Ed Miliband: Wind Power is Worse Than We Thought So We Need to Subsidise Even More of It

From THE DAILY SCEPTIC

by Chris Morrison

At first sight the news that the British Government is reducing forecasts for the amount of energy produced by wind turbines is another nail in the coffin of Net Zero. The Telegraph reports that as a result of “updated modelling” the predicted efficiency of wind turbines is being reduced by more than a quarter. The sceptical might observe a political game being played ahead of the latest annual round of subsidy handouts for future renewable projects. Andrew Montford of Net Zero Watch describes it as “unbelievably deceptive”. The game is one of bumping up the enormous subsidies needed to achieve the Government’s clean power capacity ambitions by 2030 while leaving it to fellow zealots in the media to explain away the future eye-watering electricity costs. Expect therefore organised climate fearmongering to be ramped up, and the large Parliamentary majority currently enjoyed for the next four years by the Labour Government to be utilised to ensure there is no turning back from the Net Zero fantasy.

How can such a plan possibly fail when you have trusted messengers still claiming wind is nine times cheaper than gas? All hope is surely not lost when Fiona Harvey of the Guardian can write a recent story headlined: ‘Wind power has cut £104 billion from UK energy costs since 2010, study finds.’ It might not be a complete surprise that this veteran Guardian headbanger is reporting on statistical modelling from UCL, an academic institution that hardly covered itself in mathematical glory during the Covid pandemic.

In the real world, of course, the further dismal downplaying of wind power is a nail in the Net Zero coffin. It means much higher electricity bills for UK consumers, further deindustrialisation and loss of currently well-paid jobs, increasing likelihood of blackouts and runaway public finances. Nine times cheaper than gas was a Green Blob-funded Carbon Brief hilarity, so how we laughed when a group of top British energy executives told a recent Parliamentary committee that future electricity prices in Britain would not fall even if the price of gas fell to zero.

Chris Norbury, CEO of E.ON UK, laid it on the line for often deluded Parliamentarians. “If I look at the non-commodity costs – policy costs, network costs – then certainly some of the modelling that we have suggests that you could get to a position by 2030 where if the wholesale price was zero, bills would still be the same as they are today because of the increase in those non-commodity costs.” Simone Rossi, Director of Economics at Octopus Energy, highlighted a lack of budgetary control over policy-driven expenses, an obvious reference to £15 billion of renewable subsidies and expenses loaded straight onto UK electricity bills every year without legislative oversight.

By 2030, the hated gas turbines will be running down with no immediate prospect of replacement, while nuclear will also be in short supply until the opening of Sizewell C. Do Edward Miliband and his band of weird wonks at the Energy Department care? Probably not – if your ultimate political aim is command-and-control of the heights of the economy, what are a few blackouts when an elite-ordered socialist nirvana is the ultimate prize? Is it not time to stop routinely calling him ‘Mad’ Miliband, a dismissive insult from his enemies he probably enjoys and even promotes, and start treating his sinister plot with the serious attention it deserves?

Needless to say, the news that energy from wind turbines is nothing like as powerful and plentiful as originally though has been known for some time. In March 2023, the Daily Sceptic reported on a paper published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) noting that “wind power fails on every count”. Even at the time it was charged that governments are ignoring “overwhelming evidence” of the inadequacies of wind power “and resorting to bluster rather than reasoned analysis”.

Written by Oxford University mathematician and physicist Professor Wade Allison – who is also a researcher at CERN and Fellow of Keble College – the short paper concentrates on working out the sums behind natural fluctuations in wind speed. At 20 mph, calculated Professor Allison, the power produced by a wind turbine was 600 watts per square metre at full efficiency. If only the wind stayed at 20 mph all day and night, power generation would be a lot easier. Alas it does not: if the wind speed drops by half, the power available drops by a factor of eight. Conversely, and almost worse, notes Allison, if the wind speed doubles, the power delivered goes up eight times, and the turbines have to be turned off for their own protection.

Want to know why the Miliband zealots are going hell for leather to connect as much wind capacity as they can at whatever price is necessary? Consider the graph below, published in the GWPF paper.

The brown dashed line shows the installed nominated generating capacity in the EU and UK in 2021. This was 236 GW but the highest daily output was only 103 GW, recorded on March 26th. Most other days it was substantially lower.

Professor Allison was doing the sums a couple of years ago and they are the same today since they were based on physics and freely-available information. “Whichever way you look at it, wind power is inadequate. It is intermittent and unreliable; it is exposed and vulnerable; it is weak with a short life-span,” he concludes.

Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor. Follow him on X.

