‘We’re not Nimbys but defenders of rural Wales’ says Bute Energy’s leading opponent
Martin Shipton
Opponents of a controversial company that plans to build a network of wind farms across Wales are not climate change-denying Nimbys but defenders of rural Wales and its economy, according to a leading campaigner.
Former BBC Radio 4 producer Jenny Chryss, who lives in Powys, dedicates much of her time to battling with Bute Energy, whose project she and colleagues in the Re-think group are trying their best to defeat.
Whether they succeed depends on the outcome of a series of planning applications, the first of which may be announced by the end of September.
Fait accompli
Asked what had galvanised opposition to Bute’s plans, Ms Chryss said: “I think people objected to the fact that it was a private company coming in from outside Wales with foreign investors – Copenhagen Infrastructure – and it was the attitude of Bute Energy.
“The implication was, right from the start, that we’re coming in to do this, not that we would humbly come in and hope that we could gather the concerted agreement of the population. The implication was that they were coming in and getting the plans passed was a fait accompli.
One of the first consultations was held during lambing. That enraged people almost more than anything. It was a complete lack of understanding of how this area works and how important agriculture and farming is. People are busy lambing – the sheep won’t say ‘well you pop off to the consultation and I’ll wait to give birth until you get back’.
“I’m not a farmer but I know from the farmers who live next door to us that once they’re lambing, they’re lambing – and it meant that people who would like to have been at the consultation meeting couldn’t be there. And the feeling was that it was done deliberately, because it was repeated this year as well.”
Asked to what extent opposition to the plans was founded on an objection to the way Bute had handled themselves and treated other stakeholders, and to what extent it was it a principled objection to having wind turbines and pylons, Ms Chryss said: “I don’t think it’s an objection to the principle of having wind turbines. I think everyone understands – and I can think of very few people that I know who would not understand – that somehow we need to move away from fossil fuels. But it was the way they came in. They turned up on people’s doorsteps.
“The community feels that they’ve ridden roughshod, and that’s been enhanced recently by the letters they’ve received from their agents relating to the power line and the pylons or wooden poles or whatever they are, and access to the land.
“The recipients of the letters felt they were threatening them with legal action way before they got the IDNO [Independent Distribution Network Operator’s] license, which they had absolutely no power at that time to use. This feeling that we’re just getting in the way of what they intend to do has developed rather than gone away – and the consultations have not helped – either the timing or the information that’s been given or the fact that very few senior people from Bute come to the consultations.
“I think people are worried for their businesses, they’re worried for the tourism industry, they’re worried about farming. There’s potentially division amongst families and between neighbors. People are very perturbed that Bute Energy wants to put 65 turbines to the east of Llandrindod Wells and Builth Wells and a 60-mile overhead power line to Carmarthenshire.
Ms Chryss said: “We are extremely worried about the precious landscape of Wales, but that’s not the only thing. I wouldn’t have a view of any of the wind farms close up – we would see them in the distance. I’m not worried about the view from my point of view. I’m very worried about how it will affect people who will have them literally 1,000 metres from their back fences – in some cases 500 metres from their back fences. And how they will look up and see these enormous turbines.
“They see themselves as basically a big human experiment. These are turbines the size of which have not yet been seen in the UK. There are bigger ones in planning or having received planning permission, but they haven’t yet been built so far as I know.”
Asked whether the objection to the turbines was essentially aesthetic, Ms Chryss said: “In part, but very much only in part. Nobody knows how these turbines are going to affect people living near them – the noise, the shadow flicker.
“It’s going to be very different when you think that some of them are going to be exactly twice the size of the turbines at Hendy Wind Farm [in Radnor Forest, which isn’t functioning]. Hendy is known as the most notorious wind farm in the UK, because it has never turned because it doesn’t have a connection to the grid. People look at 110 metre Hendy turbines and the realisation is that some of these turbines are going to be double the height, and most of them are going to be over 200 metres tall.
So when you look at the Gherkin in London or the BT Tower, they’re going to be 20 metres or more higher than those. And there will be 31 of these in the first development of Radnor Forest alone 31 of these, according to Bute. It’s not a small wind farm – it’s an enormous development.. And when you add on the other 34 that would make up Bryn Gilwern and Aberedw Energy Parks – 16 and 18 respectively – you’ve got 65 turbines, mostly over 200 metres, towering over the communities of East Radnorshire. And I think you can understand why an awful lot of people are very unhappy about that.
