Wind Things

Windsave, again

Anent my previous rant about Windsave claiming impossible efficiencies, they’ve made some changes to their website. The machines now have larger diameters (1250 and 1750 mm — up from 1000 and 1400mm), and much lower rated power (500W and 1000W at 27mph — down from 750 and 1200).

Plugging in those numbers to Cp = P / ( 0.48106 d2 v3 ), we get more realistic efficiencies of 0.378 and 0.386 (for the small and large machines, respectively).

The Lakota turbine we installed last week has a nominal rated power of 900W at 28.8 mph for a 2.09m diameter rotor. It has a very conservative Cp = 0.20, although David Cooke says that typically they see 1,000 Watts at around 25mph (a Cp of around 0.34).

At the other end of the scale, the Lagerwey LW52 is a 51.5m diameter machine rated at 750kW at 12ms-1. This advanced utility scale, variable pitch machine has a Cp = 0.34.

Windsave’s revised figures are much more credible, but until we have real figures backed by a few years of installations, there’s little more we can say about them. I’m a little concerned that, although there are claims that 1000s of these machines have been sold, there’s not a single real photo of one on the web.

I’m going to enjoy putting up an anemometer and logging system alongside the urbine downtown. We’ll see how it runs.

119 replies on “Windsave, again”

I have a report in front of me about these sexy rooftop wind generators, even though it is confidential i will give you the jist of what is here….The BWE have been testing three Windsave wind turbines at a number of urban locations across the UK and in the past year the test units have output a total of 4kWh between them.
These turbines and their respective inverters are not grid tie approved they are designed to sense the load being consumed in the house and supply to that load. So if you are out and have no load and its windy the energy these things may produce goes nowhere. The inverter has also been found to take 90 seconds to allign itself with the load by which time the turbine has in most cases lost the wind.
The tail plane on the Windsave turbine is too small and only in very strong steady (not gusting) wind conditions is the turbine able to stabilise itself in to the wind. In lighter conditions the turbine tail and blades compete to be the tail.
I have carried out extensive research into the manufacture of small wind turbines, The Windsave machine is made from off the shelf components, the blades, hub and cone are made by a leading European fan blade manufacturer and the motor is also a 1kW off the shelf product with permanent magnets retrofitted. If anyone knows their physics they will see the obvious mismatch between motor size and output rating.
Unless windsave have discovered a superconductor with which to manufacture their motors the total weight of the unit offset against the rated output and amount of copper and ferrite in these units does not add up.
Finally windsaves previous product which never made it to the market but was widely advertised as the answer to domestic energy needs beggars belief if you wand to see their original flyer go to:
its at the bottom right of the page.
I have asked windsave to allow us to wind tunnel test a turbine, they have declined. What have they got to hide?

Dear CG

Thanks for your comment. As you will see from my first post, I am happy to regard this thing as a big boy’s toy (not as an investment), and just see what it actually does. I was researching Windsave before B&Q started stocking it, so most of my correspondence has been with the company itself.

According to Windsave’s literature, the electronics of the machine stop it from generating at windspeeds of 15m/s and above; the next sentence IMPLIES that it will withstand persistent speeds of 35 m/s, and gusts of up to 52m/s.

What it actually SAYS though is “Our product has been designed and developed to meet the relevant standards and codes. For example IEC61400 Part2 requires the system to be capable of withstanding 35 m/s wind speed. We have also accounted for structural design limits where the structure is able to withstand short gusts at up to 52m/s (app 120mph). Note, this is “extreme” and represents possible wind events “over a 50-year period”.

Which, I am sure you will agree, is not quite the same thing!

Elsewhere, the text talks about, “shutting it down” (OK, I understand what that means) and “making it safe” (which I do not) in “particularly extreme winter weather “(which it does not define). It also makes no mention of where the wind energy goes when (above 15m/s) the machine cuts out; I imagine into spinning the wheel. The background picture in Windsave’s literature appears to show a propellor feathering mechanism, (my RAF background) so I am assuming that the wheel “spins” rather than “screams”.

(Does my word “feathering” mean the same as your word “furl”?).

