IN reply to Peter Johnston, I am afraid that Tom Hawke's description of those who oppose wind farms as Luddites is correct.

This is because you are opposing a technology that one day will become inevitable.

One day, as I pointed out some time ago, our supplies of oil and gas will be exhausted. Then ALL our power will have to come from renewable sources. Before then, the price of oil will have risen to astronomical levels.

Wave and tidal power are indeed capable of generating large amounts of energy - up to about 15 per cent of our total needs, which still leaves the great majority to be produced by other means.

Here in Britain, solar power is a virtual non-starter, and combined heat and power schemes generate no energy at all, merely saving a little of what we do produce. Wind power will of necessity be a large component of our future energy sources.

Nuclear power would, of course, be an answer were it not for two major drawbacks. Firstly, it produces large amounts of highly toxic radio-active waste, waste that remains dangerous for thousands of years. Secondly, reactors can be used to produce the fuel for nuclear weapons, which, in the hands of the wrong people, could be disastrous.

The effect of wind farms on the landscape is, in any event, not so great as they make out, and indeed could be said to add a little bit of interest to it. They are quiet, non-polluting, and make a valuable contribution to our efforts to combat global warming. They are indeed beneficial in every way, and their installation should be encouraged.

David Haworth

Upper Mead

Egerton

Bolton