SUNDAY TELEGRAPH:
21ST DECEMBER 2008
Promoters overstated the environmental benefit of wind farms
The wind farm industry has been forced to admit that the environmental benefit of wind power in reducing carbon emissions is only half as big as it had previously claimed.
By Patrick Sawer
Last Updated: 8:14AM GMT 21 Dec 2008
It will be regarded as a concession that twice as many wind turbines as previously calculated will be needed to provide the same degree of reduction in Britain's carbon emissions Photo: PA
The British Wind Energy Association (BWEA) has agreed to scale down its calculation for the amount of harmful carbon dioxide emission that can be eliminated by using wind turbines to generate electricity instead of burning fossil fuels such as coal or gas.
The move is a serious setback for the advocates of wind power, as it will be regarded as a concession that twice as many wind turbines as previously calculated will be needed to provide the same degree of reduction in Britain's carbon emissions.
A wind farm industry source admitted: "It's not ideal for us. It's the result of pressure by the anti-wind farm lobby."
For several years the BWEA – which lobbies on behalf of wind power firms – claimed that electricity from wind turbines 'displaces' 860 grams of carbon dioxide emission for every kilowatt hour of electricity generated.
However it has now halved that figure to 430 grams, following discussions with the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA).
Hundreds of wind farms are being planned across the country, adding to the 198 onshore and offshore farms - a total of 2,389 turbines - already in operation. Another 40 farms are currently under construction.
Experts have previously calculated that to help achieve the Government's aim of saving around 200 million tons of CO2 emissions by 2020 - through generating 15 per cent of the country's electricity from wind power - would require 50,000 wind turbines.
But the new figure for carbon displacement means that twice as many turbines would now be needed to save the same amount of CO2 emissions.
While their advocates regard wind farms as a key part of Britain's fight against climate change, opponents argue they blight the landscape at great financial cost while bringing little environmental benefit.
Dr Mike Hall, an anti-wind farm campaigner from the Friends of Eden, Lakeland and Lunesdale Scenery group in the Lake District, said: "Every wind farm application says it will lead to a big saving in the amount of carbon dioxide produced. This has been greatly exaggerated and the reduction in the carbon displacement figure is a significant admission of this.
"As we get cleaner power stations on line, the figure will get even lower. It further backs the argument that wind farms are one of the most inefficient and expensive ways of lowering carbon emissions."
Because wind farms burn no fuel, they emit no carbon dioxide during regular running. The revised calculation for the amount of carbon emission they save has come about because the BWEA's earlier figure did not take account of recent improvements to the technology used in conventional, fossil-fuel-burning power stations.
The figure of 860 grams dates back to the days of old-style coal-fired power stations. However, since the early 1990s, many of the dirty coal-fired stations have been replaced by cleaner-burning stations, with a consequent reduction in what the industry calls the "grid average mix" figure for carbon dioxide displacement.
As a result, a modern 100MW coal or gas power station is now calculated to produce half as many tonnes of carbon dioxide as its predecessor would have done.
The BWEA's move follows a number of rulings by the ASA against claims made by individual wind farm promoters about the benefits their schemes would have in reducing carbon emissions.
In one key adjudication, the ASA ruled that a claim by Npower Renewables that a wind farm planned for the southern edge of Exmoor National Park, in Devon, would help prevent the release of 33,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere was "inaccurate and likely to mislead". This claim was based on the 860-gram figure.
The watchdog concluded: "We told Npower to ensure that future carbon savings claims were based on a more representative and rigorous carbon emissions factor."
The ASA has now recommended that the BWEA and generating companies use the far lower figure of 430 grams.
In a letter to its members, the BWEA's head of onshore, Jan Matthiesen, said: "It was agreed to recommend to all BWEA members to use the single static figure of 430 g CO2/kWh for the time being. The advantage is that it is well accepted and presents little risk as it understates the true figure."
This is now the figure given on the BWEA's website. The organisation will also be forced to lower its claim for the total amount of carbon dioxide emission saved by the 2,389 wind turbines currently operating around Britain.
But the association denied the change weakened the case for wind farms.
Nick Medic, spokesman for the BWEA, said: "Wind farms are still eliminating emissions. The fact is that fossil fuel burning power stations belch out CO2 and wind farms don't. That has not changed.
"The fact is we need to reduce carbon emissions, however you account for them. But there are people who just don't like wind farms and will use any argument against them."
-------------------------------------------
Save Our Silton
PRESS RELEASE
08 December 2008
FURTHER EVIDENCE SILTON NOT RIGHT SITE FOR TURBINES
Further evidence has come to light today regarding the inappropriateness of the site earmarked at Silton in Dorset for the development of 6 giant industrial wind turbines.
A slightly smaller 262ft wind turbine situated close to homes in King's Dyke, Whittlesey had to be switched off yesterday after its frozen blades threw off shards of ice - many crashing into nearby homes. (See below for link to video clip).
Turbine expert John Stoneman, of Cambridgeshire Environmental Wildlife Protection, is quoted as saying "The blades revolve at 200mph and those ice shards become projectiles. They would certainly kill someone if they hit (them)”.
This incident comes days after the Scottish Parliament published a planning notice (which forms a guide to developers) which recommended that wind turbine sites over 20MW should only really be considered when they are at least 2km away from the nearest villages and towns. This guidance, whilst for slightly larger developments, backs up similar recommendations from across Europe which have found real problems for communities when these distances have not been maintained.
