Wind farms are a sleek, shiny but superficial solution to the energy problems we are going to face in the years ahead. As such it is popular with our sleek, shiny but superficial government.

The trouble is the masts sprouting in thickets across our uplands will never provide more than a fraction of our energy needs. And while a presumption exists that the farms must be built we will continue vandalising the most sumptuous sweeps of our countryside for doubtful - and it now appears quite expensive - returns.

Of course, we must tackle the double threat of climate change and shrinking fossil fuel reserves.

Wind farms seem attractive, particularly to ministers who wish to demonstrate they are reacting. The start up costs are small and can be recovered within months. Because individual farms are small they are attractive to private investors and multinationals unable or unwilling to meet the costs of more sophisticated alternatives. They are also a useful source of income for landowners in windswept locations.

There is only one flaw - turbines don't actually generate much power. They don't even seem to produce the small amount claimed of them.

Let me give you an example, based on a few hours research and the use of a pocket calculator.

The average output of a wind turbine is assumed to provide power for 400 homes. That's the figure that crops up in planning documents, but the energy watchdog Ofgem publishes a table of how much renewable energy each farm actually produces.

I checked the performance of one of the established North-East sites, Great Eppleton farm near Hetton-le-Hole, in the year up to October 2004 (the most recent figures available). On average the four turbines put out enough megawatt-hours of power to provide for only 232 homes each. This is far less than the assumed figure and only a fifth of the domestic energy needs of Hetton, let alone that of its shops and factories.

This is a random example, I know, but it would mean Hetton's homes alone would need about 20 turbines to keep the lights on. Even if we accept the 400 figure (which now seems perilous) it would need 12 turbines before business even got a look in; Alnwick by comparison would need 34 and Newcastle 278.

Ignoring the fact they only work on windy days (no good if the breeze dies during half time in a big televised football match), where would they all go?

So far, as the Government strives to meet a target of just 10pc of energy from renewable resources by 2010, the answer is to be found on a hilltop near you.

This is fine for politicians who consider the countryside to be the boring bit between cities, but bad for those who treasure our northern landscape.

One of the latest plans is for eight turbines on Kiln Pit Hill. Most people would struggle to find the hill on a map but many will know its outline - a stately rise defining and dominating the high ground between the Tyne and Derwent valleys. To walk upon it is to know peace itself, while the tiny, isolated church of St Andrew and its striking mausoleum are an unexpected delight.

It is not a unique landscape, nor does it benefit from protected status - though it forms part of the horizon seen from Northumberland National Park on a good day and the North Pennines Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty pretty much any day.

It is loved by those who know it, and is worth preserving, unless those who want to explore our great outdoors are to be crushed into a few small pockets - Langdale, the Ingram Valley - spared for the purpose.

There are those who find wind farms aesthetically pleasing but there are as many who do not, particularly after hearing their insistent roar close to.

The ostentatious physicality of turbines creates a more subtle danger, too. They reassure us the lights won't go out. They are a comfort blanket kidding us we don't need to restrain energy use, when patently we do.

We risk placing our faith in an energy source which will not deliver as coal and gas runs out, rather than investing in more sophisticated but expensive renewable solutions - such as the neglected field of wave power - which might do the job.

We should set the meagre amount of energy we can expect against the substantial visual impact of turbines.

I suggest the next application is for a farm on Newcastle's Town Moor, or along the Links at Whitley Bay, or in a daisy chain tight round Alnwick. Then we would see a serious examination of their merits.