Add to this the damage to the tourism industry, and the whole concept of ranks of wind turbines across the roof and shores of Wales, producing intermittently and unpredictably amounts of electricity far less than developers lead us to expect, seems utterly foolish, especially when there are much less damaging ways to produce electricity (in which Wales is self-sufficient, in any case).

As someone who lived in Scotland for many years I was absolutely delighted when I read my RSPB "Bird" magazine, and would like to quote an article from this month's August edition entitled Lewis windfarm update: "With the period for comments on the Lewis wind power proposal now closed, we are delighted that the Scottish Executive received almost 11,400 objections and only 59 letters of support. This represents the level of opposition both locally and across the UK to this damaging proposal. "We will continue to press the new Executive to turn down this application or hold a public inquiry to consider the issues in more detail."

Given two identical houses at the same price, one with wind turbines on the horizon, which would you buy? No prizes for guessing that the twirling monsters would be a deterrent. But the British Wind Energy Association dismisses this as a "myth about windfarms - their impact on house prices". It is hardly surprising that a trade organisation uses "spin" to sell its windmills, but I wonder how it will react to the news in Denmark's Copenhagen Post (July 30) that its government is drafting a proposal suggesting that "homeowners living in the shadow of the 150-metre giants be compensated for lost property value where values have been brought down by the presence of nearby wind turbines".

The bitter battle that is being fought over the proposal to build a wind farm at Edinbane, on the Isle of Skye, has stepped up a gear. After several years of deliberation, against the background of a debate that has sharply divided public opinion on the island and further afield, Highland Council granted consent for the 18-turbine development in May. The Skye Windfarm Action Group Limited (SWAG) has moved the battle to a new front: the Court of Session. SWAG is arguing that the planning authority acted unlawfully in granting planning permission and the permission for the wind farm should therefore be quashed.

If other industries misrepresented facts on this scale they would rightly be criticised, but when wind power companies do so they are all too often abetted by the media. The BBC does its audience no service by its uncritical acceptance of inflated claims.

In the blood of every Briton runs at least a little seawater. We sing of the sea, romanticise our maritime heritage and regard the beach holiday as a nationally affirming birthright. Every year we potter in our millions down to the sea with bucket, spade, snorkel, jet-ski, paperback, shark defence kit and inadequate quantities of suncream. Oh, we do like to be beside the seaside; but we have a strange way of showing it. For the past 300 years or so, we have poisoned and plundered the sea; we have destroyed the seabed, killed the fish and bemired the vast oceans with our waste. We wring our hands at the pollution and devastation we have visited on the land, but because we cannot see what is happening beneath the dark waters surrounding this island we somehow assume it will mend itself...........The Bill is not simply some worthy Magna Carta for beleaguered British fish, since it also sets out clear rules for exploiting the sea by fishermen, oil prospectors, dredgers and energy farmers. The Bill will make it far easier to build and operate offshore wind farms, developments to harness wave power, and schemes for storing carbon emissions from power stations in former oilfields. So far from ducking the issue, as successive governments have done, the marine Bill aims to balance competing interests and face up to the inevitable but not insoluble conflict between exploitation and preservation. But in politics, as at sea, the weather changes quickly. The marine Bill, promised in Labour's manifesto of 2005, was expected to become law within a year, but suddenly it seems to have slipped off the political agenda. Gordon Brown did not even mention marine protection in his summer statement, and the marine Bill is not included in his planned legislative programme for next year. The Bill has been kicked into the long seaweed. It is the big one that got away, again.

Our seas must have proper protection - now! In due course, we shall be organising signature sheets in support of this Marine Bill and hope the people of North Devon will show this new Government that we are as keen to protect creatures living in our oceans as we are to protect our local wildlife and landscapes.

There are fears that plans to increase charges to remote generators could undermine renewable energy schemes in Scotland. Lawyer Peter Willis argues that such a scheme could breach European legislation.

It now seems that, having disrupted and destroyed some of our local countryside with heavy negative industry, our Fenland Council has "accommodated" enough of these "awesome beasts", and may not wish to play ball with its political masters any longer. The wind industry has not been slow in reacting to the public's withering support of this industrialisation of our countryside and has placed its marketing machine into top gear. I agree with the council that it is time to withdraw from this rural carnage inflicted by these industrialists. I even more strongly object to my beloved English countryside being concreted over by international giants, that may have very little regard or no concern for our national heritage, the British countryside.

