Extinction expert says windfarms hasten extinctions

Clive Hambler, a lecturer at Oxford University and the author of an important textbook on conservation, has written an important article at the Spectator on the effects on windfarms on wildlife.  It looks as if the "bird-blender" name is well-deserved:

My speciality is species extinction. When I was a child, my father used to tell me about all the animals he’d seen growing up in Kent — the grass snakes, the lime hawk moths — and what shocked me when we went looking for them was how few there were left. Species extinction is a serious issue: around the world we’re losing up to 40 a day. Yet environmentalists are urging us to adopt technologies that are hastening this process. Among the most destructive of these is wind power.

Shale Mili

David Miliband*, the Labour party's king in exile, has been given space in the Mail on Sunday (of all places) to take a look at the year ahead. He had some somewhat surprising things to say:

And if [the government] need inspiration they should look to the good news story of 2013: the recovery of our old ally, the U.S. It is a very lucky country.

Just when you think the price of oil is too high to sustain their standard of living, shale gas promises an energy boom. We’re not just talking cheaper prices; suddenly the U.S. is set to become the world’s largest energy exporter.

Strangely, he doesn't even mention the possibility of a similar shale boom in the UK, but reading between the lines this is surely what he means. I sense a big change in the offing.

This doesn't mean that the insanity of wind farms will stop of course. The big three political parties are wedded to the idea of expensive sops to green sentiment and will willingly squander billions to that end.

[sp. amended 8am, 31.12.12]

Wind-worn

While we were all reading about climate sensitivity yesterday, the Renewable Energy Foundation published a devastating report by Gordon Hughes on depreciation of wind turbines.

The results show that after allowing for variations in wind speed and site characteristics the average load factor of wind farms declines substantially as they get older, probably due to wear and tear. By 10 years of age the contribution of an average UK wind farm to meeting electricity demand has declined by a third.

This decline in performance means that it is rarely economic to operate wind farms for more than 12 to 15 years. After this period they must be replaced with new machines, a finding that has profound consequences for investors and government alike.

The report is here.

If the lifetime of a wind turbine is 15 years rather than 25, that presumably means that the electricity it generates is going to be much, much more expensive. Douglas Carswell MP called the government's energy bill a disaster. He wasn't joking was he?

Yeo's speech

Tim Yeo has given a speech in London on energy policy (Telegraph coverage here). Here is the text.

Two hundred and fifty years ago, Britain sparked the first industrial revolution.

By harnessing the force of fossil fuels like coal;

Enterprising British engineers were able to deliver astounding innovations in industry and travel;

Creating huge wealth and prosperity as they forged the modern world.

Click to read more ...

A story of decline

Gerard Wynn at Reuters reports on the performance of windfarms, both on and offshore, in the UK. It is not a pretty sight:

Garrad Hassan's report, "Offshore wind: Economies of scale, engineering resource and load factors", sought to "provide a supported opinion on the likely load factors for offshore wind power in the UK Round 1 and 2 offshore wind farms".

Government studies have since cited it as a reference.

The report calculated a range of load factors from 33 to 38 percent, for wind speeds ranging from 8.5 to 9.5 metres per second (See Chart 4).

Actual annual average load factors in fact only passed 35 percent for the first time last year, according to the Department of Energy and Climate Change's (DECC) "Digest of United Kingdom Energy Statistics 2012".

For previous years they were in the range 26-30 percent, or 28-35 percent depending on whether they are measured including or excluding turbines under construction.

More recent data show that load factors this year dipped back below the bottom end of the Garrad Hassan range.

WHY?

The full article is here, and is well worth a look. It appears that "wake losses" i.e. losses from some turbines being in the wind shadow of others, are the problem.

Bigger windfarms required I guess.

Green graft

The Telegraph - Louise Gray of all people - reports that money earmarked for climate change adaptation is being channelled to big corporate entities to subsidise windfarm manufacture:

[T]he World Development Movement said the money is going to large companies rather than helping poor people likely to suffer from climate change.

A recent example was £385m, channeled through a World Bank project to promote clean energy in poor countries.

WDM say that most of the money went to private companies to build wind turbines or solar panels for profit.

Some £10m ended up going towards a 27-turbine farm in the state of Oaxaca in Mexico, operated by the French energy giant EDF, to be paid back in 15 years.

Read the whole thing.

