COUNCILLOR Chris Robins (ViewPoints, April 10) feels that replacing the Didcot power station towers with wind turbines would be no more of a blot on the landscape – be careful what you wish for!

The Watchfield turbines may have been a commercial success, as he says, but only for their owners, and then only because the Government forces us to subsidise wind energy through our electricity bills.

These are already £200 a year higher than they would otherwise have been for that reason, and are set to double over the next seven years as more and more inefficient renewables come on stream at our expense.

It is because wind speeds are low inland that turbines need such large subsidies.

In 2010, the Watchfield turbines Councillor Robins quotes achieved only 16.6 per cent efficiency.

Wind speeds are in fact slightly lower at Didcot A than at Watchfield, so output would be even worse.

As for landscape impact, modern turbines are taller than the cooling towers, and have moving blades (sometimes) to draw the eye.

What’s more, it would require 4,000 wind turbines like Watchfield’s to replace the lost output of Didcot A.

That would be a bit more of a blot on the landscape than the cooling towers.

We support renewable energy in principle, but not where there are such unacceptable costs to our precious landscapes, not to mention the economy, for so little return.

Michael Tyce, chairman, Thame District, Campaign to Protect Rural England, Waterstock