NEWSLETTER
Winter 2007 - Cumbria under Seige
Spring 2007 - The energy whitepaper, local updates, the global situation
TAXPAYERS
TO FUND RENEWABLE ENERGY WITH £ 6 BILLION.
Oil,
coal and
Any
government would deem it essential to act in the face of such threats, to produce
a sensible, medium to long –term energy strategy. So… what are
the current plans to replace our lost electricity generating capacity? Oh yes – renewables. Especially the
one that relies on good old intermittent wind. According to
a recent report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, taxpayers
will be made to
subsidise “green energy” to the tune of £6.5 bn by 2010. Cost effective? Even if the
whole of
Of
course the not-so–hidden agenda relates to man-made carbon dioxide emissions. The Government maintains that these are the main cause of climate
change, a fact that is highly debatable, but Tony Blair has gone out on a limb
and committed the UK to ‘targets’ that are simply unrealistic.
Government
reports in the last nine months are enlightening.
May ‘An Electricity Supply Strategy for the
July ‘DTI Renewable Energy’ from the House of Commons Committee
of Public Accounts was very critical of the subsidy system (the Renewable Obligation
Certificates) and the unco-ordinated approach to policy that is causing a massive
rush of applications for windfarms and a huge escalation in costs. (that adds approximately one billion per year to our electricity
prices)
The
G8 Summit at Gleneagles was extremely lukewarm about Kyoto, and Blair’s recent
US speeches implied that the UK would not agree to a second round of ‘targets’
after 2012.
Perhaps
the truth is
dawning on our Government.
However, unless strong action is taken
immediately, so many windfarms will be approved that much of the
TURBINES OVER YOUR FENCE
Right
now, developers are writing to every landowner in the
At
the same time the government seems to be massaging the planning regulations
in favour of the developers.
Since
its inauguration in 2000, in response to the growing threat of windfarms in
The
blight on
WHINASH INQUIRY
We
now await the inquiry results. It appears that the Inspector’s Report will not
be sent to the DTI until January.
It
was gratifying to see that the House of Lords appears to be in agreement with
the technical points that FELLS put forward at the inquiry. In the recent
report, ‘The Economics of Climate Changes’ from the
House of Lords Select Committee on Economic Affairs, it states, to quote:
‘We
have some concerns about the objectivity of the IPCC [Inter-governmental Panel
on Climate Change] process, with some of its emissions scenarios and summary
documentation apparently influenced by political considerations,’ and ’We are
concerned that UK Energy and Climate Policy appears to be based on dubious assumptions
about the roles of renewable energy and energy efficiency and that the costs
to the UK …have been poorly documented.’
It
appears that politicians have become increasingly aware of the hole they have
dug themselves, regarding their heavy concentration on wind power to the detriment
of other more viable systems. Eggs and
baskets spring to mind.
The
full report can be accessed by searching the title on Google
The Journal – Newcastle-upon-Tyne
by Robert Brooks
Wind
farms planned for the North may not be as ‘green’ as developers claim. After
an advertising watchdog ruled that crucial pollution figures were exaggerated.
The
Advertising Standards Authority upheld a complaint against Hertforshire-based
Renewable energy Systems over the company’s published estimates of how far its
turbines would reduce carbon dioxide emissions.
They
based their figures on the typical emissions from a coal burning power plant,
but after taking expert advice, the authority determined it ‘was not reasonable’
to use present figures for calculating the reduction in emissions over a period
of as long as 25 years. And it has now asked RS not to publish the results of
similar calculations in the future.
The
ruling has wide-reaching for all similar developers across the
In
the North East, they include npower renewables, which is currently engaged in
consultation over a proposed 18-turbine wind farm at Middlemoor, near Alnwick
in Northumberland.
Protester
Dominic Coupe, whose family owns farms near middlemoor, said:” the review affects
the rash of North wind turbine schemes and for the first time gives clear guidance
on how CO2 savings from wind power must be estimated. This more sensible estimate puts the staggering cost of wind
farms into perspective.
Wind turbines are hugely costly relative
to the alternatives and they offer no significant reliable capacity.”
Dr
John Constable, policy and research director of the Renewable Energy Foundation,
said: ”It’s good to see that the ASA has revisited this issue and brought its
ruling into line with commonsense engineering principles.
