News from U.K.:backlash against wind power projects

Here is a story from today’s Daily Mail in the U.K., which sums up the current attitude in Britain toward industrial wind power generation projects. “Costly, unpopular and completely pointless…”

The wind turbine backlash: Growing public opposition thwarts green energy drive

• 32 out of 66 applications for onshore wind farms were rejected in 2010
• Britain has 305 onshore wind farms and 3,360 turbines

 

By David Derbyshire

Last updated at 11:44 AM on 11th July 2011

Plans to cover Britain with wind farms are being thwarted by a growing tide of public opposition.

Nearly half of all onshore wind farms in England and Wales are being refused planning permission, figures reveal.

The percentage of such developments being refused planning permission has risen sharply over the last five years.

 

Unpopular: Nearly half of all onshore wind farms in England and Wales are being refused planning permission, new figures have revealed

According to data obtained by law firm McGrigors, in 2005 29 per cent  were turned down by planners – rising to 33 per cent in 2009 and 48 per cent last year.

The increase in objections is partly the result of the volume of wind  turbine applications being proposed by energy companies.

Under European climate change targets, around a third of all Britain’s electricity will have to be generated by renewable energy sources by 2020.

The majority of that green power will come from 10,000 new wind turbines at sea and on land.

But according to McGrigors, 32 out of 66 applications for onshore wind farms were rejected in 2010. Britain has 305 onshore wind farms and 3,360 turbines.

McGrigors, a leading commercial law firm which represents wind farm developers, claims energy companies will become increasingly frustrated with local planners refusing to give the go-ahead to money-spinning turbines.

Not surprised: Benny Peiser of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, is sceptical of the Government’s climate change policy with wind farms

However, Benny Peiser of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, which is sceptical of the Government’s climate change policy, including its plans for building wind farms, said: ‘The public backlash against wind farms is  not surprising.

‘It is the inevitable and inexorable consequence of a costly, unpopular and completely pointless policy that is butchering Britain’s green and pleasant landscape without having any effect on the climate.

‘These green projects are only viable because of multi-million subsidies supporting a few hundred wealthy landowners and a handful of energy companies.

‘By opposing wind farms, a growing number of neighbourhoods and communities are protecting both their local environments and their purses from blind exploitation.’

Jacqueline Harris, a partner at McGrigors, said wind farm developers believe they are not getting a ‘balanced hearing’ at local level. She said: ‘The feeling is that local authorities are too often prioritising local concerns.

‘There is little willingness to  consider the benefits of renewable energy generation in context.’

She added: ‘Objections based around the visual impact of  wind turbines are overriding the wider need to deliver energy security and mitigate the impact of climate change. The visual impact of wind turbines is a common complaint and often successful grounds for objection.

‘This applies even where the benefits of the development greatly outweigh the downsides to a small but vocal minority.

‘Even single turbines, which can generate enough electricity for a few thousand houses, are being rejected because of the visual impact on a handful of properties.’

 

The Government’s Localism Bill – which gives more power to local communities over planning decisions – could make it even  more difficult for the wind farm developers to push through planning permission.

According to Mr Peiser, the Bill has ‘helped to empower individuals, councils and communities to oppose and halt wind farms’.

A spokesman for Renewables UK, which represents the wind  farm industry, claimed: ‘Wind farms bring real economic benefits to  local communities.

‘Every refused wind farm planning application is a missed opportunity to secure employment and business benefits at a local level, and further deliver on our energy security and climate change targets.’

Contact us at northgowerwindturbines@yahoo.ca

Read Full Post »

“Intermittent” and “unreliable”: that’s wind power

From The Telegraph in the U.K., June 19, sent by one of our members.

To access the article and its links: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/windpower/7840035/Firms-paid-to-shut-down-wind-farms-when-the-wind-is-blowing.html 
 

Firms paid to shut down wind farms when the wind is blowing

Britain’s biggest wind farm companies are to be paid not to produce electricity when the wind is blowing.

 

By Robert Mendick
Published: 9:00PM BST 19 Jun 2010

Energy firms will receive thousands of pounds a day per wind farm to turn off their turbines because the National Grid cannot use the power they are producing Photo: ALAMY

Energy firms will receive thousands of pounds a day per wind farm to turn off their turbines because the National Grid cannot use the power they are producing.

Critics of wind farms have seized on the revelation as evidence of the unsuitability of turbines to meet the UK’s energy needs in the future. They claim that the ‘intermittent’ nature of wind makes such farms unreliable providers of electricity.

 

Related Articles

• The ‘hippy’ wind farm tycoon receiving millions in subsidies

• Wind farm subsidies top £1bn

• Wind farms could blight one in six beauty spots

• Wind power will make Britain the dirty old man of Europe

• Climate Change Act: Now the world faces its biggest ever bill

• China powers ahead as it seizes the green energy crown from Europe

The National Grid fears that on breezy summer nights, wind farms could actually cause a surge in the electricity supply which is not met by demand from businesses and households.

