Dear Editor, Besides the noise and negative visual impact, wind turbines are highly expensive (£22 billion), according to Government figures for overall national development.

Also, when developed to maximum potential they are capable of supplying only 10 per cent of Britain’s electricity needs.

Although the energy production of nuclear power is higher than wind turbines, its final cost with construction, demolition, decontamination when worn out and storage of radioactive waste is incalculable.

More importantly, nuclear power stations, besides through accident, leakage or earth movement, are vulnerable to military, terrorist or political attack from hostile foreign fuel suppliers.

However, despite the examples of Chernobyl and recent Japanese nuclear disasters, with the German Government’s decision to decommission and not replace its existing nuclear power stations, the British Government has unsurprisingly decided to place both wind and nuclear energy production at the head of its priority list for development.

Alternatives such as solar and geothermal energy have been discussed but apparently little or no consideration has been given to the massive potential of hydroelectricity. From the colossal Itaipu Dam on the Parana River in South America which supplies electricity to 23 million people, to cities, towns, and industrial plants throughout the world, energy is provided by this means.

With the potential of the tides which surround Britain, further development of this kind would, like wind-powered and nuclear energy, be expensive.

Unlike these, however, hydroelectricity would create a clean, safe, permanent, independent and high volume source of energy from which Britain would ultimately gain both economic and environmental great benefit.

To achieve this, our Government must, for once, abandon its present short-sighted, inadequate and highly dangerous policies and for once, plan and invest for the future.

R Pountain,