Content © Stopwoodlanewindfarm 2008 - 2011
Exaggerated claims and overstated benefits
Links for our comments
Quotations tell the story
Wind farms are uneconomic
“Hopelessly uneconomic on any substantial scale, since it requires a conventional power back-up for when the wind stops blowing, forests of wind turbines are rightly regarded in most countries as an environmental monstrosity”. Nigel Lawson, Time, May 21, 2008
No reduction in fossil fuel used
“In spite of the establishment of significant volumes of additional wind power as a result of the energy agreement of 21 February 2008, fuel consumption remains almost constant in the forecast period”. Energinet.dk,, Environmental Report 2008
Wind blows at the wrong time
“As the wind installations multiply, companies have found themselves dumping energy late at night, adjusting the blades so they do not catch the wind, because there is no demand for the power. And grid operators, accustomed to meeting demand by adjusting supplies, are now struggling to maintain stability as supplies fluctuate”. New York Times, July 27, 2010
No power when most needed
On the evening of December 20, 2010 Britain’s average temperature fell to minus 5.6
Celsius. At 6.30 that evening, the nation’s wind farms, which claim a generating
capacity of 5.2 GW of electricity, were actually generating a piffling 40 MW, the
equivalent of 20 turbines working at full capacity. Peter Glover - Energy Tribune
The Woodlane proposal would build wind turbines across nearly 30% of the open countryside between Ferrybridge and Eggborough power stations. Turbines higher than the cooling towers and visible from just as far away. Turbines in addition to power stations and not instead of them.
All this and the 14 turbines would still only generate an average of about 1% of the power from one of these power stations, power that will only be generated when there is sufficient wind.
There is no way that the benefits of the wind farm outweigh the costs to the area.
The wind farm application claims the benefits are :-
The cost is the transformation of the area from desirable rural to ineffective wind farm. People living in the area will suffer loss of residential amenity, possible noise and health problems, loss of property values. 16 villages are within 5 km and four village communities are within 2km. House sales in the area are already suffering as buyers find out about the proposals and pull out. The wind farm will have a substantial net negative impact on the area and its future prosperity.