“There are obviously a number of farmers and landowners who are going to have a turbine on their land, and that means there are financial implications for them and they sign non-disclosure agreements. But it’s not always the people whose land it’s on who are going to be most affected by the overbearingness of the turbines. You’ve got to remember that in their planning consultation documents for Radnor Forest, there are about 60 residential properties which will have a high visual amenity impact from the turbines. So this isn’t just a few people saying, ‘it’s going to affect me and I’m not going to like it’. This is an admission that it is going to be a problem.
“There’s case law that refers to where it becomes overbearing to a point where it’s not a good place to live any more. Bute says none of those reach that threshold. It’s not for me to decide whether they do or not – I don’t live there and I’m not a planning inspector. There are a number of people worried about how turbines of that size will behave in terms of shadow flicker and the noise from them.So there are huge concerns just from people who live near them.
“But then of course it extends to people who live near them but also live near the proposed power line and the concern for the tourism industry because there’s no getting away from the fact that our area of Wales relies very heavily on tourism. I would say that everybody who comes to mid Wales comes for the outdoor enjoyment. You don’t come to mid Wales to sit indoors; you come not just to look at the countryside but to cycle in the hills.
“I live in mid Wales and we have cyclists cycling along paths, looking at the views. People come for all sorts of things – horse riding, walking. It’s big business and the people stay here normally because they’ve come from areas elsewhere. They’re going to camp and stay in B&Bs and hotels. They’re going to stay here, they’re going to eat here, they’re going to buy their food here, and there is serious concern about the effect this is going to have. It’s not just the turbines. It’s the pylons as well. Somebody was heard to say at one of the meetings, with feeling, ‘who’s going to sit in my field under a pylon on my campsite and eat their sandwich lunch’.”
Nimby
Ms Chryss rejects utterly the designation “Nimby” [not in my back yard] to describe Bute’s opponents.
She said: “The fear is that this could devastate the rural economy. There was research from the LSE [London School of Economics] recently which showed the likelihood that living near to pylons and also turbines will affect your house price. And there is serious concern about property values and local estate agents have already been to value some properties and there is a reduction. So absolutely it’s not just about landscape.It’s a very cheap thing to say, ‘they don’t want their view spoiled’. There’s so much more to it than that.
“I’m a former chair of a wildlife trust and the ecological side of things is a great worry to me as well. I know that the human cost of this has to come first – I completely appreciate that. The reason I’ve got so involved and basically have put everything aside like others on the team have to is because I can see what it’s doing to local communities already.
“People sometimes say the fear is worse than the reality. I’ve no idea whether that’s going to be the case because none of us actually know what the reality is going to be. But people are very afraid. People have been to the doctors, people are depressed, people are in tears because it’s a really big deal for the area and the fact that it’s made so much worse by the attitude of Bute and its agents, and by not knowing and getting different versions from different people.
“[Bute Energy] managing director Stuart George made the point very strongly in your recent interview with him that these project sites would not be sold on once planning permission had been achieved. That’s not what his staff are telling people at the consultations. They’ve been told that they will be sold on – or at least some of them will. Community councillors have been told that at least some of them will be sold on. Copenhagen Infrastructure, their funders, have got a call option at the point of start of construction. That means that if they want to buy the sites they can do so.
“It’s very hard when you’re hearing two different versions. Whether they’re sold or not is extremely important for local people. Better the devil you know. I suppose at least they see that this is a company that has begun to realise what the local area is about – or we hope they have. But if they were to sell on to somebody else, to yet another organisation, that we’d need to deal with, to get to know. The community benefits are a huge conundrum, and would be made even worse because how would you be sure that the people who bought the sites would honour the community benefits. And that’s a really important point.
“I’ve found it, and I know other people have found it, absolutely extraordinary that Bute thinks that they have the wherewithal, the authority, the knowledge of the area to come in and prescribe five headings under which the community benefits [paid by developers to communities] are going to be distributed. How dare they? Who knows the area? Where have they come from? They’ve come from Scotland. OK, some of the staff are now from Wales, I fully concede.
“But Bute Energy is a Scottish company – and they come here and tell us under what headings we should spend our community benefits and how they will allocate them! But if Bute are no longer involved and have gone back to London to run another property development organisation or whatever they’re going to do … It’s bad enough dealing with Bute, but imagine some purchaser of the sites coming along and doing it instead. It’s just adding to the unknown and the uncertainty – and the feeling that Bute doesn’t give a monkey’s about the people of Radnorshire.
