Has wind power REALLY saved the UK £104 billion?
Kit Knightly
Have you heard that wind power has saved the people of Great Britain over one hundred billion pounds in the last decade?
That’s the contention of a new study, which has been eagerly picked up and run with by all and sundry across the media landscape this morning.
Is the claim true? We’ll get to that.
First, a little background.
The lead author of the paper is Colm James O’Shea. He’s a 55-year old hedge fund manager who returned to University in 2023 to get a Masters in Climate Change. Why? We don’t know.
The Guardian calls him a “former hedge fund manager”, but according to Companies House and his own LinkedIn profile he’s still the CIO of COPAC, the hedge fund he created in 2006.
The holdings of COPAC are not currently publicly listed (and their website is peculiarly blank), so I don’t know if the fund has any investments in Green Energy projects.
Prior to starting his own fund in 2006, O’Shea had worked for — among others — Soros Fund Management and Balyasny Europe Asset Management. His involvement with Balyasny extended past the end of his employment there, as they are listed as a LLP Designated Member of his COPAC fund from 2005-2009.
A cursory search doesn’t show Balyasny to have any green energy holdings either, but they have been buying up gas projects since 2023, including some in Denmark as recently as July…which is potentially interesting.
Does Balyasny benefit from news coverage potentially lowering the price of gas infrastructure? Or are their purchases intended to somehow sabotage the market and increase the price of gas?
Impossible to say at this point. There’s nothing concrete in any of this, but there are interesting questions to ask.
But back to the paper itself, and the key question: Has wind power REALLY saved the UK £104 billion?
According to the maths as published…yes. But those are some very, very selective maths.
Remember this is a pre-print modelling paper, and you should always be wary of modelling papers because they are entirely defined by the assumptions on which they are built.
This one is no exception.
Essentially, the model for this paper assumes that wind power costs nothing except the subsidies pumped into it. They made no effort to account for construction or maintenance costs, the costs of running back-ups when there’s no wind or the need to upgrade the grid or anything like that.
From the horse’s mouth [page 19, emphasis added]:
This paper focuses on quantifying the wholesale electricity market as a proxy for generationcosts. A common criticism of this approach is that in a similar way to the use of Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) (Lazard, 2025) it does not include all system costs (Moraski & Spokas, 2025). These include: Grid infrastructure costs as renewables are located further away from demand and intermittency costs including storage and peak load management (Dale et al., 2004).It is a very fair observation that this paper does not attempt a holistic system-wide evaluation of all associated costs of a type of generation
In short, they don’t know and they didn’t really try to find out. They harvested enough data to support the pre-approved conclusion, then published it.
All this is, is yet another example of “The Science”.
I’m sure it seems the height of egotism to quote myself perpetually, but I’m going to do it anyway:
“The Science” is a self-sustaining industry of academics who need jobs and owe favours.
An ongoing quid pro quo relationship between the researchers – who want honors and knighthoods and tenure and book deals and research grants and to be the popular talking head explaining complex ideas to the multitudes on television – and the corporations, governments and “charitable foundations” who have all of those things in their gift.
This system doesn’t produce research intended to be read, it creates headlines for celebrities to tweet, links for “journalists” to embed, sources for other researchers to cite.
An illusion of solid substantiation that comes apart the moment you actually read the words, examine the methodology or analyse the data.
Self-reporting surveys, manipulated data, “modelling studies” that spit-out pre-ordained results. Affiliated-authors paid by the state or corporate interests to provide “evidence” that supports highly profitable or politically convenient assumptions.
…Interlacing layers of nothing designed to create the impression of something.
This pro-mask “study” is why you should NEVER “Trust the Science”
So, is the claim true? It doesn’t matter. That is entirely beside the point. The paper has already done its job by generating headlines like this, or tweets like this:
Fab study, delivers truth to the lies of the right wing. Its fossil fuels driving bills up and green drives them down, you paying attention Tony, Nigel, Kemi…..? @InstituteGC @KemiBadenoch @Nigel_Farage https://t.co/KevktIYwoH pic.twitter.com/uUVXawVe2L
— Dale Vince (@DaleVince) October 28, 2025
This study is just a single tile in mosaic of bullshit. It helps create an image and sell a story.
In this case, the hope is that enough dodgy studies in conflict with observable reality will override people’s awareness that their energy bills are getting bigger and their bank balances smaller.
