---

Draft National Policy Statement for Fossil Fuel Electricity Generating Infrastructure (EN-2)

My Lords, on the face of it, the EN-3 document gives some comfort to those who feel that there is some danger that these applications will be steamrollered through by the IPC on the ground of national need. However, when dealing with onshore wind in particular, the paper begs the question. It seems to accept that the case for wind power on an enormous scale is proven, but it says nothing about the cost-effectiveness of wind. Paragraph 2.7.1 on page 56 says: ""Onshore wind farms are the most established, large-scale source of renewable energy in the UK. Onshore wind farms will continue to play an important role in meeting renewable energy targets"." The fact is that they cannot possibly fulfil that role. We have a target of 20 per cent of power from wind by 2020. As my noble friend Lord Reay has just demonstrated, the current output from wind power is risibly low and shows no sign of rising. If we are going to meet the EU-imposed target, we will need to build up to 10,000 onshore and offshore wind farms by 2020. That means building 2.5 to 3 wind turbines every day, and each turbine is up to 600 feet high. There is not the remotest chance of achieving that target. The 2008 report from the then DTI confirmed as much. The chief executive of the think tank Energywatch, referring to the target when it was 15 per cent, said: ""In my view, the UK 15 per cent, if that is confirmed, is absolutely unachievable in the timeframe"." The target is now 20 per cent. Absolutely unachievable has turned into absolutely impossible. The serious question of intermittency was rather skated over by the Minister in his opening remarks. I do not blame him: it was a short opening speech. I will not go into detail: the noble Lords, Lord Reay and Lord Jenkin, have dealt very well with the intermittency problem. I will add that because of intermittency, we need conventional coal, gas and oil-fired power stations covering for wind 100 per cent of the time. What one gets with wind is absolutely no reduction in emissions, while retaining the total cost of wind power. There is no advantage whatsoever. The effectiveness of wind generation is 20 per cent of its rated capacity: that seems to be the average. That is like buying a car that is supposed to go at 100 miles per hour, but when one has bought it one finds that it only goes at 27 miles per hour. One would feel that one had been had. The former chairman of Scottish Power, Sir Donald Miller, got it absolutely right when he said that, ""this massive concentration on wind must be about the worst energy investment yet devised either for its ineffectiveness or its cost/benefits for consumers"." I fear that the EU has locked us into the wrong energy policy with wind. The policy is set by bureaucrats and is completely unworkable.