Balderdash, dishonesty and woo

There is much excitement this morning about a Cambridge Econometrics report on windfarms. The headline finding is this (according to the Independent):

British economy would be £20bn-a-year better off with focus on wind power, says think tank

There is a parallel article here at Greenpeace's Energy Desk, which is perhaps surprisingly slightly more honest than the Independent. For example we learn from Greenpeace that:

Based on the government's own price assumptions, and the rising cost of carbon, the report found the cost of power from offshore wind would be within 1% of the cost of power from unabated gas power.

Click to read more ...

Windfarms in court

When suggestions were made that windfarms had detrimental health effects on nearby residents, I wondered if we might see windfarm operators sued for damages. I was right:

[I]n a 49-page complaint filed last month, the plaintiffs, who live within a mile or two of the wind farm in Fairfield, Middleville, and Norway, N.Y., are charging the Iberdrola companies with negligence, private nuisance, trespass and product liability violations for building the project without adequately considering the impact on residents.

Plaintiffs said the 476-foot turbines are bigger and noisier than developers promised residents.

As a result, they say, residents near the wind farm are dealing with loud noise each day.

It's gas

The news this morning is that the government seem to have plunked once and for all for a gas dominated future. The Energy Secretary Ed Davey has said this morning that we are going to need a lot of unabated gas fired generation.

They're not saying that they're abandoning renewables of course, but it seems clear that the shale gas revolution is indeed going be central to the UK's energy future.

A wildly expensive policy of promoting windfarms is going to be increasingly hard to justify.

Close DECC

The Department of Energy and CLimate Change really needs to be closed down before it does any more damage to the country's prospects. Just look at this:

Under the government’s Feed-In Tariff (FIT) scheme, which aims to make renewable energies competitive with fossil fuels, the size of a turbine is measured not by height but by power output. If a turbine pumps out more than 500kW, its owners receive 9.5p per kilowatt hour. But a ‘smaller’ sub-500kW one receives a subsidy of 17.5p per kilowatt hour, supposedly to compensate for its lower efficiency. The idea is to lure smaller wind-power producers into the market.

Problem is, while smaller turbines are more popular with the public, those designs don’t produce anything like the 500kW needed to take full advantage of the subsidy. So instead, investors are buying big, powerful turbines and downgrading them, tweaking their components to churn out no more than the magic 500kW. It’s simply far more lucrative to hobble bigger turbines — machines that ought to be capable of producing almost twice as much electricity.

Read the whole story.

And will Ed Davey be fired? Don't hold your breath.

(H/T Roger)

The great levelised costs lie

The BBC covered the Energy Bill on Newsnight at the end of last week, looking in particular at onshore wind.

There was much airing of what I now refer to as the "great levelised costs lie" and, with the BBC adopting its usual approach to "due balance", there was nobody there to call them on it.

Video here.

Putting windfarms to the sword

Readers may remember Pat Sword's challenge to the legality of the Irish government's green energy policies on the grounds that the public consultation required under the Aarhus Convention had not taken place.

Pat emails with an update

I was as a lay litigant in Monday in the Irish High Court at the request for leave stage for a Judicial Review of the National Renewable Energy Action Plan and the REFIT funding scheme, in which the relief sought was for (a) an Order of Certiorari (a Judical Review); (b) a Declaration that it was unlawful to grant planning permissions and award funding with the proper public participation in decision-making, namely the Strategic Environmental Assessment and Article 7 of the Convention and; (c) a protective cost order. I explained to the judge in the morning that there was a window of opportunity to lodge an application for a Judicial Review of the Irish National Renewable Energy Action Plan and REFIT funding scheme within three months of the UNECE decision, which so far the Department has ignored. He was very interested, asked me what my interest was in the matter - I explained the major financial costs of the programme, the resulting soaring energy prices and how it would have a very negative effect on inward industrial development, on which I made my livelihood. He was happy with that and requested he be provided with a chance to read the documentation over lunch and that he would see me first thing at 2 O'Clock.

Click to read more ...

Today on wind power

In amongst the carnage and bloodshed of the BBC's handling of the McAlpine affair, the Today programme took a moment to talk to Lord Deben and somebody from the Renewable Energy Foundation about subsidies for wind power.

