One hundred and one conservative M.P.'s have called on the Prime Minister to slash the subsidies on windfarms-nothing surprising about that, nor is it surprising that they offer no alternatives to turbines. This is strange when there are apparently many. There is nuclear for instance, we are told it is 'perfectly safe' and will provide us with limitless energy and then there is shale gas extraction (also known as 'fracking') which will again we are told be of no consequence to the environment. Why don't the M.P.'s in question push for these forms of energy to be developed in their constituencies instead? They would never have to look at another turbine again...But could it be that when faced with a choice between fracking and/or nuclear and wind turbines their constituents would choose turbines every time? And if they are so concerned about 'useless and damaging subsidies' why aren't they campaigning to stop the EU giving common agricultural policy money to British farmers?
Comments