A Very Happy Christmas & Successful 2009 to all our supporters
Newsletter No. 17 Winter 2008
Contents
Please oppose Sillfield Windfarm
The Alice-in-Wonderland world of the Governments wind policy
Our AONBs may no longer be secure
Vandalism at Cartmel (Stribers wind farm)
Government Legislation—the Planning Bill
The headlines in our Spring 2006 and Spring 2008 Newsletters read ‘A Wonderful Whinash Win’ and ‘Hoff Moor—another win for rational debate’. So how gratifying it is to record yet another victory. At the SLDC Planning Committee meeting on 30th October the councillors rejected the Officers recommendation to approve the Armistead wind farm by 12 to 1. This is not the end though as we have now been informed that Banks Developments do intend to lodge an appeal which should trigger a Public Inquiry.
However, the win is a great tribute to all members of the local opposition group (known as ABLOT—Against Barkin Lot developments) who, with FELLS and other organisations, have worked hard for the past 18 months. Our case against this proposal was supported by the Yorkshire Dales National Park Authority, Friends of the Lake District, the National Trust, the majority of local Parish and Town Councils and 495 individual letters. On the day, 22 people spoke against the proposal (including the most affected local farming families) while only four speakers were in favour. It was also gratifying that our MP, Tim Farron, and the Conservative candidate (Gareth McKeever) both took the time to visit the location and speak to the local people, an action that cemented their opposition to the scheme.
The application was rejected on three grounds. Firstly the harm to the landscape of South Lakeland which would be contrary to several planning policies; secondly, the unacceptable impact on the nearby families, and third the affect on the bridleway that crosses the site. The developers tried to claim that the visual impact would not be significant at more that 2 kilometres distance. What nonsense. Standing on the site in clear weather you have a 180 degree stunning Lakeland panorama stretching from the Kent Estuary to the Howgill Fells, the turbines on Kirkby Moor 18 miles away can be seen turning– and they are only half the height of those proposed here.
In this battle we produced and delivered 2,500 leaflets and several newsletters, held 7 exhibitions, attended and spoke at 6 parish meetings, held over 20 committee meetings, held site walks, plotted bird counts, and produced a delightful CD of slides in and around the area which went to councillors on the Planning Committee. Hard work, yes. But well worth while. We must now gird our loins for round 2 and mount a robust challenge at the Public Inquiry. This will require significant funds. If you are willing to help financially please fill in and return the enclosed form.
Please oppose Sillfield wind farm
The Armistead application was for 6 turbines but a second application for 3 turbines of 110 metres only 1 km from the Armistead site and above the village of Gatebeck is now with SLDC (SL/2008/0900). The company, Whirlwind Renewables, is part of the Novera Group. This will be as prominent as Armistead and Tim Farron MP and Gareth McKeever have already said they are opposed to it. Within this newsletter is a proforma objection letter. Please take a few minutes to add your address and sign it legibly and send it to the SLDC address shown. Whirlwind are paying a company to get people in Kendal town centre to sign letters of support—a disgraceful and undemocratic action. It is vital that this one is also defeated or the whole of South Lakeland will be at risk from wind farm proliferation like that at Barrow. .
The Alice-in-Wonderland world of the Government’s wind policy
Alice-in-Wonderland is the only way that you could describe the present Government’s attitude but unfortunately the views of the opposition parties are not very different.
Consider the announcement by the Energy Minister, John Hutton MP (who was shaping up as a sensible Energy Minister but now moved to Foreign Affairs) about five months ago. He said that the Government wanted another 27 gigawatts (GW) of electricity generation from wind by 2020. This was to be delivered by 3,000 offshore turbines of 5MW capacity each and 4,000 more onshore turbines of 3MW. Added to what is already in the planning system, this would take our total electricity from wind to nearly 40GW.
Now just think for a moment. How many days are there between now and 2020? It seems a long way off doesn’t it, but the answer, from January 1st 2009, is just 4015 (ignoring leap days). That means they will have to build nearly two turbines a day, every day for the whole of that time: Almost half of which will be built in hostile North and Irish Sea environments where most experts agree that only about 100 days each year might be calm enough for such complex operations. Each of these turbines would be just less than the height of Blackpool Tower. On top of that there is a world turbine shortage, an almost complete lack of barges with cranes suitable for lifting such massive structures, and little suitably skilled manpower. If that’s not crazy just what is?
But it gets worse. How much would this all cost? According to Mr Adrian Chatterton, E.ONs Head of Wind Farm Construction (see House of Lords Report, 24th October 2008, The EUs Target for Renewable Energy: 20% by 2020, page 51) the cost would be £2.4 million per megawatt for offshore (£12 million per turbine) and £1.5 million per megawatt onshore (£4.5 million per turbine). So the capital construction costs will be at least £54 billion. However, that is still not the end of the story, it gets even crazier!
