DURHAM, TEES VALLEY ETC. - NEWS

‘LOCAL CLIMATE CHANGE EXPERT SPEAKS OUT... AGAINST TURBINES’

Teesdale Mercury, 22 February, 2012.

‘First there was Barningham, then Bolam. Now there is Hamsterley and Ponder Gill, near Barnard Castle. Wind farm proposals have dominated the local news in recent years, but one question remains unanwered – are they any good? For the first in two-part series, we speak to Professor David Campbell, an expert in the field who also happens to live near the proposed Hamsterley site.

[...]

‘There are many reasons to object to wind farm proposals I have not mentioned. But surely the fact that any such proposal cannot yield any of the claimed environmental benefits is enough. The real issue is not whether proposals like the Upper Gaunless wind farm should go ahead. It is how so completely defective a national and international policy could have been followed over the last 20 years, and how our Government can persist with it when doing so is outright irrational.’

‘REDCAR M.P. BACKS NO CAMPAIGNS FOR WIND FARMS’

Evening Gazette, 17 February, 2012

‘A Teesside MP has joined residents in East Cleveland in the fight against plans for the construction of eight wind turbines.

‘Redcar MP Ian Swales is backing the no campaigns for wind farms at both Beacon Moor between new Marske and Upleatham, and a proposed site between Marske and Saltburn.

[...]’

‘EAST CLEVELAND RESIDENTS UNITED IN WIND TURBINE FIGHT’

Evening Gazette, 11 February, 2012.

‘Residents in East Cleveland have come together to fight plans to build eight wind turbines.

‘As previously reported, a 60m met mast has been installed to monitor wind conditions on Beacon Moor at the top of Errington Woods with a view to erecting four 115m wind turbines.

‘And now, a second application has been submitted to Redcar and Cleveland Council scoping opinion for another site between Marske and Saltburn.

[...]’

GROWING OPPOSITION TO SHERATON SCHEME

EDF have submitted an application for five 115m (350 ft) turbines at Sheraton, near Peterlee. ¹

Four turbines are in the Durham County Council area, one in Hartlepool.

Durham County Councillor Rob Crute, who represents the Blackhall ward, is opposing the scheme.²

According to Councillor Crute, views given at a recent public meeting showed that, “It was clear from the outset that there was unanimous community opposition to the application.” ³

-------------------------

¹ DCC Planning Ref. CMA/5/31.
² ‘Public meeting over wind farm’, Peterlee Mail, 29 January, 2012.
³ ‘Opposition to wind farm’, Hartlepool Mail, 16 February, 2012.

‘BLOW FOR TURBINE FIRM AS PLANS “FACE REFUSAL”’

Teesdale Mercury, 6 December, 2011

‘A plan to build a £12.5million wind farm in Teesdale is either facing refusal or significant planning delays.

‘Banks Renewables, which has submitted plans for five 115-metre turbines between village of Woodland and Hamsterley Forest, has been told that its survey work on wildlife is not up to scratch.

‘It is believed Grant Folley, a council planning officer, has now informed Banks that unless more work is done on the impact on birds and bats, the plan will be recommended for refusal.

[...]’

‘SIX-TURBINE WIND FARM IS APPROVED’

The Advertiser, 20 October, 2011.

‘A SIX-TURBINE wind farm has been approved in the region.

‘Darlington Borough Council’s planning committee chairman Paul Baldwin used his casting vote to approve Banks Renewables’ plans for the wind farm, north-east of the town [Moor House, Barmpton].

[...]’

Durham Tees Valley Airport had objected to the six 125m turbines but withdrew their objections on the morning of the meeting.

EASINGTON TURBINE THROWN OUT

Durham County Council’s county planning committee has thrown out a controversial application (‘Junction House’) by BT for a 100m turbine on land off Pesspool lane, Easington Village.

The committee were told that the majority of people in the area were against the turbine and that the parish council opposed the scheme because of its impacts on listed buildings, including St Mary’s Church and the Seaton Holme conservation area.

Officers told the committee the county has exceeded its target for wind farms.

-------------------------

‘Turbine bid blown out’, Sunderland Echo, 5 october, 2011.

‘ISLES’ CAMPAIGN GROUP FORMED

People in the communities surrounding E.ON’s bloated ‘Isles’ proposal have formed a campaign group to oppose the scheme.

E.ON are proposing to build up to forty five 121m (396 ft) turbines on a low wind site which is only 1.5km from Newton Aycliffe and which straddles the A1 motorway.

