Letter - windturbines

windturbines

May I draw attention to two relevant issues in the wind energy debate.

1) Radar

Newcastle Airport’s objections to specific wind farms in the North East include concern for turbines proposed at the pharmaceutical firm Aesica. The Airport’s concerns must not be ignored .In support of this I add comments from the All Energy Conference in Aberdeen in May this year. The session entitled “Where now? What next?” presented by Julian Chafer FRICS, Head of Safeguarding, Defence Estates, gave the following clear message

WIND TURBINES DO AFFECT RADAR. Methods of mitigation are being explored but National Safety and National Security must remain the prime concerns

2) Renewable Obligation Certificates.

Aesica will benefit from extra income in the form of ROCs (Renewable Obligation Certificates) Article in Manufacturing Chemist on 24 may 2006

Aesica claim the green energy resource will reduce its £407,000-a-year electricity bill by around 40%, making it more efficient and protecting the jobs of its 165 employees. TNEI services, managing this project, used a similar argument to support the GlaxoSmithKline turbines. However information from the ROC register shows the poor performance of the GSK turbines in 2005 would have resulted in a reduction from the anticipated extra annual income of £60000 to less than £20000

In 2005 The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) pointed out that the cost of the Renewables Obligation (RO) passed on by electricity suppliers to consumers who pay for it through higher prices does not appear on their electricity bills and is not explained to them.

Furthermore we must look at the whether wind turbines are in fact saving carbon emissions as expected. In the North East they are not.

Elizabeth Mann Chair of Durham Branch Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) >26 Milbank Court>Darlington Co Durham >DL39PF>01325 485107