Evidence was given by E.ON to the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee in June 2008 (see Volume II: Evidence of HOL Paper 195-II, page 118, 25th November 2008) on the requirements for thermal generation to back-up wind capacity. It said that their assessment of wind generation data in 2007 indicated that the Grid could rely on only 8% of the wind capacity to meet peak winter demand for power. It added that if the UK’s wind carpet was 40GW (40,000MW) then 8% would be just 3,600MW that could be relied upon. This would avoid the need to build this amount of thermal plant but the remaining 36,400MW would have to have back-up. THIS MEANS THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO BUILD, FROM NEW, EITHER 20 COAL OR 40 GAS GENERATING STATIONS JUST TO BACK UP THE WIND. That is, they are additional to our existing power stations. New gas-fired power stations cost between £350 and £500 million each and coal plants between £800 million and £1 billion. So if half the new build was coal and half gas the bill would come to around £17.5 billion. Add in the extra cost of Grid improvements and other infrastructure and the total cost is not far short of £100 billion! Is it crazy enough for you yet?
Well lets consider the renewable obligation subsidies paid to wind farm operators. Current ROC prices are £53 per megawatt hour of electricity generated. The new wind turbines will generate nearly 86 million MWh which at this price will mean consumers (us) will be paying £6 billion each year on top of regular costs just for the doubtful privilege of having unreliable wind generated electricity.
And while all this goes on we are nearly paralysed. Several Gas plants are in planning or under construction together with one biomass power station. But no decisions are being taken on new coal plants or on nuclear new-build. Yet just seven modern, new nuclear plants would generate more electricity than all these wind turbines put together—and they would generate nearly all the time. Yes it’s an Alice-in-Wonderland wind policy and the Mad Hatter is in charge!
This area continues to be under enormous threat. With already 5 wind farms operating, yet others are in the wings, most notably Standish Cote which will effectively join up with Harlock Hill wind farm. It is also known that a Dutch operator is keen to buy all the existing wind farms in order to repower them (i.e. install much bigger turbines) and make the whole peninsula one almighty wind farm. Unfortunately, Barrow Council seems unsympathetic to the wishes of local people and their MP, John Hutton, until recently Energy Minister, clearly was pushing Government policy.
OUR AONB’s MAY NO LONGER BE SECURE
Six years ago Nick Raynsford MP, then the Environment Secretary, announced that Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs) would enjoy the same landscape protection as National Parks.
So it is surprising that developers are now targeting AONBs in Cumbria and North Lancashire.
One company in particular is guilty, the Cheshire-based and misnamed Community Windpower Ltd. It is seeking to build a 12 x 125 metre turbines on Maudy Mea, an upland hill near Stainmore in the Eden Valley. The hill is inside the Pennines AONB, is peat rich and a bird haven. Cumbria’s policy states that only single turbines up to 25 metres high would be permissible in AONBs.
An opposition group (Save our Stainmore) was quickly set up and a public meeting held on October 3rd. Speakers included Mike Hall and a representative of the AONB management team. At present there have been no further developments but the scheme remains on the table.
The same company are also behind a large 17-24 turbine wind farm on Whin Moor, next to Caton inside the Forest of Bowland AONB. The site area is over 800 acres— 10 times larger than the present Caton wind farm. This would dominate Hornby and the villages to the NW of the Lune. This same company commissioned an opinion survey of local residents via Lancaster University. Superficially an academic study, it was really a move to ‘soften up’ any likely opposition prior to this application. Fortunately, there is an opposition group already active in Arkholme (STILE) who will no doubt want to fight this proposal.
Cumbria County Council passes a key motion
On November 20th Cumbria CC backed a motion deploring the present wind farm situation in the County. It had all-Party support and followed a rousing speech by Cllr. Norman Clarkson. The motion read;
“The County Council has grave concerns that the current targets for onshore wind-generated energy ride roughshod over the capacity of our landscapes and seascapes to satisfactorily accommodate further wind farms. Cumbria’s environment is a key asset for economic wellbeing. The County Council believes that a proliferation of wind farms will undermine efforts to address the county’s economic problems.
The County Council calls on the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change to give a commitment to seek to ensure that Government will reduce its over reliance on onshore wind, reduce current wind-related targets and invest, as a matter of urgency, in other low carbon energy generation."
We all back this motion—a useful tool for all Cumbrian wind farm opposition groups. Well done CCC & Norman.
VANDALISM AT CARTMEL—the Striber/Ellerside wind farm
Where do these companies come from? Energia in Natura (yes really) have crept out of Italy to wreak havoc at Cartmel. The Ellerside Ridge abuts the Lake District National Park, is crossed by the Cumbria Coastal Way, and commands spectacular coastal views. Yet they want to build 6 turbines over 400 feet high along the top.