Good luck with that.
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
The word $cience should soon appear in the Dictionary.
Def: The art of having an answer paid for by some vested interest/agenda, and then working backwards.
yes, but would it come before ‘a’ ?
This film is complete waste of time rats-in-the-wall.
Its working in negative. You and I can only waste our time by commenting on all the fake headlines it makes and says.
There is eternal resources on this our planet! See how much easier it is to live in the true world.
An apple tree gets bigger and bigger and bigger every year and gives more and more apples.
If there are free soil around it not occupied by other stronger vegetation, this apple tree will replicate itself and provide even more apples. Why?
Because that was the way an apple tree was designed! Michael Moore and my arse!
off guardian is now the official parody platform of off guardian
Are you the official parody of Jesus?
Could be Antonio
Convicted sex offender Hades Kabatu claims he was ignored by police after being mistakenly released from prison and wandered around London for 48 hours.
Maybe the Police Lawyers hoped he would do more harm = more money to them?
Nicola Tesla could produce free energy over 100 years ago.
Crawfordisation (from Carluke) was a device shown on ‘Scotland Today’ in the early 70s, which ran a car from Glasgow to London on a small glass of fuel.
Everything we are told is a lie.
The world is supposedly in climate change despair yet Trump is ready to start exploding more nuclear bombs to test for fk knows what.
As Hitlary Clinton said: “Why do we produce and have large stockpiles of nukes if we dont use them”?. Exactly what I would have said if I were on BBC News best time.
If we use them, we can depreciate them in the account books and lower America’s large public debt yes?
It is therefore the MAGA bloc supported by the SISSY bloc, now start nuclear bomb testing and research projects again.
If it shows up that Nukes can be used to isolated actions with minimum harm, we could use them to a lot of separate purposes and make America ……rich and wealthy again.
The Golden City on the Hill, United States of America! 🤒
it’s said, by John Carroll iirc, that Truman authorized the Hiroshima and Nagasaki strikes at least in part out of fear that if the bombs played no role in the war, the Manhattan Project with its billions in budget items would be decried as a pointless boondoggle
Confirming my case ;-). 😅 .
It was far from pointless. it was the start of the globalist parasite campaign to hold the world hostage:
Nuclear explosions are not possible – it’s more state terror.
https://mpalmer.heresy.is/webnotes/HR/
You prefer napalm and mustard gas? Your link shows that nukes are not that bad and dangerous as they say.
We can use them isolated to erase minor cities or part of cities if they are dictatorship cities!
Wimbledon with a 100000 audience. This way it will go fast.
you nailed it for once. hiroshima was napalmed. no nukes have ever been used because they are scientifcally impossible, and evidentially absent – it’s another fraud like climate crisis and convid-1984.
I’m not so sure about the Tesla story, simply because it was covered by a Hollywood ‘blockbuster’. I haven’t seen it and I don’t want to.
I remember a 1980’s docu (Tomorrows World?) about hydrogen car engines.
Modern hi-tech steam turbines are fckin huge,impressive pieces of engineering and it appears to be a thriving, enormous money-spinning industry.
There’s loads of info to find about them.
As a kid, many years ago, I used to wonder what was occasionally rising out of those power station cooling towers…it was steam.
The powers that be wouldn’t be holding back any information from us would they?
Steam and hydrogen are pretty clean I would think.
What if those ‘nuclear’ power stations are nowhere near as deadly dangerous (not nuclear) as they would like us to have us believe?
Trump is ready to start exploding more nuclear bombs
nuclear bombs LOL
Do nuclear bombs exist though? 🤔
They need to test them to make sure they are working, yes, sure they do.
The “nukes” are another psy-op. Dirty bombs and chemicals is the worse they can do, but apparently people are desperate to believe in “superpowers” and world-ending big bangs.
The forever nuclear threat is another psyop. Dirty bombs and chemicals is the worse they can do, but apparently people need to believe in “superpowers” and world-ending big bangs.
Indeed. Everyone happy to repeat the mantra of conservation of energy, but no one really talks about the implications of that. We ain’t creating energy, we are harnessing it, and once used it doesn’t vanish, it goes back into the aether to be harnessed again.
Obviously the dweebs in charge know this but your average man is clueless.
Stopped paying for energy years ago.
Ignore letters to the strawman!
