Torture Earns Subsidies.

Except for warfare, our society does not tolerate machinery that damages the public. In the case of wind projects the non-impacted public has been led to believe that harm done by wind projects is not real and therefore needs no correction.

The Minister for Energy, Angus Taylor, is focussed on energy costs. Those matters are discussed in our post: Dealing with Excessive Power Costs.

It was noted when Taylor took on the Ministry, that health matters deriving from wind turbines would not be the Minister’s responsibility.

This is a pity.

We know that wind turbines are unsafe and cause considerable and lasting damage to neighbours. There is some debate whether the word torture fits the repetitive and severe impact on some country residents.

The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines Torture is the infliction of severe bodily pain with the addition of the words “especially as a punishment or a means of persuasion”.

DeFrock believes the use of the word torture is appropriate in the context of developers knowingly causing pain and persisting to do so; and responsible bureaucrats and politicians knowing that they have condoned the infliction of pain and suffering, both groups having the means of alleviating or causing the pain to cease. It follows such responsible persons are complicit in torture of country Australians.

Severe bodily pain and mental anguish (often an accompaniment  of torture) afflicts a large number of people living up to 10 to 12 kilometres of a wind turbine. The World Health Organisation calls it, more politely, ill health.

Defrock notes that John Zakula, a sufferer and possible litigant living near the Bald Hills project has called his suffering as torture and that Stop These Things has published that language https://stopthesethings.com/2018/11/14/not-in-anyones-backyard-angry-neighbours-launch-million-lawsuit-against-wind-farm-developer-council/.

So for the present, torture is not an exaggerated claim.

Given that the industry and its acolytes presently claim wind projects are competitive with the now hobbled coal and gas generators, the wind industry needs no subsidies to place it in the energy mix.

But wind project owners continue to be subsidised. The subsidy was likely conceived as a bonus or reward for building these machines, but what now is its current purpose?

Rational argument would proceed like this:

 No need of subsidies, therefore remove them. Power prices reduce by $1.5 billion a year.

The renewable energy act mandates these subsidies.  Given that the industry behaviour includes:

  • driving people from their homes and farms without anything like adequate compensation;
  • torturing country families with sound waves that damage health and lead to permanent intolerance of certain sounds and vibrations;
  • doing everything possible to hide and deny that the problems are caused by wind turbines;
  • effectively appropriating farming families’ properties for their own use, (i.e. so-called wind ‘farming’), for as long as the turbines are maintainable;
  • leaving the countryside with the debris of their invasion; useless towers, rusting blades, almost impossible to remove foundations, etc.

Subsidies are excess profits. How can we make the public pay excess profits to an industry that is torturing people?

The industry’s proselytizers have been claiming for some time that wind energy is competitive, therefore the subsidy is unnecessary to do anything other than hasten the destruction of our once cheap and reliable coal and gas powered grid.

Defrock has sought analogies in medieval torture, land clearances in Scotland, the forcing of native Americans into reservations, fascist work camps, etc., but finds no analogy in our supposedly democratic society’s problem with the wind industry.

So here it is:

The wind industry is knowingly drawing very large subsidies (WETax) it certainly no longer needs, whilst causing severe hurt to country people.

So-called Responsible Authorities are simply not acting responsibly in controlling this extraordinary abuse and need to be held to account; where guilty, severely punished, e.g., demoted, fired, benefits reduced, fined, etc.

The present situation is that Chinese seek licences to build projects using their own turbines, then, once built, sell the project to multiple foreign investors who will never participate in correction of the unsafe project or be able to be brought to account in Australian Courts.

At least one idiot Premier does not get this.

Time for a Defrock ceremony?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s