Does it strike anyone else as strange that every time somebody from GWPF goes on the BBC they are asked about their funding, but every time Lord Deben goes on nobody asks him about his acknowledged (and continuing) conflicts of interest?

Anyway, Lord D was on top form, trying to convince everyone that wind is nearly cost-competitive with other forms of energy (the great levelised costs lie) and waffling on about the "devastation" of climate change.

Deben and REF

They don't like Mondays

Those with interests in wind turbines are not having the best of times right now.

Yesterday's news that scientists have been able to demonstrate detrimental health effects on people living near windfarms - a finding that will surely lead the way to massive damages claims - was just the start of it.

Today it is being reported that there has been a wholesale collapse in orders for offshore wind turbines, as investors read the writing on the wall - as the Guardian reported over the weekend, behind the public recitations of the green catechism, government is moving decisively towards a gas-powered future..

This is hardly surprising, in the light of yet more proof that the cost of wind power is ruinous.

Ill wind

A peer reviewed paper has claimed for the first time that wind turbines can detrimentally affect the sleep patterns of people living nearby. According to Andrew Gilligan in the Telegraph:

American and British researchers compared two groups of residents in the US state of Maine. One group lived within a mile of a wind farm and the second group did not.

The findings provide the clearest evidence yet to support long-standing complaints from people living near turbines that the sound from their rotating blades disrupts sleep patterns and causes stress-related conditions.

Both sets of people were demographically and socially similar, but the researchers found major differences in the quality of sleep the two groups enjoyed.

This presumably opens the way for damages claims against windfarm investors.

The study will be used by critics of wind power to argue against new turbines being built near homes and for existing ones to be switched off or have their speed reduced, when strong winds cause their noise to increase.

The researchers used two standard scientific scales, the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, which measures the quality of night-time sleep, and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale, which measures how sleepy people feel when they are awake.

Related Articles

• Giant pylons for planned for National Parks

  23 Jun 2012

• 'Steel giants of the glens'

  30 Jun 2012

• Wind industry's extensive lobbying to preserve subsidies and defeat local resistance to turbines

  11 Feb 2012

• Proposals submitted for giant wind farm off the Isle of Man

  14 Jul 2012

“Participants living near industrial wind turbines had worse sleep, as evidenced by significantly greater mean PSQI and ESS scores,” the researchers, Michael Nissenbaum, Jeffery Aramini and Chris Hanning, found.

“There were clear and significant dose-response relationships, with the effect diminishing with increasing log-distance from turbines.”

The researchers also tracked respondents’ “mental component scores” and found a “significant” link – probably caused by poor-quality sleep – between wind turbines and poorer mental health.

More than a quarter of participants in the group living near the turbines said they had been medically diagnosed with depression or anxiety since the wind farm started. None of the participants in the group further away reported such problems.

Each person was also asked if they had been prescribed sleeping pills. More than a quarter of those living near the wind farm said they had. Less than a tenth of those living further away had been prescribed sleeping pills.

According to the researchers, the study, in the journal Noise and Health, is the first to show clear relationships between wind farms and “important clinical indicators of health, including sleep quality, daytime sleepiness and mental health”.

Unlike some common forms of sleep-disturbing noise, such as roads, wind turbine noise varies dramatically, depending on the wind direction and speed. Unlike other forms of variable noise, however, such as railways and aircraft, it can continue for very long

periods at a time. The nature of the noise — a rhythmic beating or swooshing of the blades — is also disturbing. UK planning guidance allows a night-time noise level from wind farms of 42 decibels – equivalent to the hum made by a fridge.

This means that turbines cannot be built less than 380-550 yards from human habitation, with the exact distance depending on the terrain and the size of the turbines.

However, as local concern about wind farm noise grows, many councils are now drawing up far wider cordons. Wiltshire, for instance, has recently voted to adopt minimum distances of between 0.6 to 1.8 miles, depending on the size of the turbines.

Dr Lee Moroney, director of planning at the Renewable Energy Foundation, said: “The UK noise limits were drawn up 16 years ago, when wind turbines were less than half the current size. Worse still, the guidelines permit turbines to be built so close to houses that wind turbine noise will not infrequently be clearly audible indoors at night time, so sleep impacts and associated health effects are almost inevitable.

“This situation is obviously unacceptable and creating a lot of angry neighbours, but the industry and government response is slow and very reluctant. Ministers need to light a fire under their civil servants.”

The research will add to the growing pressure on the wind farm industry, which was attacked last week by the junior energy minister, John Hayes, for the way in which turbines have been “peppered around the country without due regard for the interests of the local community or their wishes”. Saying “enough is enough”, Mr Hayes appeared to support a moratorium on new developments beyond those already in the pipeline.

He was slapped down by his Lib Dem boss, Ed Davey, the Energy Secretary, but is unlikely to have made his remarks without some kind of nod from the top of Government. George Osborne, the Chancellor, is known to be increasingly sceptical about the effectiveness of wind power, which is heavily subsidised but delivers relatively little reduction in carbon dioxide.

Wind farms generate about a quarter of their theoretical capacity because the wind does not always blow at the required speeds. Earlier this year, more than 100 Tory MPs urged David Cameron to block the further expansion of wind power.

Whatever the Government decides, however, may not matter.

The Sunday Telegraph has learnt that the EU will shortly begin work on a new directive which may impose a binding target for further renewable energy, mostly wind, on the UK. There is already a target, which is also Government policy, that 20 per cent of energy should come from renewables by 2020.

But Brussels is considering imposing an even higher mandatory target to be met over the following decade, according to Gunther Oettinger, the EU energy commissioner. “I want an interesting discussion on binding targets for renewables by 2030,” he said earlier this year.

Two weeks ago, a senior member of his staff, Jasmin Battista, said that Mr Oettinger was “open to” forced targets, though no decision had been made.

The European Parliament has voted for mandatory increases in renewables by 2030 and Mr Davey has also said he favours them. The issue will be considered at a European Council of Ministers meeting next month.

Wind Power

• News »

• Politics »

• UK News »

• Earth News »

• Health News »

In Wind Power

  

How noisy is a wind farm?

 

Wind turbines would need to cover Wales to supply a sixth of country's energy needs

 

Wind farm benefits 'overstated'

 

Floating wind farms to be developed as part of government-backed research

Ads by Google

• 6kW - 600kW Wind Turbines

  Extensive range of Wind Turbines Free Electricity - Free Site Survey

  www.motive-windpower.com

• Pension changes-Oct 2012

  Find out what the benefits of staying enrolled are here

  www.gov.uk/workplacepensions

• 5kW - 500kW Wind Turbines

  Asessment, Development & Finance Capex or Financed Projects

  www.lifelongenergy.co.uk

    

29 comments

Add a comment

Comment with a Telegraph account

Login | Register with the Telegraph

Alternatively...

Comment with one of your accounts

Showing 1-25 of 29 comments

Order by

Real-time updating is enabled. (Pause)

5 new comments were just posted. Show

• Follow with email
• Follow with RSS

• 

  Boghound

  14 seconds ago

  The remedy and answer is very simple....Just stop all subsides and therefore  make the windfarm owners make a living from their "business" like most other commercial enterprises have to.....The landscape of Europe would soon be dotted with rusting metal.

  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  aligatorhardt

  18 minutes ago

  Amazing how an article that claims a study is peer reviewed, not necessarily peer accepted, comes with absolutely no references. Is this church? Do we get assertions on faith?

  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  aligatorhardt

  30 minutes ago

  I hope these setbacks can also be applied to dogs, cattle, sheep and passing airplanes and cars, as it is possible to obsess over any unwanted sound. Cattle and dogs should be outlawed in the country because they are loud and annoying. 

  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  Mike Barnard

  Yesterday 10:54 PM

  This is a flawed study by long-time anti-wind lobbyists that mistakes correlation for causation published in a third-rate journal and 'peer-reviewed' by professional anti-wind testifiers. Hardly a smoking gun, more like a dribbling water pistol.

  http://www.quora.com/Wind-Powe...

  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  anniemalone

  Yesterday 11:21 PM

  It appears Mr Barnard that you are in the minority on this board.  Why would this study done by multinational experts in various fields, including epidemiology, not be as valid as the ones that are several years old and put out by the wind industry?

  • Recommended by 4 people
  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  charlietwo

  Yesterday 08:49 PM

  Even if this is true which is doubtful it can easily be remedied by putting a minimum distance between residebtial properties and wind turbines. As it's perfectly possible to build turbines offshore this is not a problem.

  • Recommended by 1 person
  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  nautonnier

  Yesterday 07:45 PM

  This problem is so simple to cure.  Windfarm companies must be contracted to provide a specified amount of power in a  specified period.  If the windfarm produces less than the amount then it is to be removed and the environment returned to its pre-windfarm state at the cost of the windfarm company.  This to include removal of any roads or power lines, removal of any bases (concrete, tarmac or other) and of course removal of the windmills.

  So as we are assured that windfarms will provide the power for (n) houses - this should not be an impost as all windfarms are completely efficient.

  • Recommended by 10 people
  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  anniemalone

  Yesterday 11:23 PM

  I like your idea nautonnier.  If wind turbines don't perform at the levels that the wind industry says they will, shut them down and get rid of them.
  And as we all know, they don't perform anywhere near what the wind companies tell us they will.   

  • Recommended by 5 people
  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  jeke

  Yesterday 07:44 PM

  Another good reason for leaving the EU. The sands are shifting under the foundations of this overhyped and over subsidised scam. Thank you Andrew Gilligan for once again speaking the truth.

  • Recommended by 10 people
  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  stelvio

  Yesterday 07:12 PM

  Never mind the noise from wind turbines, it's the gormless wittering of the greenies that is damaging my mental health; subsidies do not create jobs you deluded cretins, subsidies destroy jobs.

  • Recommended by 18 people
  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  Mary Young

  Yesterday 06:59 PM

  Oh here we go; the trolls are creeping out from under bridges to decry the report; no interest in people suffering or having to move from their homes around the world; no research done on the subject; no sense - just an ability to write rubbish everyone's heard over and over and which is now extremely boring

  • Recommended by 12 people
  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  speymk1901

  Yesterday 11:18 PM

  But Mary, you do not understand!  We are expendable so that the greens may achieve their goal of becoming Ubermenschen who decide the inevitable triumph of manifest socialist destiny in accordance with their master plan crafted by master debaters.  

  For instance, if you have more than two children, those over that number must be donated for medical experiments and for erecting new wind towers at Camp Happy Happy Joy Joy.

  Do not worry, They will be so happy. They will be equipped with Happy Helmets.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

  • Recommended by 1 person
  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  John Curtis

  Yesterday 06:52 PM

  jack scht.  You do need your medication now, dear chap.  You have obviously not been subject to the noise of a wind turdbine which, as has been proven by many victims in this country and around the world, can and does cause serious health problems. 

  • Recommended by 14 people
  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  dawdler

  Yesterday 06:49 PM

  Sleep deprivation is a popular method of torture used by unscrupulous governments. Usually, this is carried out on terrorists or subversives in the guise of "national security".

  Unfortunately, it is also carried out on law abiding citizens who just happen to live in the wrong place...

  • Recommended by 19 people
  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  jack scht

  Yesterday 06:25 PM

  Lets hope they don't live by the sea, the noise of that used to drive me up the wall.  And whatever you do never go to Africa or Australia, the non stop sound of crickets is suicidal. Never live in a city the sound of traffic and especially the sirens of cops is a murder waiting to happen.  Whenever I visit my mum in the country I just want to kill every owl that has ever lived. Ear plugs anybody.

  • Recommended by 3 people
  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  BlueScreenOfDeath

  Yesterday 10:09 PM

  " the noise of that used to drive me up the wall. "

  I doubt it.

  I think you were probably up the wall to start with.

  • Recommended by 4 people
  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  aligatorhardt

  25 minutes ago

  That is exactly the point, people obsess over something they don't like, and make themselves loose sleep over it. The sound of wind turbines are no worse than other common sounds. When people share in the profits from turbines, almost no one is bothered. Isn't that interesting? Ownership (and Money) a Cure for NIMBY

  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  larkdescending

  Yesterday 06:41 PM

  Take another sip of your anti psychotic medication!

  • Recommended by 10 people
  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  cyclepath

  Yesterday 06:30 PM

  Try therapy Jack (or earplugs)

  PS, this is cynical, to avoid confusion :(

  .

  • Recommended by 9 people
  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  larkdescending

  Yesterday 05:49 PM

  This is why there is rage in the countryside. A big public health scandal in the making. The industry and the Government have tried to keep a lid on this, now they will have to get their cheque books out!

  (Edited by author 9 hours ago)

  • Recommended by 20 people
  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  3aple

  Yesterday 07:45 PM

  Not to mention the most beautiful countryside in the world blighted by these things.

  And where does the Country landowners Association (CLA) stand on this?

  You know, the people that got us all out protesting against restrictions on fox hunting on the grounds that they were protecting the countryside and the rural way of life?

  Well, the CLA can help our countryside conscious landowners with their applications for windfarms and the grnts that go with them.

  Preservation of the country, or preservation of their bank balances?

  .

  • Recommended by 10 people
  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  aligatorhardt

  23 minutes ago

  Packs of dogs barking all night are far worse than wind turbines.

  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  BlueScreenOfDeath

  Yesterday 10:08 PM

  "And where does the Country landowners Association (CLA) stand on this?"

  Laughing all the way to the bank, if "Sir" Reg Sheffield is anything to go by.

  • Recommended by 2 people
  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  wibbling

  Yesterday 05:54 PM

  Considering wind is almost ntirely tax payer subsidised, that's us again then.

  Why do we put up with this? Why do we allow them to get away with this utter crock?

  • Recommended by 16 people
  • Recommend
  • Report
• 

  aligatorhardt

  20 minutes ago

   Renewables payed back 7 billion Euros last year; making money explains why people like wind power. No water use and no pollution of air or water are more reasons.  Getting poisoned by coal use and paying extra for it is really hard to find an advantage for.

  • Recommend
  • Report

• 1 2   Next →

blog comments powered by Disqus

promotions »

• 
  Telegraph Wine: Sauvignon Blanc

  Save £26 on this delicious, crisp white wine from Telegraph Wine.

  View

FIND YOUR CHEAPEST GAS & ELECTRICITY DEALS

Earth Most Viewed

• TODAY
• PAST WEEK
• PAST MONTH

1. Wind farm noise does harm sleep and health, say scientists
2. Ash sites with killer fungus double
3. Giant spider eating a bird caught on camera
4. Anglo-Saxon hall found in Kent is 'tip of the iceberg'
5. The elephant that speaks Korean

Editor's Choice »

The US: a struggling nation that is polls apart

 

America is divided as never before on class, gender, race and economic lines – but voters agree on the big issue, says Niall Ferguson

228 Comments

Golden Dawn: undisguised fascism in Greece

Has Sandy given Obama new hope?

Sandy glamour model a welcome tonic

The grubby sexy girl taking over the US

<SCRIPT language="JavaScript1.1" SRC="http://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/N5030.152130.7253069880621/B6820735.2;abr=!ie;sz=160x600;click=http://adclick.g.doubleclick.net/aclk%253Fsa%253DL%2526ai%253DB-AbTnCGWUKKPF-Wqigba7YGYCK6pm9UCAAAAEAEgADgAWL7s-OM3YLv2x4PcCoIBF2NhLXB1Yi0xOTEzNjg5NTcwNzEyNjY2sgETd3d3LnRlbGVncmFwaC5jby51a7oBCWdmcF9pbWFnZcgBCdoBeGh0dHA6Ly93d3cudGVsZWdyYXBoLmNvLnVrL2VhcnRoL2VuZXJneS93aW5kcG93ZXIvOTY1MzQyOS9XaW5kLWZhcm0tbm9pc2UtZG9lcy1oYXJtLXNsZWVwLWFuZC1oZWFsdGgtc2F5LXNjaWVudGlzdHMuaHRtbJgCsAmpAhMqMJT34Lo-wAIC4AIA6gIvNjU4Mi90bWcudGVsZWdyYXBoLmVhcnRoL2VhcnRoLmVuZXJneS53aW5kcG93ZXL4AoHSHpAD0AWYA9AFqAMB4AQBoAYg%2526num%253D0%2526sig%253DAOD64_2q0DD7-cccJONj45JCLVuKgoLqTw%2526client%253Dca-pub-1913689570712666%2526adurl%253D;ord=301140597?"></SCRIPT>

FEATURED ADVERTISING

• Shopping
• World Travel
• Property
 

• 
  FREE 2013 Photo Wall Calendar

  Choose from a variety of themed designs, upload your photos and customise the logos and text - it's as simple as that. Vistaprint will do the rest.

• 
  Create 10 FREE personalised Christmas Cards

  Pick from thousands of quality Christmas designs - add your special touch with photos, images and messages. Exclusively from Vistaprint.