Sedgefield MP Phil Wilson is also campaigning against the proposal, see below for more details.

ISLES CAMPAIGN ON LOOK NORTH

On Thursday, 29 September the Isles campaign headlined on ‘Look North’ (not available on BBC i-player).

In the same programme, Chris Huhne, the Energy Minister, came out with his usual inane remarks comparing hundreds of 125m turbines to individual historic windmills a tenth of their size.

The programme pointed out that Durham has 16 operating wind power stations, with hundreds more turbines in prospect. They did not dwell on the fact that Mr Huhne’s county, Hampshire, has NOT ONE large industrial turbine. There is one small, historic windmill in Eastleigh, Mr Huhne’s constituency.

If Mr Huhne really regards 125m turbines as, “the modern equivalent of a picturesque windmill”, might we suggest that he gets on TV in Hampshire to demand that a few hundred be built on the Hampshire Downs. Sadly, that might be the end of his political ambitions!

-------------------------

The Isles communities campaign is also on Twitter.

LAMBS HILL ON HOLD

‘Queries by protestors put wind farm on hold’

Northern Echo, 19 September, 2011

‘A controversial planning application for a wind farm has been quashed after campaigners started a legal battle.

‘Banks Developments had been allowed to start work on four 125-metre turbines at Lambs Hill Farm, near Stillington, but the latest development has resulted in the project being halted.

‘Lambs Hill Action Group asked for the planning application to be reviewed after it raised concerns about how the decision was made by Stockton Borough Council.

‘They have now received confirmation that the application has been quashed, but have been warned that the plans for the turbines will be resubmitted for consideration.

[...]’

‘WIND FARM FIRM HAS FEARS ABOUT...
WIND FARMS’

Teesdale Mercury, 5 September, 2011

‘A renewable energy firm has admitted that competing developers rushing to build wind farms in County Durham may create an “unacceptable impact” on the countryside.

‘Banks Renewables, which has submitted plans for five 115-metre turbines between village of Woodland and Hamsterley Forest, made the statement to council officials.

[...]’

‘MP LAUNCHES CAMPAIGN TO FIGHT WIND TURBINES’

Northern Echo, 9 August, 2011.

‘An MP will today launch a campaign aimed at stopping any further wind farms from being built in the region.

‘Sedgefield MP Phil Wilson is taking action after E.ON announced plans that could see England’s biggest wind farm built in his constituency.

‘The energy firm will launch a formal consultation on August 31, with three proposals to be considered – for either 29, 30 or 45 turbines – on a site east of Newton Aycliffe.

[...]

CONSULTATION

Stage One of E.ON’s consultation exercise started on 31 August and ended on 7 October, 2011.

(For further information about the proposal, call 0800 096 1199).

NB Members of the public can formally respond to the planning application when it is accepted by the IPC. E.ON’s response questionnaire is designed to assist their planning application, not the public.

An application for a development consent order is likely to be submitted to the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) towards the end of 2012.
“The IPC was established on 1 October 2009 under the Planning Act 2008 to streamline the planning system for nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs)” [And wind turbine arrays with a headline capacity over 50MW, however¨paltry their real output].

CON-SULTATION

It can’t be said that E.ON do not learn lessons from their previous attempts to foist turbine parks on unwilling communities.

They are now careful to avoid holding consultation events in local village halls, as people have asked. In the past, communities have set up exit polls to properly record the views of every visitor to E.ON’s exhibitions. These have usually demonstrated the overwhelming opposition of visitors to their projects.

E.ON now choose venues in private spaces where they can deny community response groups access. The additional carbon burden of forcing people to travel does not seem to trouble them.

The company also tries to weight responses by involving major settlements distant from the site. We have been told that some people living close to the site have not received consultation documents from E.ON while they have been widely distributed in large communities 10 miles away.

-------------------------

Isles Communities Action Campaign.
E.ON UK website.
Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) - Isles application page.
Phil Wilson’s Parliamentary Petition against the Isles proposal. Details on his website.

See also:
‘Fight vow as wind farm plan unveiled’, Northern Echo, 9 August, 2011.
‘Councils unite to oppose Sedgefield wind farm’, Northern Echo, 28 July, 2011.
‘Concern over potential wind farm in Newton Aycliffe’, BBC News, 26 April, 2011.
‘David Cameron agrees to Newton Aycliffe wind farm talks’, BBC News, 27 April, 2011.
‘New fears over wind farm plan’, Northern Echo, 2 June, 2011.
‘Residents meet Minister over plans for England's biggest windfarm’, Northern Echo, 17 June, 2011.