The
wind industry as a whole must now revise claims which have seriously distorted
debate about the value of onshore wind power.
PRESS
RELEASE
Renewable
Energy Foundation
SCOTTISH
POWER SEEKS COMPULSORY PURCHASE TO DRIVE THROUGH WIND FARM PLANS.
Ofgem
yesterday announced that CRE Energy limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of Scottish
Power, was seeking powers of compulsory purchase to drive through the construction
and connection of its projects.
Ofgem
reports “ In its application CRE explained that it intends to develop a series
of windfarms at various locations in the
“CRE
also considered that it would be helpful to have the power of compulsory wayleaves
available to it for activities such as the installation and connection of associated
cables, the export of power off site, construction and lay down areas and access.”
While
it is to be expected that developers will in the first seek to purchase or lease
land from neighbours to their wind farm projects in the normal way, the threat
of compulsory purchase will make it impossible in practice for adjoining landowners
to defend their interests. REF warned
today that growth in wind power companies seeking compulsory purchase orders
under the 1989 electricity act is to be expected following the successful applications
of Thanet Offshore wind, and that of the Green Renewable Energy Company Ltd.
which is apparently proposing biomass plants, both in October 2005.
CRE/Scottish
Power’s application is the next wave of this trend.
Ofgem
has stated that it is minded to approve the grant of Compulsory Purchase powers
to CRE/Scottish Power.
In
the legal and planning tradition of the country, powers of compulsory purchase
are rarely granted, and this growing precedent for the automatic award of such
powers to enable businesses to further their commercial ends is deeply disturbing. Such a move would be justified only if there was a clear
and unequivocal case for believing the national interest to be at stake. REF believes there is no such case.
Campbell
Dunford, CEO of the Renewable Energy Foundation said:”The essence of Renewable
energy is sustainability, co-operation and mutual benefit. The fact that some companies feel the need to ride roughshod
over individual liberties and obtain powers of compulsory purchase reveals their
projects in their true, profit driven,colours. This is a civil liberties issue, pure and simple. The unjustified
allocation of these powers should be resisted tooth and nail.”
Western
Morning News 17 Jan 2006
How
wind firms have duped us
An
adjudication by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), released on December
21 confirms that the wind power industry has duped the country, despite repeated
warnings from critics. Every new windfarm, most recently the approval of the
giant on Romney Marsh, is hailed as saving the emission of thousands of tonnes
per year of carbon dioxide (CO2) and saving us from imminent flooding.
The
new ASA adjudication tells us that during the life of these industrial monstrosities
they will save only half of the CO2 emission which has been claimed. In many
cases it was the promised saving of CO2 which swayed the votes of councillors
and planners. Thus the Romney Marsh permission is founded on a lie.
The
more realistic saving of CO2, accepted by ASA, is based on average fuel mixture
use by power stations. Gas-fired generation provides an increasing amount of
our electricity, with lesser CO2 output, so in future, wind power will displace
less and less CO2 emission.
The
Sustainable Development Commission's recent report on wind power uses a gas-fired
CO2 emission factor, also used by the DTI, which is yet smaller than a mere
half of the inflated claim made by developers and their trade organisation,
the British Wind Energy Association.
The
landscape is being raped with governmental collusion and fraudulent claims.
Dr
John Etherington
Llanhowell,
Pembrokeshire
Westmorland Gazette 3rd February
2006
Bring
on the wind turbines
I noticed the anti-wind farm groups
are shouting ( Gazette, January 27, “Windfarm sites search brings angry response”),
aghast at the visual blight on the landscape, as they would see it , of wind
farms.
May I ask of all the people opposed
to wind farms- are they prepared for the alternatives?
Are they willing to forego electrically
powered washing machines, dishwashers, heating, television, and their computers
and electric light? And what about driving their cars and jetting off on holiday?
If they are not to give up on electricity
or change their energy comsumption and convince the rest of the nation and planet
to follow their lead, are they prepared have another nuclear power station built
on
If nuclear power is unacceptable
to them, are coal fired power stations okay? Would they be willing to be a miner
or have a son/daughter or grandchild risk life and limb working as a miner?
