Wind farms do help

As rightly stated by Paul Smith and Joe Borg (December 5), the subject of wind energy (not to mention the entire subject of renewable energy) is not receiving enough attention in Malta. It was, therefore, unusual that four letters on this subject were published simultaneously in the correspondence columns of The Times.

Wind energy continues to flourish in other countries. Cumulative wind power capacity in the EU increased by 18 per cent in 2005 and EU wind energy installations have now surpassed the EC White Paper targets for 2010. The United States and India are also investing heavily in wind energy. Yet, Mark Duchamp, a fierce opponent of wind energy in Spain, continues trumpeting his opposition in our newspapers, calling wind energy a "scam" which produces only "useless and harmful energy" and raising the old argument that wind does not blow all the time.

Even if the wind is not constant, wind farms still save huge amounts of fossil fuel when the wind does blow, which is most of the time. It is common knowledge that wind power does not eliminate the need for back-up power generators, but it is utterly nonsensical to say, as Mr Duchamp does, that these generators need to be kept "spinning in reserve 24 hours a day, seven days a week". These generators are simply switched on when necessary.

Mr Borg seems also to have been exposed to adverse propaganda. He recalled reading that 600 wind turbines are necessary to provide the necessary power for 20,000 inhabitants. This is grossly incorrect. The output of 600 modern, medium to large wind turbines would theoretically meet more than twice Malta's total requirement. For instance, the projected annual output of a wind farm of just 12 turbines that was to be built on Marfa ridge was 55 gigawatt/hours. This would have been equivalent to about five per cent of Malta's electricity needs at the time. Of course, it is impossible to provide anywhere near 100 per cent of energy needs from wind power alone. Fifteen to 25 per cent (the output of three to five wind farms of 12 turbines) would be a realistic target. Wind power and photovoltaic electricity make a very good combination for Malta; these could cover a significant proportion of our needs.

As to installation costs, the usual arrangement is for private enterprise to set up a wind farm and sell the energy to the government. The price of electricity generated by land-based wind farms is decreasing steadily and is now poised to become cheaper than oil-generated electricity as oil prices increase and advances in wind turbine design allow turbines to operate at lower wind speeds, harnessing more of the wind's energy.

Offshore (sea-based) wind farms are much more expensive to install; electricity from these will also be expensive. As Mr Borg rightly says, Malta's misguided option of deep offshore wind farms will surely be too expensive and unsustainable. On the other hand, land-based wind farms are much cheaper and quite feasible in Malta; a wind farm of 12 turbines needs an area less than a square mile. About two thirds of Malta to the south and west is sparsely populated and there are a number of sites away from built-up areas that are high, exposed, virtually uninhabited and windswept, where wind farms can be built with relative impunity.

Sadly, the wind farm at Marfa proposed some years ago never materialised. Had this one wind farm been built, we would by now have had the answer whether land-based wind farms are sustainable and acceptable in Malta. As it is, we remain the only country in the EU which is fully dependent on fossil fuel.