MIKE Sanderson (Letters, November 14) is concerned his contributions should be included rather than “mocked”.

Of course we’ll do our best to respect this but it would be better if we had the debate on the basis of real facts rather than “mock” ones.

On rare earth metals, Mr Sanderson is right to highlight this. We share his concern about the stories that lie behind many consumer and industrial products.

Rare earths are used in many applications; less than a quarter worldwide go into magnets and those will be for very many different uses, not just wind turbines.

Rare earths also crop up in computers, smartphones and flat screen TVs. Friends of the Earth does not believe that the solution lies in boycotting all these things and we suspect your readers don’t either; rather we need to push for high standards of environmental protection and human rights.

On the ownership of the project we agree that it is lamentable how Britain has failed to develop a strong renewable energy industry. Our marine and offshore renewable resources give us a chance to change this.

A recent study showed that England’s South West Peninsula could benefit from 34,000 full time jobs created in these technologies by 2030. Wave and tidal power will be part of this, but they are not yet commercially viable.

No, we do not “own” these energy streams. But neither does anyone else, and the more we reap the bounties of our renewable energy resources the less we will have to depend on imported fuels.

The “load factor” of wind turbines is frequently cited by anti-wind groups as a problem when it is nothing of the sort.

No machine operates under best possible conditions all of the time, especially not if working with a variable resource like the wind. This does not reduce the value of the wind industry.

Every kilowatt hour generated from wind displaces power from a more polluting source and the net contribution to the fight against climate change is considerable and growing. On impacts on nature, Friends of the Earth is well aware of the potential for harm from this project if it is poorly designed or executed.

That is why our support is conditional; we want to see what comes out from the environmental studies and will be pressing the developers to use the best available techniques to avoid harm to marine mammals, birds, or important areas of seabed.

If the dilemma was as simple as having the Navitus Bay wind farm or not having it, then I suspect we’d all be on the same side but that isn’t the question that faces us.

It is between getting our energy supplies from this project and others like it, or from other sources such as coal, oil, gas or nuclear power. It is our conclusion that offshore wind emerges as the power source of choice.

ANGELA POOLEY, Co-ordinator, East Dorset Friends of the Earth