Was Billy Bob stating fact on the show, Landman last season? He said that it takes 30 years to recover your investment from a wind turbine and by that time the turbine will be obsolete. An Aussie was saying something to this affect about turbines in the Down Under. Tough to calculate the value of a solar panel given that everything sitting in it’s shade is automatically dead. Is that loss included in the calculation? Unlikely. And what do you do if you have panels on your roof and you get a roof leak? Elon was posting the benefits of solar panels fairly frequently on X. Each time I equated a solar panel with dead. Just plain dead. Apparently Musk noticed. His posts on the benefits of solar panels don’t show up in my feed any more. Now that’s weird. What would that be called? Selective free speech? The big question still circling the net: Why the sudden change with Bill Gates and climate change. Solar flare radiation damaged his retina and caused an imbalance in his pituitary gland and it made him snap out of the climate coma he has been suffering from ever since he first met Al Gore? Whatever.
I can see advantages for an individual to have solar panels at home, the better ones work in cloudy, overcast conditions too.
The main advantage is electricity independence if one has sufficient batteries to store the charge overnight. If the system is not connected to the grid then in the event of a network power cut the grid cannot drain the householder’s batteries.
Cost-wise the batteries are the most expensive part, panels are relatively cheap but the economic issue is knowing the average usable life of the panels and batteries and bearing in mind the length of the manufacturer’s guarantee in order to calculate the cost by amortizating the initial upfront cost over the life of the components. Also other considerations are cleaning costs – if on a roof – and risk of damage from hailstones or other weather related problems which needs to be covered by the home insurance policy.
Anyway, solar panels seem a more practical way of gaining electricity independence than say a wind turbine unless one has a large plot of land and doesn’t mind having an eyesore on it.
Dead. There is a 20 acre farm field down the road from me. Was once an alfalfa field. Now it’s dead. Just plain dead. Can’t be refuted. Dead.
It could be refuted. If someone bought it up for more worthy purposes, for instance
Any piece of land can be resurrected. Just needs the right buyer with the right vision. Imagination being key.
‘sufficient batteries’ indeed. The super clean electric car battery lasts about 5-10 years I read somewhere. The amount of horrible poisonous crap that comes out of any battery bothers me. And also,because of the weight of the fckin things, it leads to extra wear and tear on the car tyres and leads to more damage of roads,which then need more maintenance.
Environmentally friendly my arse! It appears to me to be another enormous scam to keep us controlled and fearful.
Don’t get me started about people looking at their smartphones while riding electric bicycles.Good grief.
Ok, rant over.haha
I wasn’t talking about electric cars.
I was taking about houses. When the lights go out or you need CBDC or electricity is rationed then having your own supply, be it off grid solar or a combination of that and a petrol/diesel generator would be handy.
Yes I know but when you mentioned batteries I went on a short rant.Sorry about that. Posting on the internet after a few Belgian beers is not recommended.
LOL, seems like a good idea at the time though.
All this green tech is just greenwashing. So bad for the environment. Solar panels endup in landfill and contain heavy metals such a lead and cadmium which can leach into the groundwater. Lifespan depends; domestic ones come with a 10 year guarantee or sometimes longer, but is the guarantee worth the paper it is written on? I don’t know.
Anyway, I am only looking at them as an insurance policy to keep the lights and heating on. I am not expecting to save money over the lifetime of the components, so if I breakeven versus being on the grid then I would be happy. Any cost saving would be a bonus.
Just another thought : How much crap (plastic/metals/chemicals/minerals etc) and energy goes into the manufacture of solar panels and batteries?
The solar tech is also getting more efficient so when have you got to buy new ones? 10 years or so? What happens to the old ones? Do they get recycled? Or just dumped?
It’s all very well these eco/enviro-friendly, clean air, green energy ideas, but at what cost? Is it really worth it?
Maybe the old solar panels can be incinerated to fuel steam turbines.
Landman says oil makes 10x more than medication.
Off topic but isn’t this the most ludicrously contrived “arty” interview you ever saw?:
https://www.prageru.com/videos/the-silencing-of-eve-barlow-when-honesty-becomes-a-crime
Eve frets, Eve pouts, Eve searches her soul whilst the camera soulfully moves around her soulfulness, Eve gesticulates magnificently, the camera blurs and hovers and virtually ejaculates around her!
Oh Eve! Eve! We love you, Eve! You’re just so ….. Eve!