“I know Stuart George made a big thing in his interview about how we need to work more closely with the communities and we’re being very open and engaging. That’s not how the communities see how they’re operating.”
Private sector company
For Jenny Chryss, the fact that Bute Energy is a private sector company whose purpose is to make money for its shareholders is a hugely negative consideration: “It’s a lot worse that this is a private company,” she said. “The power they hope to generate is not for Wales. It’s for the grid. It’s going round the UK.
“There’s nothing in it for Wales. People around the UK won’t say: ‘Ooh, that’s Bute Energy’s electricity’, will they? It will just add to the grid. If they do this, it would be sent down to the grid on a power line used not by National Grid or Western Power or whatever it’s now called, but by Bute Energy, for the profits of Bute Energy. So you can understand this is gradually building into something which people see as the same sort of ‘rape’ of our area that was the Elan Valley, water to Liverpool and water to Birmingham. And people are talking about this in the same light. They feel a private company has come in to take what it can.
“Why couldn’t the Welsh Government get involved in a joint venture to see the wind farms are built in the best ways for the community? There are all sorts of ways the Welsh Government could have worked it so there was more gain for Wales. They’ve really sold our area, and other parts of Wales too, down the river.
“The fact that Bute Energy and [the firm’s owner)Oliver Millican would walk away with millions if these energy parks get built sticks in the craw when people feel in danger of losing their livelihoods and not benefitting from anything and seeing the power from proposed wind farms passing down the grid into Carmarthenshire to go off whizzing round Britain.”
Sustainable
Ms Chryss suggests that Bute’s claim to be a sustainable developer is on shaky ground when the foundations of its proposed wind farms are taken into consideration. She said: “When you think that the foundations of the turbines in Radnor Forest each have 25 metres in diameter roughly and would have something like 2,500 tonnes of concrete. What you see above is one thing. What goes below is something else. In total there are going to be 141,000 tonnes of concrete put in Radnor Forest, 16 miles of roadways, hardstanding for cranes by every turbine.
“To me it goes against the argument that it’s a green project because you replicate that in every other energy park that’s developed. There’s going to be something like 408,000 tonnes of construction material, including that concrete. They’re going to dig deep quarries for the stone, they’re going to bring in sand. The carbon that’s going to be used in all this, they say in their blurb for this wind farm that the turbines will recoup the carbon in 1.4 years. I’m not an expert, but I would find that very hard to believe.
“I’d like to know what they’ve included – they talk about the ‘construction of’. Do they mean the ‘manufacture of’? Do they mean the bringing from wherever the turbines are coming? The blades are obviously coming from abroad because they’re going to be brought to a port, currently. They haven’t decided which port yet. There’s so much that isn’t green about these developments. You sit at the end and you look at turbines up on a hill and they look quite pretty. But there’s a lot going on underneath them. And when they’re decommissioned, the concrete doesn’t get taken out of the ground.The top bit does, and then they just leave the rest of it. That concrete will never leave the ground.”
Onshore wind
Ms Chryss insists that she isn’t opposed to onshore wind in principle: “I keep going back to this – with the Bute plans it’s the scale. And I think they’ve made a huge mistake by creating 16 energy companies and putting them in Companies House within the words ‘energy park’ at the end of them. If they’d done one and then set up another one, I think they’d have got away with more. I’m only saying that because it really shocked me when I saw 16 energy parks proposed.
“In terms of onshore wind, we already have some. We could have more in terms of smaller developments that are built nearer to communities. They might be private ones, they might be public ones, they might be community ones – but if they were built nearer to the communities that actually benefitted from them and could then be ones that actually had at least a share of money achieved from selling them, which would be vastly more that a few grand per MW installed of the community benefits and actually had an interest in these turbines turning and producing electricity. It just doesn’t feel well planned – it feels ‘oh we’ve got to be seen protecting the planet’ Good. ‘ This company from Scotland looks pretty good – let’s sign them up.’ And once they’re with them, they can’t get out of them, really. The relationship is formed.
“What would be an absolute tragedy is if we built these huge turbines, 17 square miles of turbines in Radnorshire, and then it was found that there were other ways of doing it.
