From the independent;
http://www.wind-farm.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=Web_Links&file=index&req=visit&lid=33
<http://www.wind-farm.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=Web_Links&file=index&req=visit&lid=33>
Wind farms will be
allowed on national park borders
By Michael
McCarthy, Environment Editor
27 October 2003
Developers of large-scale wind farms will be encouraged by the Government
to build right up to the boundaries of national parks and other cherished
landscapes.
New planning guidance, to be published shortly by John Prescott's Office of
the Deputy Prime Minister, will rule out the idea of "buffer zones" to keep
wind farms away from the immediate vicinity of national parks and protected
areas.
It will be part of a set of new policy recommendations designed to overcome
growing public opposition to the siting of giant wind turbines in the upland
areas of Britain.
The proposal attracted anger from green groups involved with landscape protection
when they were informed of it. "This would be an outrageous and blatant disregard
of the Government's statutory responsibilities to protect these areas on behalf
of the nation," said Ruth Chambers, the deputy chief executive of the Council
for National Parks.
Though the public has hardly realised it, the Government's renewable energy
policy, part of the national strategy to combat climate change, implies that
as many as 5,000 wind turbines, each hundreds of feet high - more than 350
feet is typical - will be installed in the uplands between now and 2020.
The new planning guidance, which Mr Prescott enthusiastically supports, is
designed to smooth the passage of this process. The planning policy statement
22 (PPS22) firmly tells regional planning bodies and local councils in England
that they are expected to encourage the development of renewable energy projects.
It instructs them to adopt "positive" policies on renewables, which must not
be "undermined" by other policy issues, and warns that if they do not toe
the line, the Government will intervene.
Dealing with the effect of large wind farms on scenic views, the document
says: "Visual impact is essentially a subjective issue", and it tells developers
they can use the windy hill country that is the setting for most of the English
national parks as wind-farm sites.
It says: "Regional planning bodies and local planning authorities should not
create 'buffer zones' around nationally designated areas and apply policies
to these areas that prevent the development of renewable energy projects.
"Nor should local landscape and local nature conservation designations be
used in themselves to refuse planning permission for renewable energy developments."
As reported in The Independent
two weeks ago, at least one county council, Cumbria, has already designated
extensive "search areas" for wind farms along the edges of two national parks,
the Lake District and the Yorkshire Dales, with one application already in
to build a 27-turbine, four-mile-long wind farm on the Lake District National
Park boundary. PPS22 would force other councils to follow suit.
"This is extremely worrying, and if it is not stopped it will lead to a 'necklacing'
of the national parks with large industrial developments," Ms Chambers said.
"It displays a fundamental misunderstanding about the role of national parks
in the landscape. Often they are surrounded by countryside which is attractive
in its own right, and it's the setting that makes them special.
"The Government fails to see that the national park boundary is not a sharp
line in the ground with high-quality landscape inside it and poor quality
outside."
Jill Hatcher of the Campaign to Protect Rural England described the planning
guidance as a "sinister" turn of events. "What they are proposing is that
the landscape issue is not going to get any kind of consideration. It says
that renewable energy should be promoted and this policy should not be undermined
by other policies. But these other policies are the ones we have had to protect
our countryside for the last 50 years.
"The statement about visual impact being subjective is really unbelievable.
It's not subjective - there's either an impact or there isn't. The idea of
providing no way in which it can be judged is ridiculous," she said.
Tony Burton, policy and strategy director of the National Trust, said: "We
are firm supporters of renewal energy, but there lots of ways we can hit our
renewable targets which don't require such damage being done to important
open countryside. The suggestion that there should not be buffer zones is
an insult to a real public concern."
But Alison Hill of the British Wind Energy Association (BWEA), the industry
umbrella group, said: "We appreciate that there are designated landscapes,
and we are not going to build wind farms in them. But to apply buffer zones
alongside these areas makes it incredibly difficult for the industry to find
sites. If we go down that road, we would be severely restricted."
The UK has 82 wind farms with 1,030 turbines generating nearly 600 megawatts
of electricity, enough to power one large city. Stephen Timms, the energy
minister responsible for renewables, said recently that it was expected that
about 8,000MW would be produced by wind by 2010.
BWEA estimates that about 2,500 large new onshore turbines will be needed
to generate this. The same again would be needed to reach Government targets
for 2020.
(© The Independent 2003)
Are YOU interested
in the environment? Do YOU want to do something about it? Find out more at:
http://www.countryguardian.net &
http://www.wind-farm.org