FELLS helped set up an action group (STOP = Stop Turbines on the Peninsula) during the summer but since then they have really got moving. They held a highly successful public meeting, managed to get wide paper, radio and TV coverage, held local exhibitions and already have a substantial fighting fund. In addition they have an excellent web site (www.stopcartmelturbines.com) where you can see a simulation of the site as seen from Greenodd. There is also a picture gallery, interviews with people who love the area, and an opportunity to receive their newsletters. You can also enter your own ‘blog’ on their site. We hope many of you will write objecting to this shocking proposal when the application is lodged with SLDC.
As many of you will know, Cartmel is an historic village with its priory, narrow streets, its race course and a very distinct identity all of its own. This wind farm will utterly dominate the village and is bound to impact the local tourist industry— a vital part of Cartmel life. It should not have to tolerate such legalised vandalism.
Government Legislation — The Planning Bill
As we go to press, three major pieces of legislation, the Climate Change Bill , the Energy Bill and the Planning Bill have received Royal Ascent. This Planning Bill seeks to change radically the way that some construction projects are dealt with. If the Government deems that they are ‘Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects’ [NSIPs], the Secretary of State will issue a National Policy Statement and refer the application to a newly created body of unelected people called the Infrastructure Planning Commission [IPC] which will determine such applications. Projects likely to be included will be airport runways, gas storage facilities and pipelines, overhead pylons, motorways, major railways, and of course power stations. Many people will agree with the general proposition that Britain cannot allow major infrastructure projects to drag on for years and years in a Byzantine planning system which can be repeatedly challenged by special interest groups to the detriment of the country. But having said that, the system clearly needs to allow for proper democratic involvement.
FELLS and other bodies such as Friends of the Lake District had many reservations about certain aspects of this Bill and have sought to encourage amendments, especially in the House of Lords. Much painstaking work has been done, especially by Sir Christopher Audland (the first Chairman and a founder of FELLS) to identify weaknesses and help formulate amendments. FELLS is greatly indebted to Lord Hugh Reay of Whittington Hall for the great interest he has taken in this whole issue. He has made a number of speeches in the House and moved several amendments. As a result, some improvements have been made to the Bill. For example, a clause which would have prevented anyone from lodging a complaint about ’nuisance’ caused by a NSIP has been significantly amended. Secondly, the list of consultees failed to include National Park Authorities. This has now been rectified.
Perhaps of greatest concern is the proposal that power generating stations would be considered NSIPs if they had a capacity of 50 megawatts (MW) on land or 100MW offshore. Although there was no actual mention of wind farms, this was clearly what this is was meant for. We argued that a 50MW wind farm (which would have an average output of less that one-third of that and might consist of less than 10 turbines) could NOT be considered ’Nationally significant’ even though some members of the Lords tried to REDUCE this to 30MW or even 20MW onshore. At present. after much discussion, the government proposals remain and the Secretary of State retains the power to group together small schemes in ‘exceptional’ circumstances for referral to the IPC — an issue that the British Wind Energy Association might try to exploit. In local terms this could mean that Armistead, Sillfield, and High Biggins could be lumped together and taken out of local authority control — clearly nonsense.
SALT, North Cumbria and Craven
Wind farm opposition in Cumbria was boosted in 2008 when SALT (Strategic Alliance Against Lakeland Turbines—contact Andrew Carter, Tommy’s Barn, Bowscale, Penrith, CA11 0XH, Phone 07803 044846) was formed. The group is focussed on the west and north of Cumbria They have held several group meetings (which FELLS supported) and have attended meetings in the south. FELLS looks forward to working with them for future successes. Next meeting: Mungrisedale Village Hall, December 10th, 7.30pm when Dick Bowdler (New Acoustics Ltd) will talk about wind farm noise—all welcome.
A recent success in the north was the rejection of the Cumwhinton wind farm just south of Carlisle. FELLS sent a detailed objection. A letter has also been received by the Planning Officer of Allerdale Borough Council from National Air Traffic Services (NATS) stating that radar ‘noise’ clutter has now reached saturation in the Solway area. They have restated their objection to Fleeter Wood (Maryport), Tallentire Hill, Brownrigg Hall (Allonby) and Warwick Hall (West Newton) wind farms. This is excellent for NW Cumbria and could bring a halt to the glut of schemes being proposed there. Still no news on the Berrier Hill proposal. On the down side, an extension to the Winscales windfarm as well as Flimby Hall wind farm were approved, while Hellrig is going to an appeal.
We also record with pleasure the rejection of the Brightenber Hill wind farm in Craven District (Ribblesdale). FELLS opposed this application and helped set up the local action group (Friends of Craven Landscape). They also helped us with Armistead.