Wind Turbines and Wickedness. Is the money that’s going to be wasted the result of incompetence? Or instead – is it a strategy of truly deliberate evil?

 The figures involved and outlined below are so appalling, even by the wasteful standards of Cubanized socialist provincial administrations of the EU like this one in Westminster,  that they have to be repeated here today.

Apart from the opportunity-cost of NOT building updated Nuclear capacity as soon as possible, one has to consider a world in which the British are fighting at least two wars at once, probably for the foreseeable future: the very public and probably deliberate underfunding of our defence capability, not to mention letting the poor Tommies themselves go without essential weaponry, vehicles and protection is despicable, is probably an effect of all this lefty “windery”, and in my humble opinion is deliberate since ageing 1960s lefty hippy longhaired druggie student activists probably don’t like soldiers much, and especially Western liberal State soldiers, unless they

(1)  fight for dictocrasts or Jerks-in-Mercs-in-sunspecs, or

(2) goose-step en masse while looking up-stage-right somewhere off camera, or 

(3) look like Che Guevara (who was anyway not a proper soldier but a fascist murderer, and your T-shirt is NOT cool.)

That sentence is so long that it ought to have been my headline.

Astonishing cost to consumers of wind farms.   




Parliamentary Replies exposes astonishing cost to consumers of wind farms.   

Owen Paterson has been astonished by a number of Parliamentary Replies from Government Ministers on the cost of wind farms.  Firstly the Renewables Obligation will cost consumers £25.1billion between 2002 and 2027.  

He also attempted to get from the government some idea of the huge costs of connecting the planned 7,000 wind turbines to the national grid.

In a confusing response, Energy Minister Malcolm Wicks gave a number of figures adding up to over £10billion:  £560 million to connect new renewable generation in Scotland and the North of England;  further  £3.8 billion to cover network refurbishment and the costs of accommodating new generators between 2007 and 2012; £5.7billion from 2005 to 2010 to cover network refurbishment and development.  

Another astonishing reply revealed that the government has not worked out the cost of decommissioning wind farms and restoring sites to their original conditions.

Owen Paterson said “£10 billion is the same amount that it would cost to build seven new nuclear power stations, which would deliver exactly the same amount of power as the installed capacity of the 7,000 wind turbines.  The Government seems to be telling us that just to connect 7,000 wind turbines to the grid will cost more than it would to generate the same amount of energy from nuclear power stations.  This is before we take into account the enormous cost of building the turbines.” 

I will be tabling further questions to try to clarify the answers I have received so far.  The above information is astonishing and clearly vindicates VORTEX and other campaigners in Shropshire opposed to wind farms which are clearly a massive waste of consumers’ money.

Note to editors

Owen’s PQs can be found on the Hansard Website 


For further information on the local campaign on wind farms please visit Owen’s website  HYPERLINK “”

Further note to editors;

The Libertarian Alliance’s executive Committee believes that massive State purchases of so-called “renewable” energy generation “capacity” (using money extorted from taxpayers most of whom are opposed to it) are a tragic waste of both financial resources and also the opportunity to deploy those resources towards truly “renewable” electricity generation sources, such as Nuclear power stations. (Individual members of the Libertarian Alliance may disagree with this opinion.)

3 responses to “Wind Turbines and Wickedness. Is the money that’s going to be wasted the result of incompetence? Or instead – is it a strategy of truly deliberate evil?

  1. It is good that you put your second ‘renewable’ in scare quotes, since of course nuclear power is no more renewable than oil, natural gas or coal, being based on a finite, if large resource.

    £10bn is also a gross misrepresentation. As far as I can see the only cost directly attributable to wind farms appears from the figures cited £560m. The balance relates to network refurbishment and development which would presumably be necessary however the power is generated. Or does nuclear generated power somehow do this by magic without any need for further investment?

    Perhaps it isn’t just Wicks and Paterson who are confused…

    It is also rather surprising that you don’t recognise that these figures are based on the usual centralising, big is better, statist arguments that imply the only way forward is huge, state or corporately owned, turbines rather than the enormous variety of micro-generation and high insulation options open to people left to their own devices.

    Here for example is one possibility. I have no idea if it will work, but centralised, government funded investment in an energy equivalent of Big Pharma will almost certainly ensure it goes nowhere.

  2. Ian:

    As a ‘high-tech environmentalist”, I was impressed by your “Windbelt” link.

    One of the projects I work on might interest you:- Our “Defensible Homes” project.

    The plan is to mass-produce 50 foot diameter geodesic domes, with transparent covers made of triple-glazed ETFE, which is transparent to sunlight, and you can see it in use at the Eden Project.

    ETFE is incredibly strong and durable.

    The supporting geodesic steel or alloy frames are built by MERO UK.

    It is now possible to “print” efficient photovoltaic layers directly onto the ETFE. It is also possible to “print” photochromic layers, which fade to black electrically.

    The first defensive option is CAMO netting.

    The second is a ten-foot-wide moat filled with coiled stainless razor wire. The entrance door to the dome forms a drawbridge when opened and lowered.

    The third option is a central hydraulic ram system which can lift the dome with its platform 16′ high vertically.

    The fourth option is an internal armoured “panic room” equipped with radio alarms and survival kit.

    It’s for customers to decide whether or not to be armed. It’s defensible territory. This is a product for global markets.

    It is self-sufficient in terms of heating and lighting (and water collection in ordinary climates). It’s economical. It’s eco-friendly.

    It’s also rather beautiful, nestling in a clearing in the woods. >:-}

    Oh, and it’s a fraction of the cost of an “ordinary” house.

    Planning authorities are especially favourable to it if you use it as a “Wildlife Observation Station.”



  3. Johannes van Vuren

    What this article omit is to estimate how long it would take to build and errect those 7000 windmills. It requires huge cranes and riggs to errect them, not many of which are available or even exist. Say they can errrect 3 per week, which is optimistic. Hence, it would take 44 years to errect 7000 windmills. Can the country wait that long? In 44 years’ time, nuclear, and everything else, will have been superseded by thermo fusion power generartion.

    For more enlightenment, consult Supporters of Nuclear Energy.