Re your remark about “losing” electricity at high wind speeds. This is a matter of semantics as much as physics. I’m not paying for the power in the first place (remember, I’ve written off the £1,498) so I’m not losing anything – just not gaining either. Furthermore, as the law stands at the moment, (though a private member’s bill is before the Scottish Parliament to change it) you have to instal an additional meter and pay lots of MONEY up front, and annually, before you are acually permitted to SELL electricity back into the grid. Thus – if the machine is generating above the base load of my little (all electric) cottage, and dumping into the grid – I am “not losing” twice over – once, because the electricity is free in the first place, and again, because I don’t have to pay to be allowed to sell it – because I’m not selling it…….

If you’re sitting where I am, it makes perfect sense………

I’m sure that all will become clearer, though, when, and if, the thing turns up. I shall keep you posted on my adventures (if any) with Thomas the Turbine; I’ll certainly tell you if I end up looking for him in the fields to the North East the next time we have gales like those last week!

I’ll also buy a plug-in power meter on e-Bay.


I know I am wasting my time with this post because you seem determined to write off £1498 of your own and tax payer’s money on this piece to junk. I do assure you that I am not arguing for argument’s sake; I am a keen wind enthusiast and I want wind power to be one of the spokes in the renewable energy wheel that this country could run on. But when the Windsave saga finally comes to an end wind energy will have suffered greatly from the bad publicity that will arise from what is really a scam.

There have been many incarnations of the Windsave turbine. One of those incarnations has a boom connect to the tail, and I think that this one furled (it is the one on the A4 flyer, on sale for under £1000). Furling is the folding of the tail boom allowing the blades to turn out of the wind, which is what they naturally wish to do. This, if properly implemented, happens gradually as the wind increases. As the blades go through the 90 degrees of furling the first variable of the Betz theorum – area swept by the blades – decreases, and so the generator is not overloaded even though the seconded variable – the windspeed cubed – is increasing. So the turbine can carry on safely generating electricity. B&Q’s Windsave does not furl it cuts out. If the inverter just creates an open circuit there is no braking effect and your blades will over speed, wearing out the bearings of the generator. This is the cheap way to control the generator, much like a tv remote is now cheaper than knobs and buttons on the tv. (I do not think the remote is for convenience, considering the time spent looking for the damn thing)

Feathering (I think) is the altering of the pitch of the blades. This is used on some turbines, such as the Proven downwind turbine – a very good turbine. It is not used on a cheap turbine like Windsave’s, because it is quite complicated.

You might like to take a look at This site is more for the build you own enthusiast, but is has many knowledgable contributors who are used to building and running their own turbines. It’s not just a case of sticking something up a pole and sitting back to enjoy the glow got from saving the planet – NW London yesterday gives you some idea of the energy you will be tapping into in the near future.

Do, please let us know how things turn out, but I just want to make this last effort to urge you to save yours and our money until something more suitable comes along

Rumi, you can’t possibly mean 4 kWh over an entire year, can you? Not looking good for the Windsave product then.

Does anyone have any real-world data from Renewable Devices Swift turbine?

I see there were two on the BP garage opposite Edinburgh that have now been removed. Was there any reason (poor yield perhaps etc) for their removal?

there is one on a primary school at Largoward, they had to have three before they got one that worked. However they are in about the most exposed place possible.

I quote

“Thank you for the enquiry about the wind turbine at Largoward Primary
School. We were asked by Swift to trial the wind turbine for them – we
are (it would appear) in prime position – height and wind wise. We
have had a few teething troubles and are on about our third or fourth
turbine, but (touch wood) they seem to have got the troubles sorted and
it has enough puff to provide our hot water.”

Make of it what you will, or better still make one of your own, it’s bound to better.

I saw one of those at AWEA earlier in the year. They look a bit weird.

ISTR certain places in the UK don’t allow downwind turbines for noise reasons.

I visited the Wick Tesco recently, which is meant to have 5 Swift turbines on the roof. Unfortunately when I was there they had all been removed!

Speaking to someone there, they told me that they hadn’t been producing the amount of power they were meant to and had been taken away for “modification”.

Perhaps mounting turbines just above the lip of a roof is the problem? Certainly the support towers looked very short to me!

Incidentally, I also hear Tesco are putting up 3 x 20 metre turbines at the Glasgow St Rollox store, which they reckon will power the whole store.