The Dews eternal victim star role. I could see there was something wrong already on the nose. But first after 10-15 minutes of the Interview it appeared that she was one of the 6 million. O boy. 😑 .
15 minutes? You have a stronger stomach than me. I just clicked on various points to see her performing seal show. Gruesome.
The Jew cries out as he hits you!
Wind turbines ‘Green’?
Sounds like a heap of hot air to me;
https://energyskeptic.com/2020/900-tons-of-material-to-build-just-1-windmill/
Make that a mountain of hot air.
From the link above;
‘You’d need 32,850 wind turbines to replace the Cubic Mile of Oil consumed globally every year, and a grand total of 1,642,000 turbines to replace oil over the next 50 years, which may be conservative given that the wind isn’t blowing all the time so that triple or more would be needed on a national grid with massive energy storage batteries’
The national safety margin for electrity generated, beyond some estimated maximum demand, would be of interest. Since solar and wind are unreliable, the government pays cronies to maintain conventional power plants, regarless of whether any electricity is supplied.
Those enormous turbine blades have to be replaced often. Some of the old blades pile up at remote yards, with the help of friendly politicians. I suspect they are less dense than water. So the resorting to the usual dumping ground – the sea – won’t work.
STARDUST TO BLOCK THE SUN (Joint US-Israeli Co)
“Stardust says they have created a powder that they promise “wouldn’t accumulate in humans or ecosystems, and can’t harm the ozone layer or create acid rain like the sulfur-rich particles from volcanoes. But it refuses to disclose what the particles are actually made of.” https://jonfleetwood.substack.com/p/israeli-us-geoengineering-company
Starting as early as April. Have you given informed consent to be sprayed?
No one gave consent to be spayed by the “covid vaccines”.
Wind-power is great !
Jet fuel hoax | stolenhistory.net – Rediscovered History of the World
They should do some research on harnessing the power of cow farts.
You can get “a Masters in Climate Change”? Can you get a masters in “Transgender Existentialism”? In “Covid Topography”? In “Taylor Swift Transcendentalism”?
I wanted an Hnd in Football Punditry, back in the 80’s,
They said that wasn’t a thing.
No problem!
Expensive legal scams too.
In the hospital and pharma worlds there are plenty more, ex: the infamous “ventilator”, one of the most painful and expensive deathtraps, apart from being useless for health. If you survive one, you good to go.
They all sound feasible in these days of fakery George.
I know one thing for sure; They all have a Masters in Mayhem Madness and Murder.
The above irrelevant crap is nothing compared to
yesterday’s newspaper headlines which were more important about putting migrants in camps.
It looks like the already purpose built COVID camps for UK ” refuseniks ” are now being used for the migrants’ hotel psyop.
When this becomes normalized and cheered on, your the next one up.
These are designed after the Abu Ghraib case. After the removing the asylum seekers will be interrogated by a new staff to see if there are any terrorists in between.
Illegal immigrants to undemine citizens wages have become.. asylum seekers!
How was this look into the crystal ball, I mean, this study conducted? Via computer modelling? Like the study according to which millions were saved from an untimely death thanks to all those Covid injections? Instead of these injectables actually killing around 17 million and injuring millions more?
Who financed this study? Ah, yes – the UN and COMAC Capital. NOW I see.
Good ole computer modelling hey?
Garbage in = garbage out.
Shutting down all the Hedge funds would be a more efficient way to level the playing fields of unfettered greed.
“We never had This Problem when The Queen was Alive” … (anon) …
This type of accounting is entirely flexible, it can be used to explain and justify literally anything.
Wind power has its uses. Nothing else much to say about it.
When you are living off grid on a deserted island maybe.
Christopher Columbus discovered America by wind power. A wind mill on the deck of his ship secured free energy all over the place. He saved both Italy and England for millions of Italian Liras and British pounds.
“Christopher Columbus discovered America”.
No he didn’t – but his ships were flying some interesting designs on their sails. The whole “voyages of discovery” operation was run by the Templars who’d simply changed their name in Spain and Portugal. And no, I’ve not been reading Dan Brown….
The Spanish Empire in Latin America has been profoundly misrepresented by propaganda mostly from Britain:
https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/tkelly6785757/episodes/2025-10-22T04_04_59-07_00
Where was the world’s largest amphibious assault prior to D-Day? Don’t know (I didn’t)? Give it a listen….
