> Unbelievable but true, I've discovered someone more stupid than Duhg
> employed in a supposedly responsible position as head of the British
> Wind Energy Association. Welcome Maria McCaffery to the fuckwit hall of
> fame for her assertion that:
>
> "We don't have to pay for wind power - it just comes to us naturally,"
>
> How can such an economic illiterate head up a large business? By the
> same argument, "We don't have to pay for nuclear power - it just comes
> to us naturally"
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/04/david_king_renewables_windy_mist
> ake/

> On 4 Sep, 15:23, %%ste...@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:

>> Unbelievable but true, I've discovered someone more stupid than Duhg
>> employed in a supposedly responsible position as head of the British
>> Wind Energy Association. Welcome Maria McCaffery to the fuckwit hall of
>> fame for her assertion that:
>>
>> "We don't have to pay for wind power - it just comes to us naturally,"
>>
>> How can such an economic illiterate head up a large business? By the
>> same argument, "We don't have to pay for nuclear power - it just comes
>> to us naturally"
>>
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/04/david_king_renewables_windy_mist
>> ake/

>
> I dunno, it's not that stupid. After all, the owners of nuclear, coal
> and gas power stations have to pay for the infrastructure and for the
> fuel on an ongoing basis (and of course owners of nuclear plants also ...

> Not really "free" ...... if you take power out of the wind with a great big
> FO turbine, then there is not so much power in the downwind side of things.
> Which changes the climate.

> In article ,
> "Ian" henden.co.uk> writes:

>> Not really "free" ...... if you take power out of the wind with a great
>> big
>> FO turbine, then there is not so much power in the downwind side of
>> things.
>> Which changes the climate.

>
> You get less wind, that's all. 11/27 of it, as an absolute minimum.