5 18 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

44 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
October 31, 2025 10:17 pm

Can’t fix stupid, or? sarc

October 31, 2025 10:19 pm

But wind power is free. Just ask Nick. Nick…..?

SxyxS
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
November 1, 2025 2:31 am

It is the free energy scam of the 21st century.

And just as with co2,history has proven for a very long time that it can’t do what they claim it can
as windmills have been around for hundreds of years and they’d have entered the energymarket and established themselves throughout the last century on a large scale way before the AGW scam started and without any outside help as part of a natural economic and scientific process in a market with high energy demand.

The fact that no nerd or engineer ever succeeded to become the windmill Gates /Musk is because they are not competitive.
That’s also why Milibrain and all the other green energy pushers have to ask for more and more money.
That’s why green energy companies have even higher failure rates than hippy communities.

ethical voter
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
November 1, 2025 4:22 pm

Actually, wind is as free as coal, oil and gas. Its the stuff you have to add to make it useful that costs.

1saveenergy
October 31, 2025 11:39 pm

Yesterday (Oct 31st) across the UK & Europe, it was typical autumn weather with winds between 20 & 45mph.
How much wind was in Europe’s electricity ? just 17.4% of demand.
https://windeurope.org/about-wind/daily-wind/
In mid-winter, we often get 10-15-day periods of blocking high pressure (no wind).

Reply to  1saveenergy
November 1, 2025 1:04 am

I would really like to know exactly how this 17.4% is calculated. And perhaps another parameter would be interesting, namely what percent of total capacity is wind, compared to what percentage of demand wind delivers. And what are the trends.

CampsieFellow
Reply to  1saveenergy
November 1, 2025 4:11 am

But there’s no need to worry. There’s plenty of sunshine in the winter, especially during the long dark nights.

Robertvd
Reply to  1saveenergy
November 1, 2025 4:47 am

But we also have Solar to plug that gape in winter.

1saveenergy
Reply to  Robertvd
November 1, 2025 1:43 pm

In winter, you could always clamp sun beds onto the solar panels to operate some big fans that’ll power Ed Milliwatt’s wind turbines …a green circular economy !! (:-))

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  1saveenergy
November 1, 2025 5:15 pm

AKA a circle-jerk.

Phillip Bratby
November 1, 2025 12:53 am

Wade Allison has also condemned the use of dangerous Li-ion batteries (BESS) for energy storage. The UK is now in a very parlous state thanks to Red Ed’s policy since he gave us the Climate Change Act in 2008.

Reply to  Phillip Bratby
November 1, 2025 1:38 am

Its not so much parlous, its looking like an inevitable disaster. Nationwide blackouts by 2030 are probably unavoidable at this point, barring a U-turn. And its not clear that even a U-turn will avoid them, given the current 8 year lead time for new gas turbine plant. There are no replacements as the existing stock of gas turbines reach end of life.

Right now peak UK demand is about 47GW. Peak demand in 2030 is supposed to be supplied by 90GW wind and 45GW solar. By then peak demand will have risen north of 60GW – AI, heat pumps and EVs.

In December and January there is almost no power from solar in UK latitudes, and what there is does not coincide with peak demand. There will inevitably be in one of the coming years a January calm, when for a week or ten days the 90GW of wind will produce under 9GW.

There are no plans for enough battery or other storage to get through such a calm. And after the inevitable nationwide blackout, restarting without spinning reserve while dependent on intermittent wind is going to be problematic.

There is no way through this. All the other stuff people keep talking about is irrelevant – is there a Climate Crisis? Who cares? Whether there is or not, this is not going to work.

The more or less inevitable future will also not only have blackouts, it will have to sharply reduce demand. Steps are already being taken – the latest is to move everyone to half hour pricing with smart meters so that when the wind drops the price can be hiked at a half hour’s notice. If you cannot manage supply you have to manage demand. Won’t work of course. You are making dinner for the family and warming up the house and the high cost alarm goes off. What do you do? Turn the oven off and hand out duvets? What about charging the car? As for a week long power outage in January, I don’t think Miliband and acolytes have the slightest idea what this will mean. Do they even realize that gas boilers require electricity to work? That gas station pumps are electric? That mobile towers need power to work? That supermarkets have electrically powered freezers and cooled shelves? Streetlights, cash machines, hospitals, schools?

Its collective madness. People here, desperate to understand what is driving it, often propose that its some kind of Marxist or socialist agenda. It cannot even be that – closing down electricity is not a way of bringing about socialism, anyone can see that. Its a mass delusion. Its a new chapter in the long book of delusions of a political class. Its not going to be pretty, and the search for the guilty once the disaster gets under way will not be pretty either.