“We are absolutely not climate change deniers and we distance ourselves entirely from anybody who is. In terms of the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act, you could look at it both ways. I’m sure that supporters of big developments and Bute Energy would say they’re working for the wellbeing of future generations because they’re providing clean, green renewable energy. We would say you’re industrialising an area and destroying habitats and wildlife that future generations won’t be able to enjoy – and possibly also businesses that future generations won’t be able to work in. It’s a two way thing.
Angered
Ms Chryss and other members of the Re-think committee were angered by a letter sent out by Mr George to candidates during the general election campaign that suggested the group had been inciting people to be verbally abusive to Bute staff members, and obtained personal data relating to staff members’ bank accounts.
Mr George also stated that a staff member’s car had been tampered with in a way that could have caused a serious accident. Ms Chryss said: “It completely gobsmacked us. We couldn’t believe it when we saw it. We thought, what on earth is he talking about? When I first saw the letter I laughed and thought this has to be a joke. Does he not know who we are? Eco-terrorists we are not. I was flabbergasted and so was my team. Of course it goes without saying that we refute everything contained in the letter. He says ‘the group Re-think.’ I think he’s maybe misunderstood what the group is.
“The group Re-think is seven people sitting on a committee. We don’t have members – we have supporters but they’re not related to Re-think in any way whatsoever. I think you have to be very careful when you’re making allegations about seven people. And I don’t think he realised probably that he was making allegations against seven people. I think he probably thought there was a wider group.”
Ms Chryss dismisses as ridiculous the idea that as someone who has moved to Wales from England she is in the same category as Bute directors who have established a business in Wales while still living in Scotland. She said: “We have a lot of Welsh people amongst our supporters and nobody has ever said ‘well you’re not Welsh.’ We live in Wales, we pay our taxes in Wales.
“I’ve lived in Wales nearly 13 years, so I was here long before Bute turned up. I haven’t come intending to make a big profit. I’ve expressed concern that the profits made by Bute will be large, and they’ll be taken out of Wales. But we’re all doing this for nothing. A lot of the time we don’t even claim expenses. I think that is a huge difference.
“We’re not planning to ‘do to’ the environment, the landscape, the ecology and the people and communities of this area. We’re trying to stop this particular organisation doing what they’re particularly planning and ensuring that things are done in a better and more acceptable way for the communities of the area. We’re basically a group set up by the community for the community.”
Support our Nation today
For the price of a cup of coffee a month you can help us create an independent, not-for-profit, national news service for the people of Wales, by the people of Wales.
A letter today’s Western Mail The Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales is in principle very supportive of offshore wind farms, and the recent announcements about the Celtic Sea provide a perfect illustration why. The community of Llandyfaelog has been selected for a new substation, near the transmission lines, to connect new sources of generation. A single wind farm in the Celtic Sea, so far offshore it cannot be seen, will connect here, the power coming by subsea and buried cables, and not a single new pylon is required. The multiple mid Wales wind farms proposed by Bute Energy… Read more »
In the 90s approx 72 wind turbines were installed along the North of Ynys Mon (Anglesey). 1 within 500m of my home at the time. It didn’t cause a noise nusiance. It didn’t affect my house price (which was affordable at the time (1st time buyer)and is now ridiculously expensive and unaffordable for young local people. It didn’t affect tourism. It didn’t spoil the landscape but actually enhanced and became part of it. It didn’t affect the sheep or the cows. Farmers got £££ I didn’t grumble and although of no personal benefit to me I am happy that all… Read more »
bore da, what size are the existing turbines you refer to?
We have wind turbines in Brechfa of 145m. The newly proposed turbine are 230m. These will be taller than many of the hills they stand on and will be seen for 19 miles. These structures will be amongst the largest man-made structures in the UK if they go ahead. One Canada Square, in London, is the 4th tallest building in the UK, at 235m. This is totally out of keeping with the hills and valleys of Wales. How can it not effect tourism? And there is no legal requirement for turbines to be 500m away from a property, they could… Read more »
Well said, a voice of reason utilising historical facts and figures! Wind turbines are not some tourist killing, property prices crashing monsters.
Local jobs?
RWE’s flagship Clocaenog Forest Wind Farm has no full time staff. That’s confirmed by RWE. Don’t fall for that line!
