I WRITE in response to your front-page article (June 9, 'Turbine bid in spotlight').
How sad that someone is happy to litter our beautiful, unspoilt countryside with giant rotating eleven-storey buildings, one of them approximately a mile from Dartmoor National Park and the other even closer at approximately 800 metres.
In no other production of energy do we say 'farm', whether it be gas, coal or nuclear, we refer to the production as stations, factories and plants. Basically, we are allowing the installation of huge stations, factories or plants that are totally not in keeping with our beautiful landscape to blight our countryside and our lives and well being so the government can meet unrealistic targets.
Would landowners be as willing to have these giants on their land if they had to pay for their construction and weren't receiving the land rent each year I wonder.
Maybe the government should stop offering 'bribes' to local communities and farmers and follow in the footsteps of Holland, which has recently become the first country in Europe to abandon its EU renewable energy targets.
The Danes with more turbines per head have the highest electricity prices in Europe and still have to import much of their energy, in Spain there is a national disaster, in Germany they've built so many they are now building new coal-fired stations like crazy, in Scotland they paid six farms £900,000 to turn off their turbines for one night, oh and Scottish Power are now increasing their prices!
Why are there government subsidies and other payments for these turbines if they work as efficiently as they claim? What other industry gets a public subsidy anywhere from 100% up to 200% on the value of what it produces?
All this, and I haven't got to the affect on property prices, tourism, health, birds and bats. Let's hope our leaders refuse these applications.
Joanne Stone
Bowerland
Okehampton