The electricity cannot be stored, so one solution – known as the ‘balancing mechanism’ – is to switch off or reduce the power supplied.

The system is already used to reduce supply from coal and gas-fired power stations when there is low demand. But shutting down wind farms is likely to cost the National grid – and ultimately consumers – far more. When wind turbines are turned off, owners are being deprived not only of money for the electricity they would have generated but also lucrative ‘green’ subsidies for that electricity.

The first successful test shut down of wind farms took place three weeks ago. Scottish Power received £13,000 for closing down two farms for a little over an hour on 30 May at about five in the morning.

Whereas coal and gas power stations often pay the National Grid £15 to £20 per megawatt hour they do not supply, Scottish Power was paid £180 per megawatt hour during the test to switch off its turbines.

It raises the prospect of hugely profitable electricity suppliers receiving large sums of money from the National Grid just for switching off wind turbines.

Dr Lee Moroney, planning director of the Renewable Energy Foundation, a think tank opposed to the widespread introduction of wind farms, said: “As more and more wind farms come on stream this will become more and more of an issue. Wind power is not controllable and does not provide a solid supply to keep the national grid manageable. Paying multinational companies large sums of money not to supply electricity seems wrong.”

Earlier this year, The Sunday Telegraph revealed that electricity customers are paying more than £1 billion a year to subsidise wind farms and other forms of renewable energy.

The proceeds of the levy, known as the Renewables Obligation (RO), are divided between the main renewable energy sources, with wind receiving 40 per cent, landfill gas 25 per cent, biomass 20 per cent, hydroelectric 12 per cent and sewage gas 3 per cent.

Professor Michael Laughton, emeritus professor of electrical engineering at the University of London, said: “People will find it very hard to understand that an electricity company is getting paid the market rate plus a subsidy for doing nothing. It is essentially a waste of consumers’ money.”

A National Grid spokesman said: “The trial demonstrates that wind can help balance supply and demand just like other generation types: this is potentially useful to us on warm but windy summer days when generation outstrips the low demand – and a higher proportion of generation is made up of wind and inflexible nuclear.”

The spokesman added: “The trial is something supporters of wind energy should welcome, as it gives evidence to their case that wind generation does not bring insurmountable problems to balancing supply and demand.”

A spokesman for RenewableUK, the trade body which represents the renewable energy industry, said all suppliers to the National Grid periodically were asked to reduce output to control the balancing mechanism. He said it was simply evidence of the growing part wind energy had to play in Britain’s supply needs that turbines would occasionally be taken off the National Grid. He added: “REF exists to misrepresent any piece of information and turn it into a scandal or crisis. The reality is the National Grid’s job is to ensure we have adequate capacity to meet demand at any one time.”

………………..

To email us, northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

Important news daily at http://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com

Wind power in Ontario: At 2 p.m. today, Wolfe Island is generating 3 MW of power, out of a capacity for 198; Amaranth 18 out of 200; Port Alma 5 out of 101; and PrinceFarm ZERO out of 189. Expected high temps in Ottawa today: 27 degrees.

Read Full Post »

New film details alternative energy sources

David Chernushenko, former Green Party candidate in Ottawa and now a “green” educator and lecturer, has produced a new documentary, “Powerful: energy for everyone.” It is debuting tonight, June 8th, in Ottawa, and has other showings booked. We’ll try to catch one: go to his website at http://www.davidc.ca and click on Living Lightly then Films to find dates.

In an interview with CBC Ottawa Morning’s Kathleen Petty, Chernushenko said that a lot of the problem with industrial wind turbines in Canada is that they’re not sited properly. In Denmark, he says, the turbine developments were community-owned and sited 1-2 km away from people. They also were not contructed in large numbers. The moment that the communities stopped owning the turbine developments, he says, is when the resistance started because people had no input as to where the structures went. And, he said, the positive experiences of Denmark were with turbines much smaller than are being constructed today.

Chernushenko says solar and wind are not the answer to supplying power but rather that a “portfolio” of diverse energy sources is the answer, which should include local, small-scale applications. He particularly said that rural communities should be assisted to develop local initiavies such as biofuels.

It doesn’t make sense, he said, to produce power on Hudson’s Bay and then ship it expensively to the south of Ontario, where the power is needed.

Petty asked him about large-scale wind developments, specifically Wolfe Island, and he replied, “I don’t want to say that’s exactly how not to do it, but when I first saw Wolfe Island [with 86 turbines], I said something you can’t say on radio…it was ‘holy—-’ “

The answer to Ontario’s need for power is NOT wind: it doesn’t work. We look forward to viewing Chernushenko’s film NOT because it opposes wind but because he might be taking a larger, non-giant-industry view to the problem. We are open to learning, and listening, every day.

To contact the North Gower Wind Action Group, please email northgowerwindactiongroup@yahoo.ca

To donate to help with legal expenses and other costs, please mail us at North Gower Wind Action Group at PO Box 485 North Gower, K0A 2T0

Thank you.

Read Full Post »