I HAVE read with interest the correspondence about wind turbines. It is unfortunate that both letters claim that there is no alternative to energy produced from wind and that we have no obligation to host them in the Forest of Dean.

There is no mention of solar panels which provide immediate electricity to homes. Wind farms are much less efficient than claimed, producing below 10 per cent of capacity for more than a third of the time and low output during the times of highest demand.

The report funded by the John Muir Trust and published last year concluded turbines "cannot be relied upon" to produce significant levels of power generation. The challenge to avert climate change is to find better and more acceptable sources of renewable and sustainable energy. Land-based turbines will make a tiny difference at a great cost financially and in public support for tackling climate change.

To say that we have some sort of obligation to host large land-based turbines in the Forest of Dean is wrong and will alienate many people. The combination of quick profit-seeking by developers and finance companies keen to take advantage of subsidies and wind 'missionaries' points to greed and a lack of concern for the noise, flicker and substantial environmental impact of turbines.

There is a tyranny in the demands made in the letters written last week that seeks to blackmail people to accept solutions that are inappropriate. This will do great harm as it drives people to be sceptical about climate change.

In addition a number of people have labelled turbines as 'eco bling' because it gives the impression we are tackling climate change without any adverse environmental impact and when we have a long way to go to find sustainable solutions.

– Joyce Waldegrave, Oldcroft.