I understand that windsave have been contracted to install 25,000 turbines around the uk on schools

Any thoughts about QuietRevolution (British), or Aeroturbines (American) or Windside (Norweigan)? They all use vertical axis (sp?). They claim that being vertical with their designs means they don’t have to turn to catch the wind as it changes and so don’t lose a lot of wind if it comes in gusts or in turbulence. This makes sense to me. Windside claims they have been around for decades in extreme winds like Antarctica (windiest place on Earth) and are completely silent. They also also say since they are vertical, they don’t tend to kill birds because they don’t have large spaces between the rotors that the birds think they can just cut through. They say again because of the vertical axis ice doesn’t slide off of them in any dangerous way and that the smaller ones of these start up in pretty low winds.

I see that there is a lot of negative responses from experts about urbine turbines, but what about on skyscrapers? If the roof is a lot higher up than anything around it, it seems the wind is likely be good and if the turbines are micros they won’t harm the building the way a bigger turbine might. If these vertical axis turbines are good in turbulent winds, they seem more likely to be a good design for urban landscapes.

I am willing to assume that some of what these companies say is overhype, but there are just so many big buildings out there with wind just whistling over them.

Audrey, I’ve written about them vertical axis thingies before. Flow at the top of big building is likely very turbulent, so it might not be easy to install a turbine that could extract useful amounts of energy without causing nuisance on top of a building.

kevinmillhill I am interested to know if you got any further with your windsave from B&Q for my husband and I have got the advert for one. I was told from an employee I would need to have planning permission first and then return and place an order.
I have contacted our council for permission but need all the details which I will not have untill a survey has been carried it looks as if I have reached a stalemate, but after reading all of these comments I am having second thoughts.Jan Pearson

Clive, thanks for that, but I don’t think you’ll get much useful power if it keeps stopping like that. Also the tail of a wind turbine definitely shouldn’t flex the way it does.

Just writing my technical report about airflow over a building; i have to reccomend windsave over swift PENDING their ROC accreditaion with OFGEN, and their ability to attatch to a steel structure. the site location which benefits from a 45degree roof ridge (t-shape, so tunnel or hill effect for 300 degrees of the wind direction) which can act as a concentrator and diffuser on the leeward side means that the NOABL speed of 6.1ms, at 10m added to coastal onshores and the valley near the site, should translate into a higher average annual windspeed, perhaps 7ms. added to 45£pa for ROCs (when the accreditation application comes back) and the almost halved packback period vs the cost makes windsave VERY competitive, and for the business which has commisioned this report, who need a guarantee and a cheap installation, i have to reccomend windsave. as in eight months time, when the planning has been arranged, it is far more economically viable than the unavailable, uncertain weather it can be installed to steel etcetcetc swift.
im an objective renewable energy engineering student.

JAN PEARSON, from my experience, id say wait a bit, reassess the market in time for this autumns windy lovelyness. if you would like a detailed technical report about installing a windsave, which will MASSIVELY fastrack you planning application, i would be happy to give you my email adress.

this forum says to me that humans are such a silly race who will argue and try to pick holes in a technology, so crucial to our survival on earth, just to get one up on someone, or to look cool. its embarrasing.

OBJECTIVE renewable energy engineering student.

(Martin, in the absence of accredited third-party test data, you don’t know what you don’t know. 7m/s on a rooftop? One often struggles to get that in open air at 50-80m above ground level. And how do we know you are objective? We’ve only got your [subjective] opinion on it … —scruss)


As you can see from my postings on this blog one of my concerns about this turbine is furling. When I saw the turbine at B&Q I gave the tail a push and it did not move. In your video the tail is wobbling about all over the place. Is this Windsave’s idea of furling or is it just a thing bought about by the video image? As Scruss says it is certainly not the way a wind turbine should furl. Perhaps you may have to go up the pole and tighten the bolts that hold the tail on.

After much coming and going over 2 or 3 months we have finally had our windsave fitted by Mark Insulations. They were the problem in the time it took to be fitted. Installation was completed!! last Tuesday, and on Wednesday when it was fairly windy it broke down. The brake should have come on as the winds got stronger, which it did originally, then it starting spinning again. When the gales came on Thursday morning I thought it would come flying off the side of the house as it was spinning so fast. Eventually the installers re-appeared during the afternoon. They managed to disconnect something, and now the spinning has stopped, so noo electricity. Today is Monday, there is just a little breeze, and we are still waiting for the turbine to be mended. By the way if you order direct from Mark Insulations instead of B&Q you only pay a deposit, and the rest after installation. Also we have been awarded a grant of about a third of cost price. We are stillhopeful that once the teething problems are sorted we will be doing our bit towards global warming.

