Yes, but no one's listening

Well, no one's listening anywhere where they'll do something about it.
A recent report out shows that when you take subsidies into account every job in the bird mincer industry costs something like £100,000 to maintain. That's just the subsidies mind you, it doesn't take into account the necessity of keeping a a standby system permanently on standby for when the wind doesn't blow or often enough blows too hard. A classic case of the wrong sort of wind surely?
Telegraph.

A new analysis of government and industry figures shows that wind turbine owners received £1.2billion in the form of a consumer subsidy, paid by a supplement on electricity bills last year. They employed 12,000 people, to produce an effective £100,000 subsidy on each job. The disclosure is potentially embarrassing for the wind industry, which claims it is an economically dynamic sector that creates jobs. It was described by critics as proof the sector was not economically viable, with one calling it evidence of “soft jobs” that depended on the taxpayer. The subsidy was disclosed in a new analysis of official figures, which showed that: • The level of support from subsidies in some cases is so high that jobs are effectively supported to the extent of £1.3million each; • In Scotland, which has 203 onshore wind farms — more than anywhere else in the UK — just 2,235 people are directly employed to work on them despite an annual subsidy of £344million. That works out at £154,000 per job;
• Even if the maximum number of jobs that have been forecast are created, by 2020 the effective subsidy on them would be £80,000 a year.

As the 'climate levy' already adds at least £47  to the average households cost of living it does seem that the justifications used that the development of such power sources would eventually create jobs (it doesn't, not so far) and produce more efficient means of generating by wind power (it hasn't) which will bring the cost down (don't make me laugh) isn't worth the paper it was written on.
Those of us who believe that the idea of climate change was taken as a justification to raise taxes to the point where they became punitive and lined the pockets of those promoting the energy sources. Which in essence is why they have tried (and succeeded) in stifling all competition to their expensive bird minces in the form of shale gas extraction, because the main reason as far as I can tell is to fleece the UK taxpayer rather than provide them with a cheap energy supply that's under our control and actually works when the wind doesn't blow.
Even the recent announce of new nuclear plants isn't really a help as they take too long to build, are expensive to maintain even if they are 'carbon friendly' whatever that means.
We are sitting upon an absolute mass of coal and trillions of litres of shale gas enough to keep us happy for over 300 years, yet the environmental lobby is being used to block such schemes to line the pockets of a few.
Yes, we know this, but unfortunately we are not in a position yet, to do anything about it save club them over the head with articles like this.