The Renewable Energy Foundation has been pressing the Scottish Government and its bureaucrats to explain some of the answers it has given in Parliament about the performance of windfarms. These seem to have been prompted by Gordon Hughes' report on the poor performance of UK windfarms compared to those in Denmark (see earlier BH post here). The new correspondence has been published at REF's website here.
It seems that Hughes' findings have been discounted by the bureaucrats on the grounds that the turbines installed prior to 2002 were "immature". Which is it bit odd when you think about it. Why would immature turbines be installed in the UK but mature ones in Denmark?
Amazingly, the bureaucracy also seems to be arguing that one should not correct for different wind availability when comparing performance in the two countries.
The REF are, unsurprisingly, unimpressed:
The fundamental question that is raised by the correspondence is whether the Scottish Government is committed to the development of policies that rely upon the best evidence available or whether it is more interested in creating policy-based evidence.