How many of the people opposed
to wind power are willing to pay the premium of building and operating coal-powered
stations with flue gas desulphurisation and carbon burial? Or would
they be willing to have an incinerator that generates power from waste located
on the edge of the national park or on the edge of their town or village?
If we don’t curb our carbon emissions,
how will our climate change?
Will the
I agree wind generation is not
a solution in itself to our power generation needs but it is a very useful addition
to the renewable arsenal. Bring on the wind turbines say I! I regard
them as majestic animated sculptures and a physical demonstration of man waking
up to his stewardship obligations to the planet.
Martin
Ives, Kendal
Gazette
10th February
Seeking
the best energy solution
Mr Ives is right to say we should
try to be more frugal in our use of energy(Letters February 3, ‘Bring on the
Wind turbines’), but wrong to infer that industrial- scale wind power represents
salvation from global environmental catastrophe. So when
he asks whether people like me , opposed to wind farms, are prepared to the
alternatives, the short answer is: you bet.
Why so emphatic? Well, just
consider what wind power offers. On an industrial
scale, it can only make a small and intermittent contribution to our electricity
supply, while offering almost zero net reduction in CO2 emissions. Renewables, chiefly wind , are set to achieve a reduction
of just 1.7 per cent of the UK government’s
2010 CO2 emissions target; an insignificant 0.04 per cent reduction in global
emissions- scant reward for our handsome subsidies and desecrated wilderness.
The nuclear waste issue seems to
be a peculiarly British obsession. The French
now generate about 80 per cent of their electricity from nuclear reactors, with
hardly a murmur, while countries such as
If CO2 is really driving climate
change, this is a small and entirely manageable, price to pay. Nuclear also
produces reliable base-load electricity without leaving the UK open to political,
economic or terrorist blackmail inherent in long –distance gas supply, as made
plain by recent events in Russia and Eastern Europe.
Only last weekend we saw newspaper
reports that gas prices are set to rise by 25 per cent this spring, and electricity
prices will inevitably follow. We are now reaping the consequences of hapless
energy policies pursued by successive governments. Never forget,
no electricity is the most expensive option of all. Wind cannot
be the answer to secure a sustained electricity supply or to the problem of
climate change- as FELLS and many other organisations have been stressing for
years.
So yes, I prefer my alternatives,
which I suspect are not the ones Mr Ives would wish to
ascribe to me.
I prefer policies that dispense with
costly side shows like big wind farms and instead instead pursue meaningful
reductions in CO2 emissions, secure electricity supplies, functioning public
services, prosperity and the preservation of our natural environment.
I believe that we need to demonstrate
to the developing economies of for example
India and China, that responsible
energy and and environmental policies are compatible with economic prosperity.
I regard a mix of nuclear, gas
and clean coal technologies, more local responsibility for carbon dioxide reduction,
in which there is a role for the less intrusive, underdeveloped renewables like
biomass, tidal and micro-wind generation, as welcome alternatives to the gradual
destruction of the countryside, frequent blackouts and economic meltdown, in
the wake of large –scale wind power and the rest of Mr Ive’s vision.
Shaun
Laidler
Treasurer
Friends
of
Grayrigg
Mr Ives (Letters, February 3) seems
to have missed one point.
Over the last two months, with frosty,
anticyclonic weather, the wind has forgotten to blow, just at a time when the
demand for electricity has been greatest.
A certain, minimum wind speed is
necessary before power can be fed to the grid-this has not been exceeded.
Had the proposed Whinash development
been up and running, between them the turbines would not have managed to boil
a kettle.
Wind farms don’t work.
Peter Johnson, Levens
A WONDERFUL WIN FOR WINASH
By now hardly anyone in the
and the Government’s acceptance of that recommendation.
This is a just decision and marks the culmination of over 2.5 years work by an army of opposition groups including FELLS and many members of the public.
FELLS played an important role and gave evidence that lasted over two whole days. We believe that the FELLS evidence had an important effect by introducing balance and clarity into the reasoning. Glimpses of this are evident in the following quotations from the Inspectors report:
Paragraph 3.32 states
‘The Applicant has exaggerated the benefits of the proposal
and has simultaneously underestimated the scale and impact on the two National
Parks.
