I RESPOND to Ishbel Askew's letter (Times, February 5). My enthusiasm is for scrapping my (and your) contribution to the profits of the wind farm industry by way of taxes and extra charges on our electricity bills. I am all for improvements in renewable energy technologies but that is not the point. I'm not saying global warming does not exist (nobody knows for sure, least of all a few 'experts'), but it is certainly not proven by the limited data we have to date, and we have had extreme weather periods over the millennia, without burning coal at all. The point is that billions of pounds of taxpayers' money is going into unjustified profits for big companies and showboats for politicians, not improving our future nor meaningfully reducing our reliance on fossil fuels. Whatever the rhetoric says, and whatever politicians commit to, it will be international market forces and multi-nationals that decide our future energy use. You ask me to consider what countries in Africa are going to do about fuels in the future: I can reply by asking you what countries like Asia (India) and China are going to do about global warming, if it exists? Nothing, of course, other than signing a few bits of paper. Currently India is planning over 400 coal-fired power stations and China over 350, partly funded by banks such as JP Morgan, RBS and Barclays. Anyway, back to Okehampton and wind turbines. Your statistics are confused and confusing — 25% and 50% 'capacity' isn't relevant I think, whatever you intended to convey? Wind turbines are at best about 25% energy efficient — on the best windy days, when it's blowing steadily. Calm or gales and they don't work at all well. RES's planned 18 megawatt Den Brook turbines would in truth produce less than five megawatts, and much of that during the night when it's generally not needed. How ridiculous is that? If anywhere they are better suited off-shore and funded totally by private money, which should happen when market forces dictate, so highly unlikely. In the meantime, the sooner we use up fossil fuel and the higher prices get (you agree I note) the 'better'? It may not be a popular forecast, but it is the realistic one. RES, the company (NOT) developing the wind farm at Spreyton, are nervously awaiting the outcome of the General Election and whether they are to be dispossessed of the deliciously huge subsidies drawn from all of our electricity bills, then they will decide whether they continue to erect their white elephants. They have been attempting to mislead for ten years without success. David is however onto their stratagem and getting ever closer to expurgating Goliath. Bob Rush Okehampton