P.S. I’m not Catholic (although I enjoyed the Pope’s recent condemnation of usury – where are such statements from the ‘left’?) and don’t agree with everything they argue in the podcast.
Discovered ?
Invaded, exploited, ransacked, stole, commandeered, pillaged and plundered would be more accurate.
We invited them in for a Tea party to talk it over, but they attacked us with arrows and javelins and wanted to kill us.
Then we turned the cannon against them and gave them a blow. Do you know some of them were cannibals, and mexicans were headchoopers.
No one shoot on a Sailor without being punished!
When Columbus Day rolls around, I always think of this superb historical summary from Kurt Vonnegut’s Breakfast of Champions (lightly edited for brevity); this passage elaborates upon the nonsensical history, myths, and legends inculcated into popular culture:
__________________________
A lot of the nonsense was the innocent result of playfulness on the part of the founding fathers of the nation…
But some of the nonsense was evil, since it concealed great crimes. For example, teachers of children in the United States of America wrote this date on blackboards again and again, and asked the children to memorize it with pride and joy: 1492.
The teachers told the children that this was when their continent was discovered by human beings. Actually, millions of human beings were already living full and imaginative lives on the continent in 1492. That was simply the year in which sea pirates began to cheat and rob and kill them.
Here was another piece of evil nonsense which children were taught: that the sea pirates eventually created a government which became a beacon of freedom to human beings everywhere else. There were pictures and statues of this supposed imaginary beacon for children to see. It was sort of an ice-cream cone on fire. [illustration omitted]
Actually, the sea pirates who had the most to do with the creation of the new government owned human slaves. They used human beings for machinery, and, even after slavery was eliminated, because it was so embarrassing, they and their descendants continued to think of ordinary human beings as machines.
• • •
The sea pirates were white. The people who were already on the continent when the pirates arrived were copper-colored. When slavery was introduced onto the continent, the slaves were black.
Color was everything.
• • •
Here is how the pirates were able to take whatever they wanted from anybody else: they had the best boats in the world, and they were meaner than anybody else, and they had gunpowder… so the pirates could wreck the wiring or the bellows or the plumbing of a stubborn human being, even when he was far, far away.
The chief weapon of the sea pirates, however, was their capacity to astonish. Nobody else could believe, until it was much too late, how heartless and greedy they were. […]
White people are pure evilness, and LGBT people and Dews are pure goody goody. In the mean time from real life:
.
Mr. Pliable. Always a suspect character in Pilgrim’s Progress anyway
Look at those future architects, engineers and doctors studying hard for their respective degrees in AK-47 design and maintenance, along with bullet removal surgery.
Kurt was one of a kind.
This I fear is another false dichotomy issue. Windmills do produce electricity. This is an incontrovertible fact. How much construction maintenance and transmission costs is of course an issue with any kind of energy production. Coal and gas and oil and wood and water and nuclear all have construction maintenance and transmission costs, too.
And if a windmill blows up, it won’t irradiate you for all of eternity. Its operation doesn’t cause acid rain either.
Nota bene: I am not arguing with any of the premises of this article. I am only suggesting that perhaps it lacks a full, broad, comprehensive perspective.
Case in point: nobody ever, ever ever ever
talks about efficiency. Ever Ever Ever Ever.
Ever
Because that would bring in context and heaven forfend we bring in context.
You are right about efficiency but depends on who is tweaking the figures and ‘irradiate you for all of eternity’ I don’t think so, have you seen how nature has reclaimed chernobyl, and can you trust any information from ‘govt bodies’ et al ?
The animals and plants of Cernobyl lead shortened sickly lives. Nature fights back by increasing their procreation rate. And Belarus is full of sickly people full of problems with their internal organs. What, you’re defending nuclear radiation now?
“According to the official, internationally recognised death toll, just 31 people died as an immediate result of Chernobyl while the UN estimates that only 50 deaths can be directly attributed to the disaster“.
Are you blowing up a new invented problem?
You fucking idiot liar.
“In the spring of 1986, Chernobyl’s #4 reactor caught fire and exploded, sending a plume of radiation into the atmosphere.
The disaster forced more than 100,000 people from their homes. A 30-kilometre exclusion zone was created around the reactor leaving two large towns, as well as more than 100 villages and farms, empty.
But most of the radioactivity released from the reactor decayed rapidly. Within a month, only a few per cent of the initial contamination remained and after a year this dropped to less than 1 per cent.