“We are not NIMBYs” say NIMBYs
“We are defenders of rural Wales. Specifically and exclusively that part of Rural Wales that is. Visible from our houses and might affect our house prices. Nowhere else. Adore us as the heroes we are … pretending to be to elicit sympathy”
Offshore wind should, of course, be utilised where economically viable. But you fail to mention offshore is far more expensive to make, more expensive to maintain, requires more construction to get the power onshore, and potentially has a shorter lifespan due to the much more corrosive weather found offshore. Climate change – thanks to Cameron effectively banning onshore wind, because his MP’s constituencies fell inside inside these schemes – needs urgent investment now. Onshore schemes can be built very quickly compared to offshore, and produce cheaper power than offshore ever will. Nimby’s have already pushed the UK’s green energy plans… Read more »
“…if that means higher energy prices for everybody,…” We are all paying for the higher cost of green energy through our energy bills, and we can expect to pay more and more in the future. One of the reasons there were no bidders for the recent auction of marine energy rights, is that without huge government subsidy, as well as the subsidy we all pay in our energy bills, they are simply uneconomic to run. The upkeep bills have turned out to be much higher than predicted. Then there is the outrageous matter of how we pay as much for… Read more »
Once again but this time the other side of the ‘funny yellow metal’ legend with a new Caesar’s head but the same old name on the coin…how did they come by the name?
It seems to have slipped by those who are paid to think in four dimensions…or at least smell a fox when it is after the chickens…
But have a closer look at the relationships between Bute and the ‘Bay Area’ they are murky to say the least…like the previous FM and Nuclear…
Economic marriages between movers and shakers need the covers pulling off…
Gove and the Mail…Ed Balls…between the sheets there are no secrets…or plots that can’t be hatched then add in many family members in strategic positions and there is a conspiracy…that’s my theory…
It’s a conspiracy theory!
I must take a drive down the Meifod Valley, I haven’t been that way for years, still as beautiful I trust…
Anyone who says they are not a NIMBY, is by definition a NIMBY
The business rates from wind farms could be passed directly to local households as ctax rebate to serve as an energy discount.
The Bute family have made a fortune out of Wales’ resources for decades. Why don’t they go back to Scotland and develop there instead!! These outside developers come here and take take take. This practice must stop now! Any future developments must benefit Wales only.
Right on! Well said, well explained. All these points have been made in various ways with Bute Energy, Green Gen and other developers in the ‘consultations’. And yet still they repeat the mantras ‘it will not effect tourism’, ‘it will not devalue the value of your property’, ‘it will not impact wildlife’, ‘we are listening’. And the Development of National Significance (DNS) status means that one person in the Senedd decides whether or not each proposal goes ahead, and these development companies have worked very, very hard to get as many politicians in their pocket as possible. This industrialisation of… Read more »
Cofiwch Dryweryn? recollections fade when financial incentives are high enough and the regard for individuals and their communities correspondingly low enough.
I do hope that the serious allegations made against members of this group have been referred to the Police so that they can be properly investigated?
Copenhagen Infrastructure Investment are investment vehicles for other investors, in the background you know nothing about.
I came across an article last year on Helle Thorning-Schmidt, Mrs Kinnock as is, who is an Independent Director of Vestas a Wind Turbine company in Denmark who in 2020 acquired a minority stake of 25% in Copenhagen Infrastructure, another link to Labour in Wales.
https://www.vestas.com/en/investor/corporate-governance/board-of-directors
An excellent article, the points made are valid and a true reflection of how many residents of Mid Wales feel. If people choose to call us Nimbys then that applies to a wide cross section of the Mid Wales population. We recognise the need for other forms of energy but we do not believe in the destruction and industrialization of Mid Wales to the detriment of the wild beauty of these hills and to many businesses, and individual lives.
This is a terrible article! Where’s the balance? Just quoting one side of the argument en bloc, with practically no balancing argument, is not journalism, it’s more like listening to somebody in the pub ranting after having a drink too many!! The irony of an Englishwoman, having moved to Wales, to them make a big deal out of a non-Welsh company looking to build wind turbines! If Wales restricted investment to only Welsh owned companies, the Welsh economy would collapse. That argument isn’t far from also only allowing Welsh born people to live in Wales! That sounds ridiculous because it… Read more »
It isn’t just the fact of seeing turbines marching across our mountains but the actual siting of them. They require fuel to power the turbines: the blades have a life of only 25 years and at present there is no way of recycling them: they require ten thousand tonnes of concrete as the base ,poured into precious ecosystems, to support the turbines. In some places of Wales the concrete is to be sunk into peat borland. It may look like empty landscape but holds thousands of litres of rain water that is gently released into our rivers, thereby helping to… Read more »
A very truthful article and remember the gearing in these monsters requires Oil
“for the benefit of Wales”!!!?? The only ones to benefit will be a few farmers and a energy companies.