Having read all the contributions I am still a bit sceptical about the micro wind turbine bashing. Ok they seem to be inflating the possible energy extraction, but on the other hand the technicaly minded contributors are are possibly being a little harsh with their estimations of possible power output.

If the instalation companies are installing the wind turbines in positions such as in a photo link on Paul Gipes site of course the output will be greatly affected. But this is not the fault of the wind turbine.

So is it the consensus that most contributors dont like the sales offensive by windsave, and that the main problem is the incorrect siting.

If people have time on there hands they can carry out there own measurement campaign (direction and wind speed) before purchasing. It does cost money but only a fraction of what it costs to buy the wind turbine, and for enthusaiasts it will be interesting (even that will be worth the money)

Sue Brookes,

Please keep us informed about your Windsave turbine, whether the news is good or bad. There is so little input from Windsave users to be found on the web.

I fear in your case what I predicted has come true; without a decent furling system your turbine cut out, freed from the braking effect of generating electricity it went into overspeed. Windsave says in FAQ 8 that it has a mechanical switch to stop this happening, but I guess that is as cheaply made as the rest of the turbine. In a couple of years time, one way or another, you will be paying for the call out you had to make.

But there are more frightening things to happen to a turbine than overspeeding. I have a test rotor up a mast that is only about 8ft high. It is 1 metre in diameter and has 6 blades, I have no alternator attached, so there is little weight on the top of the mast. The other day I came home to find a blade had broke, the rotor was then unbalanced and running rough. The whole thing was shuddering. Can you imagen what that would be like if it happened to your Windsave turbine. I have tried on this blog to impress on people how dangerous wind turbines can be in the wrong sort of weather. A person has got to be crazy to want to bolt a wind turbine to their house.

I was given a refund recently on my 2 windsave units, as the company who were to install them has decided not to install any further windsave units until the current problems are sorted out, it is a shame that an inovative idea such as windsave has hit such a stumbling block. I also do not wish to spend the swift or proven prices for a turbine, so I will hang back until I see another more affordable windturbine

To followup to my previous comment, I finally heard back from my home insurers (Direct Line) who advised me that structural damage caused by a turbine would not be covered by my buildings policy (I assume because it’s basically self inflicted, and I should be claiming from the turbine manufacturers/installers, not from them). They’re still declining to say one way or another whether they’d cover third party claims if (when?) the turbine takes off and decapitates my neighbours.

I guess there are too few installation for insurers to have a clear idea of who they can fob off liability onto. Just something to bear in mind.

Has anyone noticed that all of the Swift turbines across the UK have been de-commissioned? We just bought 6 and they were taken down 1 day after original commissioning (only reason we got these was to comply with a stupid planning condition imposed by a stupid local authority).

Renewable Devices claim that their installers, Southern Electric Contracting, cannot install them properly/ installed a demo part not intended for construction, leading to a tail failure in Edinburgh (fell off into the carpark).

Now 5 months on – no sign of new turbines.

SEC are claiming that it is a product problem – strange given that they bought 20% of Renewable Devices last year.

Latest date given for replacement (and upgraded) turbines is 6 months plus. Teriffic news given that the install cost circa £90k.

Beginning to sound like never to me……

We must remember that as taxpayers we have all helped to by these micro turbines, and I for one want my money back. I want it put back in the kitty to be used for renewable energy that works. I don’t care who pays; whether it is the idiots who wouldn’t listen to reason and bought turbines like Windsave, which is earning pence per week, or retailers like B&Q who should have tested the turbine before stocking it, or whether it is the makers (although I don’t think they will be around much longer now the truth is coming out).

And I also want to see the top people of these companies that have consistently lied about their products to be brought to book.

I have now read all there is to read about Wind Turbines, Solar Heating, Heat Sinks, Biomass Pellet Heating, heat exchangers and on, and on, and on.
I am going to spend my money, some 5.5K, on insulating the external walls of my house. The reason being that all of the practical technologies of the other means of ‘going green’ are in their infancy and are a ‘suck it and see’ means of saving, or making money. Am I right?

I have after much deliberation cancelled my windsave order. I actually ordered it a year ago and had a survey eventually 5 months ago. Installation was delayed because of technical problems but my enthusiasm has dimmed for the product and not the idea basically because of any real objective evidence that they can do what they purport to do. Secondly I am concerned about the vibration effects from the unit and the fact that my household insurance will be invalid should any structural damage occur. I haven’t given up on wind power and am now looking at installing a ‘proper’ turbine eg Proven.
Finally if that is David H from Holywell, give me a ring to discuss wind technology.