Driven by concerns about climate change and security of electricity supply, public and political commitment to renewable energy has never been stronger. Generous financial support and market interventions have encouraged extremely rapid deployment in many European states and it is now a commonplace of the financial press that environmental business has become mainstream. And so it should. But some are now asking whether this rapid growth, and politically-driven target setting at local and national level, is creating a secure position for environmental technologies, one grounded in the realistic perspectives of engineering and science, or, on the other hand, a mere flash in the pan caused by speculative, subsidy-hunting developments. A wealth of data about the renewable energy experiment worldwide, and particularly in Europe, is now slowly emerging, allowing decision makers to evaluate the success of their policies. These results, as you would expect of real-world data, are mixed, and as we all get to grips with the implications, a change in the way the renewable energy sector operates is likely.

The ballot response rate was high for a local matter and demonstrates the level to which residents feel they would be affected by the proposal. That over 62 per cent of the returns gave a thumbs-down to the wind farm finally gives a true picture of local opinion, despite a well-timed campaign to highlight the potential financial spin-offs by supporters of the development.

An application for the erection of four 410ft wind turbines on Corrwg Fechan Mountain has been received by the Planning Department of Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council. Corrwg Fechan is in the heart of the village of Glyncorrwg, where there is great opposition to these highly visible monstrosities being sited. As Chairman of the Glyncorrwg Action Group, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the very many residents of the village who have written to the planning department objecting to this outrageous proposition.

Our experience shows that there is a real noise problem, which can be severe. Unfortunately, it is clear that existing regulations are not adequate to protect people, and until this whole noise phenomenon is better understood and regulated we feel that Councils and wind developers should be exercising the Precautionary Principle. Large wind turbines should not be permitted close to residential areas.

So in exchange for a one 10th share of not "deflecting climate change" we are sacrificing the Welsh landscape, a potential tourism income which far exceeds the value of wind electricity, and are risking property values and the happiness and health of Welsh people.

And what were some idiots doing? Driving round and round in circles in a 4×4, churning up the sand, roaring from one end of the beach to the other. Nobody even got out to smell the salt air, to look at the glittering tidal pools or the yellow rose-root on the cliffs. Probably a group of wind-farm contractors, eventually they drove back up the hill, leaving the beach in peace. At least the tide would soon wash away the vehicle tracks. Enjoy these wild, empty and beautiful places of the North while you can - there are fewer and fewer of them all the time. And appreciate them.

However, as soon as the Welsh Assembly published TAN 8, heralding the current rush of local wind farm planning applications, we were forced to look more closely into the claims made for on-shore wind power - both for and against. We were determined to find out if its contribution to the community as a whole (with respect to energy provision and reducing greenhouse gas emissions) would outweigh the problems such massive re-industrialisation would bring to local people if allowed to go ahead. Using only government sources and respected technical documents from the power industry itself, the results of our research have shocked and amazed us. It is clear allowing these large wind farms would jeopardise our health, wealth and quality of life along with biodiversity and the quality of our landscape/environment. All this to no real purpose since they cannot replace ordinary power stations and are four times more expensive than other means of reducing our carbon footprint.

Why is Germany considering the building of up to 26 coal-fired power stations when they already have 17,000 wind turbines whirring away to the delight of the European green lobby? Why? Because German E.ON who are doing a roaring trade building windfarms in Scotland and Wales have admitted in their own reports that however many wind turbines they build or sell, without the right back-up they will not provide grid security and herald power cuts across Europe. E.ON UK must be aware of this shortcoming of their parent company's technology. Surely, it is only fair for them to warn their collaborators in Britain like Greenpeace, and FOE, to name but a few, before it is too late.

Your front page article on the proposal for more wind turbines in Fenland does indeed raise some serious questions for our local planning authority. Since the planning acts came into being in 1947, our local planning authority has, in the main, been successful in resisting developments in the countryside which would harm the visual amenity and special character of the Fenland landscape. However, when proposals for the gigantic wind turbines came about, it appeared to ignore all its previous policies for retaining the special character of our landscape and with no special policies for controlling both the number and siting of these massive turbine structures, it has given the turbine developers a free hand to develop wherever they wish.

Well now we have it, a local landscape destroyed, wind developers sensing embracement, support, and easy pickings, banging on the planning door, and a council in denial that this local wind rush was not only started by them, turbines are out of control, and they can no longer contain this rural industrial carnage, after all how can you reject what you claim is a "positive contribution" that you fully "support and embrace".

I was intrigued by the comments from Matthew Spencer, chief executive of Regen SW, that supporters of windfarms believe there is a growing public acceptance that turbines have a role to play in providing power in a renewable way. This is wholly untrue and he knows it. Recently, in North Devon, the Green Party put up 20 candidates for the district council. As predicted, not one candidate was elected and they came last in every ward. That's democracy - and that's what the overwhelming majority of people in North Devon think of turbines. They don't want them!