Shropshire border to be built on his land."
  [Use article title in 'Search' box to access article].



• The Financial Times, January 23 2007.
  'Ofgem attacks carbon-cutting subsidies'.
  'Investors in renewable energy are profiting from a government-backed subsidy regime at the expense of taxpayers, the energy regulator Ofgem argued yesterday.
  Calling for an overhaul, the watchdog complained the system was a "very expensive way of reducing carbon emissions compared to other alternatives."'



• New Scientist, 19 December 2006.
  'An ill wind blows for UK turbines'.
  "The UK is not as windy as the British government thought. The country's first generation of wind farms are delivering less power than predicted, according to an analysis of official data on their output."



• The Scotsman, 1 November 2006.
  'Danes go cold on wind farms'.
  "The nation that leads the world in wind-farm development is going cool on the environmentally friendly source of power."



• newscientist.com., 6 July 2006.
  'The hidden cost of wind turbines'.
  When the turbines go up, it’s not just the scenery that suffers, it's the atmosphere too. Ed Douglas reveals the environmental costs of wind power.



• The Independent, 7 March 2006.
  'Dominic Lawson: The answer is not blowing in the wind'.
  "It is always pleasant to see friends come into an unexpected windfall ..."



• BBC News, 18 February 2006.
  'Rural recovery policies 'failed'.
  "Measures to boost the rural economy after the devastating foot-and-mouth crisis five years ago have failed, according to influential research."



• The Independent Online, 16 January 2006.
  'James Lovelock: The Earth is about to catch a morbid fever that may last as long as 100,000 years'.
  "Each nation must find the best use of its resources to sustain civilisation for as long as they can."



• The Scotsman, Business, 28 Dec 2005.
  'Danes have much to teach on green power - like how not to do it'.
  "DENMARK is often held up as a model of what Scotland could be: rich, environmentally friendly and impeccably politically correct in its international commitments.
  This is a comforting myth that has just been kicked into touch by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) report on how EU countries are measuring up to their Kyoto targets for cutting greenhouse gas emissions. "



• The Independent, 10 December 2005.
  'Treasury hijacks funds meant for green causes'.
  "Hundreds of millions of pounds raised from electricity bills to help develop renewable energy are being diverted to the Treasury, creating a new 'stealth tax'.
  So far, the Treasury has taken pounds 210m from the so-called NFFO Fund, while only pounds 60m has been spent on renewable energy."



• The Guardian, 24 October 2005.
  'The answer is not written in the wind'.
  "With the North Sea energy bounty gone, ministers face chilling reality this winter".



• The Guardian, 26 April 2005.
  'An ugly face of ecology'.
  'We need to be honest. Wind farms are a necessary evil, but they will not overcome the crisis of climate change'



• The Observer, 24 April 2005.
  'Seabed supplies a cure for global warming crisis'.
  'Scientists say they have found the solution to the global warming crisis. They want to bury it ...'



• BBC News Scotland, 14 April 2005.
  'Turbine snap prompts safety fears.'
  'Safety concerns have been raised after a turbine blade at Scotland's most powerful wind farm [Crystal Rig, in the Lammermuirs] shattered.'



• The Telegraph, 26 March 2005.
  'Energy research 'failing UK needs'.
  'Britain is spending 10 times less on energy research now than it was 25 years ago ...'



• The Telegraph, 26 March 2005.
  'Wind energy endures a gale of hostility'.



• The Journal, 28 February 2005.
  Huw Lewis column.
  'Wind farms are a sleek, shiny but superficial solution to the energy problems we are going to face in the years ahead. As such it is popular with our sleek, shiny but superficial government.'



• scotsman.com (The Scotsman), 27 February 2005 (Scotsman on Sunday).
  'Experts show official wind power claims are hot air'.
  'Controversial plans to build thousands of wind turbines across Scotland will make almost no difference to greenhouse gas levels, according to new research by leading environmental scientists.'



• Guardian Unlimited (The Guardian), 26 February 2005.
  'The menaced landscape', Robert Macfarlane.
  'Wind farms? You may as well take a knife to a Constable ...'



• Guardian Unlimited (The Guardian), 26 February 2005.
  'Report doubts future of wind power'
  'Wind farms are an expensive and inefficient way of generating sustainable energy, according to a study from Germany ...'



• Borders Today (Southern Reporter), 17 February 2005.
  'Storm brewing over wind farms'
  'Major forces are lining up to defeat plans for giant wind turbines which, it is claimed, will be clearly visible from Scott's View – the region's most famous beauty spot near Dryburgh.'



• scotsman.com (Scotland on Sunday), 30 Jan 2005
  'Fanning an ill wind.' Gerald Warner.
  'The worst ever violation of our Scottish environment is now being perpetrated at an exponential rate; but the good news is, this is being done in the name of conservation.'



• Times Online (The Times), 25 July 2004
  'Focus: Why the wind farms should be blown away.'
  "Is the race for wind power driven by greed more than environmental concern? Jonathan Leake and John Elliott report on a secret goldrush."



• The Times, January 10 2004
  'Wind farms ruin peace, says judge'
  "Wind farms can ruin the peace of the countryside and destroy the value of nearby homes, a judge has ruled."

OBJECTION!