Let’s drop unattainable renewables targets

Have your say

Following my letter (4 April) there have been two replies on the subject of global warming and a further letter extolling the virtues of wind farms and now my confusion has changed to concern. I will take the points raised.

Tom Crossett tells us that he is a scientist and he is convinced that the planet is warming faster than at any time in the past 100,000 years. However this doesn’t alter the fact that the medieval warming period was warmer than now; also that during the 100 years up to 1998 the global temperature rose by about 0.80C and since that date there has been no rise.

When the oceans release their heat, which would be a one off period, warming will start again. I think an explanation is necessary.

I’m interested that the IPCC report is based on “over” 9,200 papers by “more than” 200 lead authors; I can only comment that they must have worked their socks off, authors and reviewers and ask were any dissenting papers included in the review?

Tony Parker supports the thrust of the argument. I have read Lord Lawson’s book and attended his presentation at All Saints which further confirmed my scientism. With regard to scare-mongering the following appeared recently in the national and local press, scientists have reported that “between 2001 and 2010, death rates from heart and lung disease in London and the south-east increased by more than 10% for every 1.0C increase in temperature”. Or was it a foolish April joke?

Peter Gardiner’s blast at UKIP raises a number of points but first I would refer to his previous letter where he said it was a good thing Putin couldn’t control wind. That is true but neither can he or any wind power advocates; also Tony Parker’s comment on scare-mongering applies to his attributing extreme “local weather events” to climate change.

True, the Germans who currently ban fracking are building and have built coal fired power stations to ensure power supply, but these will be fuelled by cheap coal from the US as a result of the shale gas bonanza there. That doesn’t seem to fit into the European green policy.

Finally I would suggest that we forget academic science and stick to “real engineering” and common sense. Wind turbines are efficient by engineering standards in converting their fuel (wind) to power, they are however ineffective as wind is unpredictable in either quantity and availability and therefore they need a reliable back up from gas fired stations, unfortunate the capital cost is the same for a back up as for a continuous supply power station to the grid and thereby lies the problem.

The same applies to photo voltaic solar farms for the daylight hours per year (4,380) and maximum rated power is only generated by direct sunlight during the two hours about mid-day, power generated lessens gradually for hours away from the mid-day period. For the record, Eastbourne sunshine hours for 2011 were 1,962, that is 48% of the total. There is and will be a high demand for gas for the UK domestic and industrial heating purposes so wouldn’t common sense suggest that we drop the attempt to meet the unattainable renewable targets set the EU and the government and develop a practical engineering energy policy.

Brian Beck