CampsieFellow
Reply to  michel
November 1, 2025 4:18 am

Yes, the climate alarmists keep on trying to worry us about heat waves, floods, wildfires, etc, etc but the policies they are forcing on us will inflict far more damage than anything a few floods or heatwaves could inflict.

Robertvd
Reply to  michel
November 1, 2025 4:55 am

The wind turbines will then be powered by their internal diesel generators to provide energy. 

Yooper
Reply to  Robertvd
November 1, 2025 6:16 am

Except for there won’t be any diesel fuel….

MarkW
Reply to  michel
November 1, 2025 9:10 am

Collapsing what works so that it can be replaced by socialism/Marxism is a common strategy.

Reply to  michel
November 1, 2025 11:09 am

And after the inevitable nationwide blackout, restarting without spinning reserve while dependent on intermittent wind is going to be problematic.

I generated the first version of the attached graph for the GB (not “UK” …) electricity grid a few years ago, and have now updated the “Nuclear” daily-average generation numbers to yesterday (31/10/2025).

The last update from EdF I saw for Hinkley Point C was that it “should” connect the site to the grid sometime between “[1/1/]2029 and [31/12/]2031”, with Unit 2 being brought on-line 12 to 15 months after Unit 1 (*).

Things get “interesting” from (March / April) 2027, and really “hinky” from the spring of 2030.

.

(*) For anyone who thinks EdF is not going to push back (yet again) their “estimated timetable” over the next 3 or 4 years, I have a whole bunch of bridges for sale (New York, London, Paris, Vienna, Venice, …).

GB-grid_Coal-Nuclear_2020-2033
Denis
Reply to  michel
November 1, 2025 1:12 pm

And all this so the UK emissions are reduced from around 0.8% of world emissions to something less. Even if bought to zero, the change will be (for sure) too small to have any detectable effect on UK or world climate. This isn’t insane, it is deliberate knowing destruction of a once great nation.

CampsieFellow
Reply to  Phillip Bratby
November 1, 2025 4:14 am

There’s a BESS being constructed only a few miles from where I live. The only objection I’m aware of is something to do with archaeology. I wrote to my (SNP) MSP to ask about the steps the Scottish Government were taking to respond to a fire. The reply she passed on to me was, of course, full of pious platitudes about everything being under control.

Robertvd
November 1, 2025 3:43 am

Put them in Jamaica. Does people need cheap energy. I suppose those Windmills have no problem with a cat5 storm.

Ed Zuiderwijk
November 1, 2025 3:52 am

If wind power fails we need more wind power, obviously. Medieval doctors thought so too.

Reply to  Ed Zuiderwijk
November 1, 2025 5:46 am

They used to bleed patients to get rid of the bad blood
Then they bled some more, until the patient died.
Life expectancy was were low in the Middle Ages

SxyxS
Reply to  wilpost
November 1, 2025 10:40 am

It went massively up during the Medieval Warm Period.

Reply to  wilpost
November 1, 2025 7:18 pm

Reykjavik had 10 inches of snow, the first time in 100 years
Global warming, anyone?

Reply to  wilpost
November 2, 2025 9:42 pm

Life expectancy was were low in the Middle Ages

Life expectancy in the middle ages was skewed due to child mortality not adults being bled.

rovingbroker
November 1, 2025 4:05 am

How can such a plan possibly fail when you have trusted messengers still claiming wind is nine times cheaper than gas?”

Show me how one calculates a price that is, “nine times cheaper than gas.” Nine times cheaper? Maybe, “One ninth the price?

Sorry. It’s a pet peeve.

Newminster
Reply to  rovingbroker
November 1, 2025 11:54 am

I’m 100% with you. “X times cheaper than” is meanlngless because there is no static base to calculate the figure from. 99 is 11 times as expensive as 9. 9 is one-eleventh the cost of 99. What figure represents one time cheaper or two times cheaper? Anybody have an answer we can agree on?

Reply to  rovingbroker
November 2, 2025 5:06 am

Show me how one calculates a price that is, “nine times cheaper than gas.”

“emhmailmaccom” posted a comment below (timestamped “November 1, 2025 10:07 am”) which offers one method of “debunking” this particular claim. I propose a second one below.

The article he links to is more precise, saying :

The UK Government repeatedly asserts that these technologies are “nine times cheaper”.

This specific claim started being made by UK (/ British) officials in the last few months of 2022.

Attached is a graph of (natural) gas prices in the UK market from 2016 to May of this year.