Was due to participate in a Council funded test of the Windsave machine. This has now been cancelled. The test site in Southampton produced zero generation over a 6 month period. The company said to the council that the alternator was not up to the job. This is on the back of a 3 month delay because they claimed to be “redoing the software”.
Oddly enough they are still flogging them via B&Q despite these problems. It seems to me that this new industry is making any sort of claims to flog their machines while its all the latest fad. Reminds me of the dodgy double glazing salesmen of the past.
Hopefully a company will emerge that can deliver economical microgeneration via wind turbines, but it seems its not happened yet.

I don’t know how much longer B&Q can go along with the Windsave scam without damaging their name. Only this week on BBC’s You and Yours prog. there was someone from B&Q saying how good sales of this turbine were. But if it saves so much money, how is it that B&Q doesn’t have any on the roofs of their stores?

Hi – The blades are spinning fast enough to not be seen, its the camera that’s making them look like they are stopping and starting. In the video, the turbine is working well, but at other times the damm thing just won’t track properly and spents too much of its time pointing in the wrong direction, the problem is that it dosn’t like turbulance, that ‘flappy tail doesn’t help’ -this is one problem I’m hoping Windsave will sort when they come out with their free upgrade program. funny thing is that the turbine is electrically braked in storms, so the mechanical furling tail hardly seams necessary? -I will await the upgrade with interest! C:-)


Wasn’t that free upgrade supposed to arrive in April? Windsave are keeping up their usual low standards of performance.

On the way to Edinburgh on the M8, there is an industrial estate on the left. I notice that Deans Engineering has 4 Windsave turbines on one building! Perhaps we should ask them how much power has been generated?

There were two on top of a building in Livingston, but when I drove past the other day they had been tied off. Perhaps there is a problem with the wind in Scotland at the moment.


The wind must be fixed as they are now freely rotating, the others on the M8 were doing great too, not sure how effective they’ll be though.


They maybe spinning freely, but I assure you they will produce NOTHING.

Fed up with Windsave and their lies, I can already here the pitter patter of the administrators feet rushing to Windsaves office.

My order went under ages ago, waiting for new parts, then no delivery of parts etc etc blah blah. (got a “fantastic” rave review on the bbc not so long back either as i remember) you have been warned.

Got mine fixed yesterday 27 June seems to working well, (no more error 3) but they need to come back to fit a vibration reduction collar?

Holly it doesnt look like you ever had one fitted so how can you ASSURE us that they produce nothing. This is a new product at a relatively low price and i have every confidance that they will get it right.

It’s clearly wrong to say that the Windsave turbine will produce nothing; from Holly’s post and others, it is obvious that dealing with Windsave, the company, with produce heaps of frustration. As for producing electricity, the Windsave turbine, in an urban environment, will not produce enough to pay for its self, and nobody has posted on the web a site where the turbine is paying for itself – least of all any B&Q store roofs.

Windsave is not a new product, it is an electricity producing wind generator, and these have been around for decades. While being cheap, this has cause most of the problems that buyers of this product have experienced – like Robert’s post just above.

So sorry, produce nothing might have been hasty… wind speeds of less than 5 metres per second (which is most of the country), this piece of junk will generate £10 of elec per annum, (providing the damn thing hasnt broken down)

The chief exec of windsave confirmed as much when backed into a corner on Panorama not so long ago.

Nice idea as it is, look to other energy producing measures which are proven ie: Solar Panels.

5 Metres per second is an average, some days the wind doesnt blow at this speed and some days it blows a lot stronger thats how averages work. on the days its stronger the turbine should produce electricity and on the others it wont produce any.
Solar panels are a lot more expensive at about £5k per kilowatt and in an IDEAL position should produce 750kw per year. If a 1kw wind turbine was installed in an IDEAL position it would produce at least this for a lot less money. If your house is not in a good position dont buy a wind turbine and if you live in a dark forest dont buy solar..


You would be hard pressed to find a better siting than the Windsave in this photo,, but it is still only earning its owner 10p a day. If you know of a better siting where a Windsave turbine is earning its owner a good return, please give me details; this product has been on sale for three years, and I have yet to discover a moneysaving owner of one.