When these matters are set into their
proper focus it immediately becomes apparent that the benefit bears no relationship
to the […] harm that will be caused by grant of consent…’
Paragraph 3.38 states
when referring to the supply of electricity in the
‘The supply, without Winash, will meet
the Government’s targets making the destructive impacts of Winash unnecessary. Further, this has to be seen in the context of the Applicant’s
hysterical approach to global warming…’
Strong
words! FELLS accepts that climate
change is occurring but presented evidence urging a balanced and rational assessment
rather than the eco-evangelistic approach of many of the Green organisations
and wind farmers.
A
final quote from the Inspector perhaps sums up best of all what this fight was
all about:
‘As a whole, the Howgills
provide expansive views across the most stimulating landscape in the North West
of England with the dramatic mountains of the Lake District forming a continuous
skyline to the west’.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
More
turbines threaten Your Skyline
Baywind Energy Co-operative is reviving
proposals for the Barkin Lot Windfarm (formerly Barkin House) close to the B6245 near
The meeting
held by FELLS at Old hutton on March 18th, to inform local people of the project, was filled to capacity.
Latest
information shown in the table below indicates a LARGE
INCREASE IN THE SIZE, SITE AND ACCESS
1998
2006
NUMBER
OF TURBINES
6
9
CAPACITY
PER TURBINE
800 KW
2000KW
HUB HEIGHT
138 FT
197 FT
OVERALL
HT
236 FT
328 FT
SITE
AREA
0.3 KM
1.25 KM
TRACK
LENGTH
1.6 KM
4.1KM
We must
all keep our ears to the ground over this, and take any action that is needed
in good time.
To facilitate this, a small working group
met for the first time on April 13th.
Contact
: Bernard Drinkall
on 01539 724179.
Those
who are sceptical about the current trend of alarmist thinking on global warming
usually justify their view by pointing out that the scientific evidence is inexact
and often contradictory. But that does
not absolve our generation of the responsibility to proceed with caution. As Professor John
Etherington points
out, we only have one atmosphere, so it is beholden on us to look after it.
FELLS opposes industrial scale wind energy developments because they simply cannot help in any significant way---- but that does not mean that we do not care about greenhouse gas emissions.
CUMBRIA
WIND ENERGY SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT
After a long wait the consultation
draft of this importany document has been published. It is the result of
joint input from the County Council and the local planning authorities of Allerdale,
The document which runs to 121 pages, is split into three main chapters, namely(1) Guidance on Preparing wind Energy Proposals (2) Landscape Capacity Assessment and (3) Guidance on Landscape and visual Impact Assessment. The last two were prepared by Coates Associates , a consultancy group specialising in town planning and landscape architecture. It does NOT include the National Parks which are to be the subject of a separate assessment. The aim of the document is to help the planning authorities decide where wind farms might be located.
Broadly speaking, chapter 2 forms
the basis for the recommendations. It divides
Three landscape types are classified
as having low capacity (Estuary and Marsh, coastal limestone and Fells and Scarps)..No
landscape has been classified as ‘high’ capacity and the worst(moderate/high)
has been applied to just one landscape type, Intermediate Moorland plateau. This
is a matter of some concern because it includes the triangle of land whose corners
are Hutton roof, Kirkby Lonsdale and the Lambrigg wind farm, a finger of land
running into the
The main valleys in the county (Lune and Eden) are classified as low/moderate which implies the capacity to accept a small group of wind turbines (3-5). However, it states that the confines of a valley will make the impact much greater, and thus more likely to be turned down.
Other aspects of wind farm development are dealt with in a less satisfactory way----- noise, community issues, conservation, tourism and the local economy, aircraft and telecommunications. The references quoted are highly selective and generally toe the Government line. FELLS have pointed out serious omissions in some of theses areas.
FELLS’ response has been a guarded welcome for the document. We have to have one and at least this seems to be an honest attempt to bring some order to the chaos that currently governs wind farm developments. It also leaves scope to make reasoned objections to any proposals that we really feel are inappropriate.
THE SHAP RENEWABLE
Over two years ago FELLS participated
in a public meeting in Shap Memorial Hall to object to an application for an
anemometer mast above shap village with hints that a wind farm of 3 turbines
might be on the cards.
We lost. Gamesa Energy
(a Spanish firm) have now lodges a scoping study for 12 turbines 118 metres
high (taller than those proposed for Whinash) with the
If you would like further information
please contact