Douglas Carswell MP: The case for wind is running out of puff

Posted: January 21, 2015 by tallbloke in turbines, wind
Tags:

Reposted from Douglas Carswell’s blog:

carswellA Ten Minute Rule Bill to outlaw public subsidies for wind farms has just been voted through the House of Commons. It squeezed through with 59 MPs in favour, and 57 against, the support of UKIP’s two MPs proving decisive.

This wasn’t just a victory for UKIP in the Commons. It was a defeat for the subsdised scam otherwise known as the wind energy industry.

Generating electricity from wind is an inherently costly thing to do. Unlike solar energy, which thanks to technology is becoming vastly more efficient, wind is – and will remain – a far more costly way of producing power than the alternatives.

Nor is it reliable. The other day, as Allister Heath points out, as UK electicity demand hit 52.54 gigawatts (GW), wind contributed just 0.573GW. That is to say about 1pc of the total. It was left to good old gas and coal to contribute the lion’s share of 71 percent.

If wind is not an effective way to generate electricity, why have so many wind turbines been built? Because of the subsidy. Billions of pounds have been deliberately diverted away from more efficient ways of generating energy into wind farms.

Why did politicians and experts decide to plough so much into such a duff way of generating power? Partly it is because they failed to foresee technological change. Policy makers plumped for wind because they assumed that oil and gas would become more expensive. They failed to see the shale gas revolution coming.

At the same time, UK policy makers subscribed to the whole renewable energy shtick. Wind, they persuaded each other, had to be the answer in order for us to meet our renewable energy targets.

This has been a disastrous way of deciding energy policy. We need to scrap the renewable targets. Allow capital and technology to find innovative ways to generate energy. And scrap those subsidies.

Today was a step towards that.

Comments
  1. John Keen says:

    Common sense at last

  2. A C Osborn says:

    I am glad that they got it through, but only 116 MPs voted?

  3. tchannon says:

    The 10 minute stuff is irrelevant, won’t make law.

    This is good enough
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Minute_Rule
    .

  4. p.g.sharrow says:

    Scrap the Renewable Subsidies and the wind farms will be scrapped soon enough. They are too expensive to maintain for the value of the electricity that they generate. As they fail they will be abandoned, then the ones that have not collapsed will be torn down. I watched this happen in California back in the 1980s after we got rid of “The Peanut Farmer” and “Governor Moonbeam” in the first turn back of the Ecoloons. Peoples memories are far too short. 30 years and the Ecoloons came back in spades. This time the damage must be so bad that the people do not forget! pg

  5. Richard111 says:

    So solar energy is more efficient!?!? When fixed panels can only produce useable power for just 6 hours in 24 and then only if the sky is free of cloud. Not that common in the UK. Strange how MP’s know more about making expense claims than the subject of ‘climate change’ and its effect on the common man.

  6. It’s not just wind and solar that are useless and stupid and subsidised. It’s also tidal, wave, anaerobic digesters, bio-fuel; the list of subsidised useless energy schemes goes on and on.

  7. Richard111 says:

    The temperature here in Milford Haven is -1C. Looking out my window as I type I can see quite a few of the 100,000 plus solar panels installed in and around the harbour by the Port Authorities. They and all roof tops are covered in a layer of frost. The mains voltage in my kitchen in 229v.

    Anyway, seems like the BBC is quietly reporting the coming Maunder minimum.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/entries/6d50a6bd-779a-32d6-bfca-06e4484d6835

  8. Joe Public says:

    @ Richard111 at 8:10 am

    “So solar energy is more efficient!?!?” One shouldn’t confuse efficiency with effectiveness.

    Something that’s highly efficient, that produces when nobody wants it, is not effective; something that is relatively inefficient but produces only when needed is highly effective.

    Combined-cycle gas turbine vs Open-cycle gas turbine is a relevant comparison.

    http://www.iea-etsap.org/web/e-techds/pdf/e02-gas_fired_power-gs-ad-gct.pdf

  9. wolsten says:

    Does anyone know if we can find out who voted and in what way?

  10. Robuk says:

    Mp`s and numbers that voted against from 1 to 57 on above list by Wolsten , all numbers not listed are Labour.

    5,6,7 Lib dem
    13 Lib dem
    14 unionist
    19,20,21 Lib dem
    22 unionist
    23 Lib Dem
    27.28,29 Lib Dem
    32 unionist
    33 Green
    35 unionist
    40 Lib Dem
    42 Con
    46,47 Lib Dem
    48 unionist
    50,51,52 Lib Dem
    55 SNP
    56 SNP
    57 Lib Dem

  11. tallbloke says:

    I make that 29 Labour, 18 LibDems, 5 Unionist, 2 SNP, 1 Con, 1 Green and a partridge in a pear tree.🙂