It is now November 2025. Any guesses as to the date for “the price of gas” that is still being used by environmental activists when they make the bald assertion that “Wind cost = CCGT / 9” ?

Always respond with “How many ‘pence per therm’ are you using in your calculations on the ‘gas’ side ?”.

UK_Gas-prices_2018-May2025
November 1, 2025 5:41 am

Europe wanted to inflict this expensive, highly subsidized offshore wind calamity on the US under Biden/Harris regime.
That would have meant offshore production at 30 c/kWh, which was reduced by 50% subsidies to 15 c/kWh.
Subsidies are paid by ratepayers, taxpayers and added to national debt.
However you need to add about 11 c/kWh to cover the various costs from wind system to hazardous waste landfills.
Trump stopped the whole scheme dead in its tracks.
That caused a major panic in the wind industry in Europe, which had been sucking up to the dysfunctional Biden/Harris clique

Reply to  wilpost
November 1, 2025 6:38 am

HIGH COST/kWh OF W/S SYSTEMS FOISTED ONTO A BRAINWASHED PUBLIC 
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/high-cost-kwh-of-w-s-systems-foisted-onto-a-brainwashed-public-1
.
People are brainwashed to love wind and solar. They do not know by how much they screw themselves by voting for the woke folks who push them onto everyone. Their ignorance is exploited by the woke folks
.
If owned/controlled by European governments and companies, would be a serious disadvantage for the US regarding environmental impact, national security, economic competitiveness, and sovereignty 
.
Western countries cajoling Third World countries into Wind/Solar, and loaning them high-interest money to do so, will forever re-establish a colonial-style bondage on those recently free countries.

What is generally not known, the more weather-dependent W/S systems, the less efficient the traditional generators, as they inefficiently (more CO2/kWh) counteract the increasingly larger ups and downs of W/S output. See URL
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/fuel-and-co2-reductions-due-to-wind-energy-less-than-claimed
.
W/S systems add great cost to the overall delivery of electricity to users; the more W/S systems, the higher the cost/kWh, as proven by the UK and Germany, with the highest electricity rates in Europe, and near-zero, real-growth GDP. 
.
At about 30% W/S, the entire system hits an increasingly thicker concrete wall, operationally and cost wise.
The UK and Germany are hitting the wall, more and more hours each day.
The cost of electricity delivered to users increased with each additional W/S/B system
.
Nuclear, gas, coal and reservoir hydro plants are the only rational way forward.
Ignore CO2, because greater CO2 ppm in atmosphere is essential for: 1) increased green flora to increase fauna all over the world, and 2) increased crop yields to better feed 8 billion people. 
.
Net-zero by 2050 to-reduce CO2 is a super-expensive suicide pact, to: 
1) increase command/control by governments, and 
2) enable the moneyed elites to become more powerful and richer, at the expense of all others, by using the foghorn of the government-subsidized/controlled Corporate Media to spread scare-mongering slogans and brainwash people, already for at least 40 years; extremely biased CNN, MSNBC, NPR, PBS, NBC ABC, CBS come to mind.
.
Subsidies shift costs from project Owners to ratepayers, taxpayers, government debt:
1) Federal and state tax credits, up to 50% (Community tax credit 10%; Federal tax credit of 30%; State tax credit; other incentives up to 10%);
2) 5-y Accelerated Depreciation to write off of the entire project;
3) Loan interest deduction
.
Utilities forced to pay at least:
15 c/kWh, wholesale, after 50% subsidies, for electricity from fixedoffshore wind systems
18 c/kWh, wholesale, after 50% subsidies, for electricity from floating offshore wind
10 c/kWh, wholesale, after 50% subsidies, for electricity from largersolar systems
.
Excluded costs, at a future 30% W/S annual penetration on the grid, based on UK and German experience: 
– Onshore grid expansion/reinforcement to connect far-flung W/S systems, about 2 c/kWh
– A fleet of traditional power plants to quickly counteract W/S variable output, on a less than minute-by-minute basis, 24/7/365, which means more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh, more cost of about 2 c/kWh
– A fleet of traditional power plants to provide electricity during 1) low-wind periods, 2) high-wind periods, when rotors are locked in place, and 3) low solar periods during mornings, evenings, at night, snow/ice on panels, which means more Btu/kWh, more CO2/kWh, more cost of about 2 c/kWh
– Pay W/S system Owners for electricity they could have produced, if not curtailed, about 1 c/kWh
– Importing electricity at high prices, when W/S output is low, 1 c/kWh
– Exporting electricity at low prices, when W/S output is high, 1 c/kWh
– Disassembly on land and at sea, reprocessing and storing at hazardous waste sites, about 2 c/kWh
Total ADDER 2 + 2 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 2 = 11 c/kWh
Some of these values exponentially increase as more W/S systems are added to the grid
.
Offshore wind full cost of electricity FCOE = 30 c/kWh + 11 c/kWh = 41 c/kWh, no subsidies
Offshore wind full cost of electricity FCOE = 15 c/kWh + 11 c/kWh = 26 c/kWh, 50% subsidies
The 11 c/kWh is for various measures required by wind and solar; power plant-to-landfill cost basis. 
This compares with 7 c/kWh + 3 c/kWh = 10 c/kWh from existing gas, coal, nuclear, large reservoir hydro plants.
.
The economic/financial insanity and environmental damage is off the charts.
Europe has near-zero, real-growth GDP. Its economy has been tied into knots by inane people.
.