Colin, is that 10p gross or net?

I wouldn’t call that a well-sited wind turbine: right above a bluff wall, with the rest of its wind rose affected by the roof.

I didnt think you could buy one 3 years ago, where from?. How long has this one been installed i would guess a matter of months not years. At the rate its generating it will earn £36.50 per annum, over 3 times Hollys rant.
No doubt it will be upgraded soon and produce more.
A lot of the people here should re read the brochure and take a reality check on what they have bought. If you want a turbine to produce a profit spend £20000 and get a 4-5kw model. I personally havent bought one of these i prefer to see how they go.
Who knows the real return may come when in the future you need some form of renewable energy source at your house before you sell it and houses that have add a premium..


I don’t know if it was net or gross, but it was in the winter when the winds are generally higher. It may not be a good site for a wind tubine, but it is about the best for what the Windsave was designed for; gable end, and not too many houses around. A better siting could be obtained from an industrial building with perhaps a large car park in front, so the wind would not be obstructed; something like a B&Q store, have you seen any Windsaves sited like that?


The first prototype Windsave with the AEG generator was made about August 2004. This gave Windsave plenty of time to test its product on houses and publish the results – something it never did. This link will give you an interview with Brian Wilson, who is making predictions of 2005 sales, So the turbine has been on sale for about two and a half years, long enough to deliver some money saving customers, where are they? Holly’s rant came from the experience of dealing with Windsave, A £1500 deposited at 5% would return about £65 net, better than the Windsave in the picture. You have completely the wrong idea on the money side of generating your own energy, it is not a question of profit, it is a question of pay-back time. Depending on siting, a good 6kw turbine, such as a Proven, could take over 12 years to pay off and then start making a profit. A Windsave will not last long enought to pay for itself, because it’s cheaply made.

Wind is just not the right sort of renewable energy for houses on the grid, and until PV becomes cheaper, which it will, just spend your money on the simple things that will save a little bit of cash.

No i havent got the wrong idea about the money side of generating your own electricity. Its most of the other posters who whinge about payback, If they prove to be reliable and i decide to buy one the purchase price will be written off. I dont expect other things i buy to provide payback ie. car, tv, furniture etc. But i will regard every kilowatt of electricity produced to be free in both monetry terms and co2 emissions.
It will be a very long time before solar gets down to £1000 per kw installed.
I know you dont agree but it just shows that some people think about saving some cash and some about saving the planet..


If you wish to save the planet by windpower, put your money here,, they put their turbines where the wind really is, not where we wish it to be. PV manufacturers give a 20 year guarantee with their product, Windsave give only 2 years, and then you have to start paying for a maintainance contract, if you can find any company willing to take it on. In regards to the climate, the Windsave and any other turbine has to first pay off the amount of carbon emmisions it has taken to manufacture it, rooftop turbines will take ages to do this, the energy above the average house just isn’t there.

If you wish to put a bit of green bling above you house just to make yourself feel holier than thou about saving the planet, that’s fine with me, I just hope it’s fine with your neighbours, who have to put up with it.

I placed an order for a Windsave last year and finally had a successful site survey in January.

The install date of early March has constantly been slipped and I had to renew my grant application whilst waiting for the product ‘upgrade’ to be completed.

Today I was told that due to changes to the brackets, my property was no longer suitable and they’ve cancelled my order! No further explanation was offered.

Bought a system from SurfacePower. com , got everything I needed, was very worried about wind turbine stories, but they tried to talk me out of a wind turbine until I could show that I had a site that was suitable after a survey profile was created. When I mentioned ROOF mounted wind turbines, they mentioned that I should visit my local doctor for medication and treatment. System installed, wind and solar PV, excellent, very high quality which suprised me, would be interested to know more from other people with systems that are off-grid, mine is off-grid. They told me wind on its own was a waste of time. Anyone have experience, its summer now and OK, weather is crap but even Solar PV is working very well, L plates unfortunately but very exciting to make your own electricity.

look its all just not worth it is the truth, no payback will be given, just a waste of time and effort (and writing), these companies are stringing people along, new product/ after a fast buck, Just switch things off everywhere you can and wait for nucleur to save the day in the meantime store wood and buy a generator for the power cuts to come.

Not sure if nuclear will save the day. In the timeframe that we need to tide over peak oil – the next decade or so – we won’t be able to build enough reactors to help us.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *