Wind Opposition
The debate over on land wind rumbles on.
Opposition to the new wind farm proposed for Cefn Croes
in central Wales, and the DTI commitment to press ahead nevertheless,
has provided a particularly sharp focus. The opponents are incensed
by the DTI’s decision that the project does not need to be called
in for a Public Inquiry - it had after all obtained planning
permission from the local council. We will be looking at both
sides of the argument over this project in Renew 138.
Meanwhile, opposition has also begun to
emerge to offshore wind projects. In a recent Parliamentary
exchange, Bob Blizzard (Waveney) asked Secretary of State Margaret
Beckett, if she would tell ‘the
environmental and other groups that come to see her not to oppose
offshore wind farms? Although they want renewable energy, many
of those groups have blocked wind farms in the countryside.
As the windiest country in Europe, it would be a disaster if
our huge potential for developing offshore wind power were to
be thwarted by the activities of those groups’.
Beckett responded that although ‘many
of those groups make a useful contribution to the debate...
there can be a worrying tendency to a degree of inconsistency
among them when it comes to concrete proposals. Everyone who
wishes to see the greater development of a programme for renewables
- I think that includes most hon. Members - must recognise that
none of these issues is problem free’.
(Hansard March 7)
Wind versus Whelks
Energy Minister Brian Wilson got caught
in some cross fire from conflicting local interests when he
responded to a Parliamentary Question in Jan about the benefits
of offshore windfarm projects. He said he would be happy to
visit Lowestoft to see the pioneering work of SLP, which, as
the local MP, Bob Blizzard, reminded him, is involved in a project
to build the largest wind turbine in Europe, and he was also
asked to visit King’s Lynn, where, a Norfolk MP, M. Bellingham,
noted, there were plans for a further 30 offshore from Cromer.
But then came the punch line ‘Did
he agree that, however desirable offshore renewable wind energy
is, it is vital that fishery interests are considered when locations
are decided? Otherwise, irreparable damage could be done to
the cockle, whelk, mussel, shrimp and crab fishery off the Norfolk
coast’.
Wilson said he recognised the problem and
was due to meet the National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations
to discuss it. ‘As in everything,
we must strike a balance. Of course other maritime interests
must be consulted and considered, but we must not have locking
mechanisms, and stalking horses of initiative that appear to
be environmentally based but whose objective is actually to
block renewables projects.’
Mrs. Joan Humble (Blackpool, North and
Fleetwood): weighed in, adding that ‘in
my area there are two issues, tourism and fishing’.
Wilson replied ‘Of course there
must be consultation, and people have a right to expect account
to be taken of all possible impacts when applications are considered.
What we must not have, however, is institutionalised objection
to every project that is proposed. That applies to offshore
wind, onshore wind and all other renewables. At some point,
a contradiction will arise if we as a Government, and the country
generally, pay lip service to renewables without willing the
means to deliver the necessary contribution. Obviously each
project must be scrutinised, but there must also be a generally
positive attitude to the development of the industry.’
Mr. Simon Thomas (Ceredigion) then added
his piece, claiming that ‘many
people are in despair at the proliferation of onshore wind farms,
which do not even produce the amount of energy that offshore
wind could produce? We need that to happen in the Celtic sea
especially. Ireland is taking advantage of that resource and
the Irish Government are investing in the biggest offshore wind
farm in the whole of western Europe. Should not that be happening
in UK territorial waters?’
Wilson replied ‘I
am sure that the hon. Gentleman realises the problem that he
wants us to build large offshore wind farms all over the place,
but that the opposite view has been expressed by other hon.
Members. People must take a balanced view and we must act collectively.
If we are to have a serious renewables industry, we must be
able to drive forward projects without them being blocked for
years, sometimes on unreasonable grounds. At the same time,
we must protect the right of scrutiny’.
Patricia Hewitt also got an ear
full on the same issue in another session when Kevin Hughes
(Doncaster, N) asked ‘What guarantees
can the Secretary of State give to the House that huge swathes
of the beautiful English countryside will not be blighted by
these obnoxious looking windmills- noisy instruments that cannot
generate enough electricity even to boil a decent kettle? What
guarantees will she give that the English countryside will not
be ruined by these obnoxious things?
(windturbine =2MW, kettle =1kW but let that pass- ed)
Ms Hewitt replied: ‘I am sorry that my
hon. Friend does not like the appearance of modern windmills.
I think that they are rather beautiful. Environmentalists cannot
have it both ways. If we are committed to the development of
renewable energy, and if we want to meet our Kyoto targets -
and, indeed, targets beyond that - and deal with the problem
of climate change, then yes, we have to meet the targets that
we have set. That means ensuring that 10 per cent. of our electricity
comes from renewable energy by 2010 - and, frankly, more beyond
that. Environmental issues, especially in respect of areas of
outstanding natural beauty, are always taken into account when
planning decisions are made on the siting of wind farms.’