John Hultquist
Reply to  wilpost
November 1, 2025 9:54 am

You have used the notion of “government debt“, but that ought to be per person or household or something. At the moment the number is $38 Trillion ($38,000,000,000,000) and growing at $500 billion per month. For October 2025, that’s $300,000 per household, $111,600 per person. Where’s my checkbook?

Bill Marsh
Editor
November 1, 2025 5:55 am

England is committing economic suicide by subsidy. It is sad to see.

But, as Joseph de Maistre commented a long time ago, “Toute nation a le gouvernement qu’elle mérite, (Every nation gets the government it deserves). This is especially true of democracies.

As I look at my own American leadership at the moment, this saying makes me especially saddened.

Reply to  Bill Marsh
November 1, 2025 6:31 am

Spain’s Armada debacle in 1588 led to the end of the Spanish Empire
France’s Napoleon “excursion” into Russia doomed the French Empire
WW1 ended the British Empire
Then came the Muslim invasion and Net Zero
Sayonara Europe
Empty bombast keeps these countries going.

Reply to  wilpost
November 1, 2025 7:18 am

One of my favorite books when I was a kid was “Lost Cities and Vanished Civilizations” by Robert Silverberg [1962]. One of the findings by archeologists who surveyed successive layers of ruins was that at some point the locals apparently decided it was better to throw in the towel rather than to keep stacking up rocks and/or fighting wars that mainly benefitted an increasingly expensive and oppressive ruling class.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Bill Marsh
November 1, 2025 8:31 am

Every nation gets the government it deserves”

Similar to Mencken’s “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”

John Hultquist
November 1, 2025 9:15 am

At the drop of a hat, I will have a wellness visit with a medical type. I’ll be asked to draw the face of a clock that says the time is 10:50. Many folks have sent their analog clocks “the way of the Dodo Bird”. Why should I be expected to draw such a thing? Maybe I’ll draw a blank. Perhaps, it is time to deep six these sayings. Let’s put the final nail in the coffin and take our heads out of the sand.
Does anyone know how many nails it takes to close a coffin?
{This hell for leather rant is sewn up.} 🙂

Joe Crawford
Reply to  John Hultquist
November 1, 2025 1:05 pm

“…how many nails it takes to close a coffin?” It doesn’t take any… just put the top on :<)

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  John Hultquist
November 1, 2025 6:01 pm

I’m more in favor of ditching words like “tweet” and “filming” (does anyone have film in their cell phones?).

Petey Bird
November 1, 2025 9:46 am

The main source of generation must be able to follow and supply load demand or have an output that has same fluctuations as demand. I don’t see that in the chart.

1saveenergy
Reply to  emhmailmaccom
November 2, 2025 1:44 am

Superb explanation, well worth reading.

Bob
November 1, 2025 3:35 pm

CO2 can’t cause CAGW, there is no need to abandon fossil fuels. Fire up all fossil fuel and nuclear generators, build new fossil fuel and nuclear generators, remove all wind and solar from the grid. We will have lots of clean, affordable, safe and reliable power.

November 2, 2025 5:05 am

Biden people said the same when the Covid vaccines failed: since they only provide any protection at all for 3 months, you should hurry up and get a booster shot, and another.

Sparta Nova 4
November 3, 2025 6:07 am

I was once asked how to implement the maximum efficiency in packaging a solid state memory cartridge.

I explained, just take the raw chips, neatly stack them in the housing until the housing was full. Maximum capacity and maximum efficiency.

I then pointed out that such a unit would perform no function other than a paper weight or a door stop.

So wind is free, until you start adding in everything that makes it reliably function. Same with solar.
Claiming the fuel is free, which is more or less true, diverts from the cost drivers needed for a functioning system.