Nimby is an accusation thrown at those by others living distant from a particular planning eyesore . When something awful is proposed in their backyard they suddenly become involved and campaign against said eyesore . The word is hypocrisy ? Wind turbines are a dubious source of energy anyway. But at least offshore they are less intrusive and environmentally visually less damaging. One can guarantee though that none will be built on the beautiful landscape ( high up and suitable) surrounding Chequers or near the second homes owned by the political elite.
We need to move to a net zero energy system but it cannot be morally right that lives, livelihoods and biodiversity can be needlessly trashed because of incoherent energy policy which politicians refuse to address. Perhaps those who accuse local residents of being NIMBYs should campaign for better policy, or failing that, would they like to put their money where their mouth is and buy out a home or business likely to be significantly affected?
Excellent article, really must emphasize how the turbines and associated infrastructure will cause the ruination of the glorious Welsh uplands, some of the most stunning countryside in Great Britain. The Welsh government promote tourism and encourage people to come to Wales but at the same time will consider allowing the very scenery that they promote to be industrialised with turbines, roads and quarries.
The wind farm at Llyn Brenig, 16 turbines, 82 Metre diameter, each 2.3 MW nominal capacity, does not appear to have affected visitor numbers to the Llyn Brenig visitor centre 120K, .
The turbines now being proposed are 230m high and are 6.5MW. This will make them the 4th highest man-made structure in the UK. The scale is ludicrous, not to mention the environmental impact. 2500 tons of concrete in a 25m diameter Bbase. How will they transport the blades, 70m each, on the local roads?
The Emley Moor concrete transmitter is 329 metres and is now grade 2 listed, so views can obviously change over time.I am not suggesting that this is necessarily the right place but the suggestion that it will put off tourists is unlikely.
Ww dont need ugly, noisy wind farm killing machines. They are a blight on the landscape and only work when its windy.
Tidal energy is a far better option. The tide comes in twice a day every day. Both reliable and less intrusive
Tidal should very much be part of the mix going forward but currently is very expensive. The small schemes that made it through the latest auction had the highest electricty prices but because of the potential they are being supported which will hopefully reduce prices going forward.
Tidal lagoons also need to be in the mix.
I do find it slightly ironic that this lady worked for the BBC, a media giant whose industry gobbles up electricity by the megawatt and which after WWII (the second little disagreement) planted numerous massive transmitters all over the UK, Wenvoe, Preseli, Moel-y-Parc, LLanddona, Blaenplwylf plus many others. The march of technology may mean TV via your fibre/telephone line and the dismantling of those eyesores or are we just used to them? That aside it seems daft to complain about the towers not being “green” as they have concrete foundations and require hardstanding for cranes when even offshore wind uses… Read more »
Wind energy developers have been honing their tactics globally for many years. These include trespass, manipulating data and attempts to discredit opponents – such as the term NIMBY. Accusations of vehicle tampering is new low for them in the UK but not uncommon elsewhere. They are desperate to peddle their snake oil and prevent the informed public that is their greatest enemy. Wind energy is inefficient, unreliable and dangerous. What’s more, even at the vast scale proposed for US offshore, it’s described as having ‘an insignificant impact on climate change’ by the US Environment Agency in their EIA for Ocean… Read more »
Turbines are far better than living in an area which had ironworks, steelworks, opencasts and forests for timber.
Turbines may not be beautiful to look at but I’d rather those than a dirty industry.
Alun you are gullible. The advocates of unreliable erratic wind turbines believe in the fantasy that wind energy will power what’s left of our industry which includes the ‘dirty’ end.
I’m sad to read on Nation.Cymru your article, with Jenny Chrys and Martin Shipton, which was a classic example of only expressing Nimbyism. None of it touched upon just how useless erratic Wind Turbines really are. See FACTS below :- Save Wales as a nation from Bute Energy. Save the Local Government Workers Pension Fund. What we all know but Politicians are generally frightened to say as below *********************************************************** Wind Turbines – what we know and can be proven and most people ignore a lot of the information below was gleaned using Freedom of Information Questions to Government in Cardiff and Westminster e.g.… Read more »