Writing in The Spectator magazine last month, science and economics journalist Matt Ridley said that wind power’s contribution to the environment is still — after decades of development — “trivial to the point of irrelevance, with wind power and photo-voltaic solar power jointly meeting less than 1% of global energy demand.

From the International Energy Agency’s 2016 Key Renewables Trends survey, we can see that wind provided 0.46% of global energy consumption in 2014, while solar and tidal combined provided 0.35%.”

He added: “Such numbers are not hard to find, but they don’t figure prominently in reports on energy derived from the unreliable solar and wind lobbies. Their trick is to hide behind the statement that close to 14% of the world’s energy is renewable, with the implication that this is wind and solar.

In fact the vast majority — 75% — is bio-mass, and a very large part of that is ‘traditional bio-mass’ — sticks and logs and dung burned by the poor in their homes to cook with. Those people need that energy, but they pay a big price in health problems caused by smoke inhalation. Even in rich countries playing with subsidised wind and solar, a huge slug of their renewable energy comes from wood and hydro — the reliable renewables.

“As for resource consumption and environmental impacts, the direct effects of wind turbines — killing birds and bats, sinking concrete foundations deep into wild lands — is bad enough. However, out of sight and out of mind is the dirty pollution generated in Inner Mongolia by the mining of rare-earth metals for the magnets in the turbines.

“This generates toxic and radioactive waste on an epic scale, which is why the phrase ‘clean energy’ is such a sick joke, and ministers should be ashamed every time it passes their lips.”