‘ Long-term census data reveal abundant wildlife populations at Chernobyl
Long-term census data reveal abundant wildlife populations at Chernobyl – ScienceDirect ‘
How Chernobyl has become an unexpected haven for wildlife “
Yeah, so you quote some lying propaganda. Good copying and pasting. Your article is wrong. I can show you plenty of articles (although their authors struggle to get published because they don’t have the tons of money backing them that the propaganda shills trumpeting the wonders of radiation do). Only shills or idiots support nuclear power.
It is easy to check. Off course the few people who died and the few children who got cancer, and the isolated many people who had to be moved, was bad.
But it was not war.
“Children were most at risk, and cases did not seem to increase in adults.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_the_Chernobyl_disaster
“the rate of thyroid cancer in children in Belarus was normally less than 1 per million.
By 1995, nine years after the disaster, the number of cases of pediatric thyroid cancer in Gomel Oblast rose to 100 per million per year.”
Gomel Oblast has a population of 1,3 million hereof children 300000, saying 30 children more got thyroid cancer than before.
Tragic for the 30 more children.
But out of 1,3 million people you cant say 30 is a gigantic disaster for Belarus as a whole. h
Facts wont go away Aloysius!
Tim Watkins, on his website ‘Consciousness of Sheep’ has for years been writing in-depth articles on green energy and the UK economy. I suggest you have a look at some of his writing. https://consciousnessofsheep.co.uk/
Efficiency would suppose that all those resources used in constructing the wind turbines were actually generating enough electricity to justify all the expense to put one up. A quick look into just what it takes to construct one – lots of cement to anchor it into the ground or else it’s merely a giant ornamental fan; the amount of fossil fuel machinery to install the tower and blades as well as footing; then the maintenance on the thing which I can’t even begin to fathom; and then when its life cycle is over (20 to 30 years maybe) the disposal of all that material. They are not in any way an efficient use of any of the resources used to build them.
If there’s no wind, they produce nothing. If too much wind they produce nothing as they require a full shut down so as not to blow apart. Putting them out in the oceans is one of the more stupid ideas – imagine digging a footing for one of those in the ocean floor? Think no marine life is affected by that? And just what heavy machinery would be used to do it? They are a costly boondoggle, a nice profit center for the installers and those who claim to have the ability to “properly dispose of them.” And I’m not even getting to all the wildlife they kill or just what pollution they leave behind when they’re rotting away in some field, or God forbid perhaps dumped unceremoniously on the ocean floor. A truly ridiculous idea used for short term needs with NO consideration at all of the long term consequences. So, to add “context” hardly shocking in a world that glorifies such short term idiocy with no regard for massive long term costs.
None of this addresses my point.
Tell me about the production, maintenance and transmission costs of coal oil gas water and nuclear. And don’t forget the air pollution (forget global warming–remember lung cancer) and radiation.
You brought up wind specifically, so I made an attempt to address that. As for coal or nuclear plants, yes of course there are major construction costs, not to mention the time involved. And some of those will naturally require extensive maintenance. I was not making a case for nuclear or coal plants by simply criticizing the boondoggle of wind power, but I realize now in today’s binary world, any criticism of one “side” must mean total acceptance of the other.
There is NO magic bullet, there is NO completely “clean” energy on the planet – is that your point here? But what should we do then? Should we tell ourselves the lie that “green” energy is really clean? Should we not address the problems with any of the so called solutions put forth by the ownership class? Should we accept the utopian dreams we are told are NOT mere dreams but with enough faith can become reality, whether that is true or not?
And why do you need to rush to insult the minute anyone points out the finer points of any given argument? No, I don’t have figures to give you on the specifics of coal or nuclear plant builds, have you done any research on those that you can provide? I do know that big power plants, be they nuclear or coal, do take years to build but I don’t have cost figures handy on that, perhaps you do? Is your point that wind and solar are cheaper and faster to build out, and that makes them better and more efficient somehow?
I do however, know just enough at this point to see that any so called “clean energy” promoted endlessly by the ownership class is one more prime example of the willful ignorance of believing anything out of people who tell us they have our best interests in mind, when we have more than enough real world examples to show that for the lie it is.
Good. You are being reasonable. Very rare around here. Yes, there are plenty problems with Big Wind. I implied that in my first post. The worst problem being “Big.” Small windmills in every backyard, subsidized by the gov, with a bi-yearly maintenance contract, would be much much better. Farmer’s windmills have worked well at drawing water for centuries, and they can be easily retrofitted for electricity generation. Big Wind is just like Big Solar. An attempt to centralize something that will only work properly decentralized.
You have no numbers, no cost comparisons, no context. Fail.
the German site TKP publishes a lot of articles about the toxicity of those wind turbine coatings that constantly spew plumes of poisonous micro particles into the environment, according to the sources cited
definitely the cost of safely decommissioning these installations and disposing of the hazmat blades when end of life is reached will be a very significant factor in the supposed savings equation, if you accept that evidence
Now you’ve got to be kidding. Everybody in the world has Teflon coursing through their bloodstream and you moan about turbine coating?
No, gee, there aren’t any shills on this website. That would be impossible. Except your ilk pull every logical fallacy in the book.
There is no dangerous radiation now or “for all of eternity” in Chernobyl and not much in Fukushima either. The danger of radioactivity is hyped up so as to maintain the terror of nuclear annihilation.
Nuclear power is the only way to continue with the current technological civilisation without a major population growth halt.
I am all for going back to the stone age and riding horses but most people are still too addicted to blinking lights and the nonsense uttered by autistic morons like Gates and Musk, and require a massive catastrophe to wake up.
There is no dangerous radiation now or “for all of eternity” in Chernobyl and not much in Fukushima either. The danger of radioactivity is hyped up so as to maintain the terror of nuclear annihilation.
Nuclear power is the only way to continue with the current technological civilisation without a major population growth halt.
I am all for going back to the stone age and riding horses but most people are still too addicted to blinking lights and the nonsense uttered by “on the spectrum” types like Gates and Musk, and require a massive catastrophe to wake up.
There is no dangerous radiation now or “for all of eternity” in Chernobyl and not much in Fukushima either. The danger of radioactivity is hyped up so as to maintain the terror of nuclear annihilation.
Nuclear power is the only way to continue with the current technological civilisation without a major population growth halt.
Nuclear is the only way to continue with the current technological civilisation without a major population growth halt.
Nuc. power is the only way to continue with the current technological civilisation without a major population growth halt.
Nuclear power is the only way to continue with the current technological civilisation.
I am all for going back to the stone age and riding horses but most people are still too addicted to blinking lights and the nonsense uttered by “on the spectrum” types like Gates and Musk, and require a massive catastrophe to wake up.
N power is the only way to continue with the current technological civilisation.
I am all for going back to the stone age and riding horses but most people are still too addicted to blinking lights and the nonsense uttered by autistic morons like Gates and Musk, and require a massive catastrophe to wake up.
I tried my best to figure out the auto censor but must move onto more worthwhile things.
before I start getting personal!
Wind turbines are carbon credit printers, the cc industry is worth nearly a trillion dollars if you include derivatives, I doubt any of us are the beneficiary’s of any of that money. And remember, they were the first things that were put in place back in the 90s when they kick started the whole climate scam. Carbon credits are the new debt which will back the nwo economy.
Wind trade = financial speculation with as goal maximum personal profit.
A wind turbine is an uneconomic project and only sounds good on paper and far from home.
Warren Buffet says WindMills as large scale energy producer only became an issue due to Leftist Politicians romantic illusions on windmills, as there are NO economic benefit in them.
.
Wind energy is the most State substituted energy of them all! A true Commie idea like the Trabant car.
A hedge fund grifter, O’Shea,
Staked his claim that the turbines would pay,
“Trust me guys, it’s a banker”,
No it ain’t, you’re a wanker,
Full of wind ’til your dying day.
He should jump off an iceberg with Al Bore…
Gates says the climate crisis has been hyped:
https://www.gatesnotes.com/home/home-page-topic/reader/three-tough-truths-about-climate
He thinks vaccines are far more important.
For his agenda, its true
If they kill enough of us with the jabs, they won’t really need to bother with the climate change narrative.
Its a tough choice: Windmills or GMO Vaxxines.
Its easier to make money from lab virus and following vaccines. $$$ 🤑 .
If wind power has cut £104bn in energy costs, why have energy prices increased so much?
The answer to the question is an obvious NO.
