GWPF Warning: Wind Energy Is Extraordinarily Expensive And Inefficient

Written by Dr. Benny Peiser, GWPF.

English: The , also known as the Green Mountai...

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

London, 6 August: The Global Warming Policy Foundations has warned policy makers that wind energy is an extraordinarily expensive and inefficient way of reducing CO2 emissions. In fact, there is a significant likelihood that annual CO2 emissions could be greater under the Government's current wind strategy than under an alternative Gas scenario.

Professor Gordon Hughes (University of Edinburgh), on behalf of the GWPF, has also assessed the likely impact of wind power on household energy bills.

In his economic analysis, submitted by the GWPF to the House of Commons Energy and Climate Change Committee, Prof Hughes concludes that meeting the Government's target for renewable generation would increase households electricity bills by 40-60% by 2020.

The necessary investment for this Wind scenario would amount to about £124 billion. The same electricity demand could be met from 21.5 GW of combined cycle gas plants with a capital cost of £13 billion - the latter option is cheaper by an order of magnitude.

According to Professor Hughes, "the average household electricity bill would increase from £528 per year at 2010 prices to a range from £730 to £840 in 2020 under the Mixed Wind scenario. These figures amount to increases of 38% to 58% in the average household bill relative to the baseline under the Gas scenario. The equivalent ranges for the other scenarios are 29-46% for the More Onshore Wind scenario and 40-62% for the Future Offshore Wind scenario."

"The key problems with current policies for wind power are simple. They require a huge commitment of investment to a technology that is not very green, in the sense of saving a lot of CO2, but which is certainly very expensive and inflexible. Unless the current Government scales back its commitment to wind power very substantially, its policy will be worse than a mistake, it will be a blunder," Professor Hughes said.

The GWPF's submission to the House of Commons Energy and Climate Change public evidence session on the Economics of Wind Power Committee is available here: Gordon Hughes: The Impact of Wind Power On Household Energy Bills.
Professor Gordon Hughes

Dr Gordon Hughes is a Professor of Economics at the University of Edinburgh where he teaches courses in the Economics of Natural Resources and Public Economics. He was a senior adviser on energy and environmental policy at the World Bank until 2001. He has advised governments on the design and implementation of environmental policies and was responsible for some of the World Bank's most important environmental guidelines. Professor Hughes is the author of the GWPF reports The Myth of Green Jobs and Why is wind power so expensive?

Contacts:
Professor Gordon Hughes
Mob: 0787 622 2629
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Dr Benny Peiser
tel: 020 7930 6856
mob: 07553 361717
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Comments  

 
Gator
# Gator 08-06-2012 07:30
Shouldn't the precautionary principle apply here? The odds of wind power becoming a catastrophe are far greater than that of AGW.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator
 
 
anne
# anne 08-06-2012 14:55
This has always been a huge worry, as we have discussed many times Gator, it is not just the lack of energy produced by these monstrosoties it is also the manufacturing and transportation, the building of new roads to transport and the concrete bases built the lay them on. Also rare earth metals are used and we all know the consequences of mining those. On top of all this I did not realise that once they are erected it is often no ones responsibility to maintain them. If CO2 were a problem then these things would make the problem so much worse, thank god it is not.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator
 
 
anne
# anne 08-06-2012 14:56
Sorry, should be minerals, just done a 16 hour shift (any excuse) ;-)
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator
 

Add comment

Before posting a comment, please read the Terms of Service (click here). Long links are shortened but still work.

PLEASE report all spam/inappropriate comments using the 'Report to administrator' link. If you find your post gone, it's because you violated the TOS.


Security code
Refresh