HAMSTERLEY FOREST APPLICATION

Banks Renewables, part of the coal mining, property and waste group, have lodged a planning application for their ‘Windy Bank’ scheme bordering Hamsterley Forest, close to the village of Woodland.

The proposal is for five 115m turbines.

The application documents may be viewed online and comments made on the application (comments should be submitted by 21 September 2011).

Other proposals at Crake Scar, immediately adjacent to Windy Bank, and at West Shipley are at the pre-application stage.

-------------------------

Application Ref. No. CMA/6/48 - see planning website.
Banks website
Hamsterley & Upper Gaunless Action Group - HUGAG website.
See also:
‘Row as wind farm firm offers cash for local projects’, Teesdale Mercury, 1 August, 2011.
‘Village votes no to threat of turbines’, Teesdale Mercury, 12 July, 2011.

ANOTHER HAMSTERLEY FOREST SCHEME

‘Pure Renewable Energy’ has approval to erect a 50 metre anemometer mast on land at West Shipley near Hamsterley.¹

This is the precursor to yet another turbine array proposal on the edge of the Hamsterley Forest.

Banks Renewables recently lodged a planning application for five 115m turbines near the village of Woodend, on the southern edge of the forest.²

Arcus Renewable Energy Consulting have also been scoping a project for four 115m turbines for Bolterstone on an immediately adjacent site at Crake Scar.³

-------------------------

¹ Application Ref. No. 6/2011/0110/DM.
² Application Ref. No. CMA/6/48.
³ See: Scoping Opinion and Scoping Report for Crake Scar scheme.
See also:
‘Proposed site for Windy Bank wind farm is close to home of David Bellamy’, The Journal, 17 May, 2011.
‘Yet another wind turbine plan for dale beauty spot’, 30 May, 2011, Teesdale Mercury.
Community response group: Hamsterley and Upper Gaunless Action Group, see HUGAG’s new website.

THE TRUTH ABOUT TARGETS

In North East England, county and regional renewable energy targets are supposed to have been consigned to history, along with the Regional Spatial Strategy framework, ‘W’ maps and the rest of the heavy-handed planning apparatus that was forced on local communities by the last government and their unelected regional commissariat. However, there is little sign that their adherents are inclined to abandon them.

Unsurprisingly, the wind industry has always been eager to use simplistic, outdated and, all too often, plain wrong, ‘evidence’ of unmet renewable energy targets to browbeat planners and bolster their demands for weaker planning controls and speedy, ill-considered consents for ever more and larger turbine arrays.

The way that misleading numbers are used in planning applications was again demonstrated in the Wingates planning meeting on 5 April, when a planning officer again delivered a wildly inaccurate back-of-an-envelope calculation of projected 2020 targets to Councillors.

It is therefore essential to understand the statistics and why a crude measure of installed headline capacity understates how far local planning authorities have already gone towards meeting notional targets for 2020 and beyond.

Local experts have prepared a report using government data which has recently been delivered to Northumberland County Councillors and the planning department.

The results will surprise you!

-------------------------

An updated version (12 April, 2011) of Bill Short’s Powerpoint presentation is available for download here (Large, 3.7Mb, ppt file).

DURHAM, TEES VALLEY ETC. - SOME LOCAL RESPONSE GROUP WEBSITES:



• Hetton Against Wind Turbines (HAWT). Contact: Kay Rowham, Tel. 0191 5262048. Email:hettonagainstwindturbines@sky.com.
  Group opposing possible project at Hetton Lyons Country Park. According to the Head of Planning and Environment at Sunderland City Council, “The area is the subject of a feasibility study by PfR, to examine the possibility of installing wind turbines and to carry out all necessary surveys and consultation.”.



• Hamsterley & Upper Gaunless Action Group (HUGAG) .
  Opposes plans by Banks Renewables and Bolterstone to erect up to thirteen 115m turbines on land between Woodland and Hamsterley Forest.



• Isles Communities Wind Turbine Action Campaign.
  Opposes plans by E.ON UK to erect up to forty five 121m turbines on a site straddling the A1, only 1.5km from Newton Aycliffe.



• SPAG - Seven Parishes Action Group (Contact: Peter Wood, Tel. 0844 209 1515).
  - “SPAG is a body jointly established by the Seven Parish Councils of Bishopton, Great Stainton, Little Stainton, Sadberge, East and West Newbiggin, Great Burdon and Redmarshall [between Darlington and Stockton, Co. Durham]. It represents the lives of well over 2000 local residents.”