Its rubbish alright – Britain has one of the highest cost in the world for energy to the public – Scotland is swimming in energy sources oil, gas, wind and water technologies yet Scots pay through the nose for energy – English governments sold off the rights to foreign energy firms – who sell it back to Britain at a much higher cost – as for windfarms when the turbines are not turning the government pays them to keep them off – and it pays them when the turbines produce too much electricity as well – its all nonsense that windfarms have saved Brits a fortune – all that’s happened is energy firms have made a fortune at our expense.
In Scotland there’s an English produced list of figures – that show Scotland is in too much debt to be a viable nations again, the figures are called the GERS Figures – 25 of the 26 figures are guesstimates – but the foreign media reports them as real, and the damage is done in the minds of the electorate – the same thing applies with the windfarm nonsense as you now know.
Consecutive English governments closed all the coal mines in Britain – for clean energy – which in most part is burning wood chips – which isn’t clean or environmental, cutting down millions of trees that produce clean air and stop soil erosion isn’t clean or viable – but hey there’s money to be made from appearing to be Green – also in Scotland their was a huge coal powered electricity producing power station called Longannet – it had to pay £50 million quid to to get its electricity on the national grid, whereas English power stations paid much less to access the grid – needless to say it had to close due to cost – but the colonial admin in Edinburgh blamed its closure on environmental claims – its all about making money and getting bungs – and the whores in the media will gladly report their lies if it keeps the status quo intact.
Another billion + barrels of oil have been discovered in the North sea – and the foreign oil/gas firms will make a killing from it at our expense – on the West coast of Scotland there’s billions more barrels of oil, but it can’t be accessed because English nuclear subs use the channel to reach Faslane in Scotland.
Energy coats in Britain are a rip off.
They have found TOO much oil and gas. Its simply too cheap. Our society would go bankrupt if everybody got cheap energy.
Therefore they use windmill energy because it is extremely costly, and therefore it save billions.
Sorry guys but we cant all drive around in high octane black limousines, and fly 1’st class.
“They have found TOO much oil and gas. Its simply too cheap.”
Really! there’s over one million people in Britain who are in energy debt – they can’t afford to pay for their energy, Britain has one of highest cost for energy in the world – many folk need to choose between heating and eating – and there’s even a group of folk now called the working poor – their wages are so low – that after they’ve paid some of their bills – they cannot afford to pay the rest – its a choice between groceries etc, or energy bills, many foods banks are now inundated – with folk looking for free food that they DON’T need to heat up.
I’m sorry but your above assumption is nonsense – on the ground figures and circumstances don’t match your claim.
I will not make a long report with due links. Only point out some obvious facts.
They do constantly find new big oli/gas reserves. There is always a lot of political reasons why they wont use them.
The old oil/gas reserves ’emptied’ are being filled up slowly again.
They say 1000 volcanoes break out under the big Seas every year, saying hot 2000C lava is floating out from the inside to the bottom of the seas.
They blew up the 2’nd gas pipeline from Russia to Europe when it was almost finished.
Wood stoves are being banned in North due to ‘contamination’ and ‘nature’ = competition.
The clima bs is a pure financial exercise on an office desk which have nothing to do with physical reality.
When China was squeezed price wise on the Internal market on oil/gas price, they opened 8 coal factories again.
This you can confirm in the news. That most International prices are being manipulated and squeezed because we are talking about mega quantities and mega values.
The fight about power, influence, dominance, money.
Where all these money goes I dont know. I think its a gigantic circus where only the bully wins.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Lula-field-could-turn-Brazil-into-an-oil-1685465.php
Yes, in this case the answer is the question
If you’ve got a commodity that everyone needs (i.e. you’ve got your customers by the balls and they’ve become accustomed to paying high prices for it) then if you find a cheaper source its just extra profit.
Utilities are de-factor monopolies and ought to be regulated as such. Instead we’re sold this canard of ‘choice’.
That sums the situation up perfectly Martin.
Socialise the losses.
Privatise the profits.
Capitalschism at work.
Maybe they would have increased even more. Do you people know anything at all about statistics?
But let’s forget your statistical ignorance. Let’s laugh at your ignorance of diction, syntax, and logic. It’s like you asked, “How many stars are in the sky?” and you answered, “The answer to the question is an obvious NO..” Now that is just plain stupid. Sorry, can’t sugar-coat it for you. You can’t even phrase your simple-minded comment coherently. Forget whether it reflects the truth or not. How can you tell if it reflects the truth if it makes no sense? The answer to this question is an obvious NO.