The issues around safety and distance are not new. The maintenance manual for workers on the Vestas V90-3MW recommends that technicians “do not stay within a radius of 400m (1300ft) from the turbine unless it is necessary.” Furthermore, the same manual recommends that “children do not stay by or play nearby the turbine.”
Yet, the site chosen by the developers at Silton is only 550m from the nearest dwelling, and right next to a public highway.
Save Our Silton, Chairman, Chris Langham said, “These elements and incidents even taken on their own would each be enough to show that the site chosen is inappropriate. Taken together they should make any planner recommend against permission for development”
END
For further information please call 07968 049 832
Notes for Editors
1) Save Our Silton now has close to 500 local, individual and family members.
---------------------------------------------------
SAVE OUR SILTON
Minutes of The Annual General Meeting of the Association held at Milton on Stour School on Friday 5 December 2008 at 7 p.m.
Present:
Chairman: Chris Langham
Committee members:
Tim Allard
Ian Barter
David Smith
Brian Trueman
Dee Worlock
31 (thirty one) members of the Association
1. Chairman’s report The Chairman welcomed members present and presented his report on the activities of the Association during 2008
2. Accounts The Treasurer presented (a) the Audited Accounts of the Association for the period ending 30 November 2008 together with the Auditor’s report on the Accounts, and (b) his report as to the financial position of the Association, both of which were unanimously approved.
3. Appointment of Auditor Agreed: unanimously to approve the Treasurer’s recommendation that David Jordan be reappointed Auditor of the Association for the forthcoming year.
4. Election of Officers Agreed: unanimously to re-elect Chris Langham (Chairman), Ian Barter (Secretary) and Brian Trueman (Treasurer) officers of the Association and members of the Committee.
5. Election of Committee
Agreed: unanimously to re-elect Tim Allard, Neil Morrison, David Smith and Dee Worlock members of the Committee.
Signed: I Barter, Secretary.
______________________________________________________________
(4th December): Click here to view the video clip from BBC news - absolutely terrifying! And remember, the Silton turbines, if built, would be within 50m of the Drove Road - a public highway - and less than 150m from the B3081!
How on earth did the developer get permission to erect the turbine so close to houses ? Noise & ice pollution!
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
High Court action could set precedent for wind farm planning 01-12-08
A local council in Derbyshire has said a planning inspector that overturned its rejection of a wind farm proposal made an "important error of law" in reaching the decision.
If the decision is overturned at the High Court, Derbyshire Dales District Council believes other wind farm proposals around national parks would also face stiffer requirements to consider alternative sites.
The council consulted lawyers following September's approval of the Carsington Pastures wind farm by the planning inspector.
Officers said ahead of a council meeting last week that the legal opinion suggested there was a "strong basis" to challenge the approval in an appeal.
The wind farm planned for a site two kilometres outside the Peak District National Park is already facing an appeal from the park authority (see this New Energy Focus story). But, the council could now join the action.
Thursday (November 27) saw a meeting of the council approving plans to contribute 15% towards the expected £200,000 costs of the latest appeal over the wind farm.
Derbyshire Dales will now provide around £30,000 for the legal action, which could take place in the New Year.
Wind farm
The Carsington Pastures wind farm is planned by Flintshire-based wind developers West Coast Energy to have four turbines, generating a total of 10MW of renewable electricity.
After September's public inquiry, the planning inspector said the benefits of the renewable energy outweighed the impact on the local environment for the project, and going as far as stating that it "would not unacceptably harm the landscape character".
However, councillors agreed with officers on Thursday that in their opinion the planning inspector had "failed to consider" the need for the wind farm developers to find alternative sites for the wind farm.
The lawyer's opinion also suggested the planning inspector had "misunderstood" council planning policy on the environmental impact of renewable energy projects.
In a report to councillors, the officers said: "Counsel have advised that, in their opinion, the decision letter discloses an important error of law that goes to the heart of the decision itself. As such, the council has a strong basis upon which to challenge the decision."
If successful, this challenge will establish the need for consideration of alternative sites in future proposals.
Derbyshire Dales District Council officers added: "Moreover, such a challenge should be made as the council is likely to succeed."
Derbyshire Dales has already paid out £30,000 to fund its contribution to September's public inquiry over the Carsington Pastures wind farm, and has also agreed to pay a further £20,607. The Park Authority contributed £15,000 to the inquiry costs.
The council said that if the High Court appeal succeeds, it would set a precedent requiring the consideration of alternative sites in future wind farm applications in areas surrounding the national park.
"If successful, this challenge will establish the need for consideration of alternative sites in future proposals affecting the national park," the council officers said.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
‘Covering Wales in wind turbines’
Nov 24 2008 by Martin Shipton, Western Mail
IF the whole of Wales was covered with wind turbines, the nation would generate only a sixth of the UK’s energy needs, a leading academic has calculated.
The claim comes as the Environment Agency is about to announce plans to build up to 80 turbines on its own land and the speculation that a new nuclear power station will be built in Wales intensifies.
Professor David MacKay, a physicist at Cambridge University, said ministers would have to look at other forms of alternative energy, like tidal power, if they were to meet ambitious renewable energy targets.
In his new book, Sustainable Energy – Without The Hot Air, Prof MacKay, who backs wind power, argues that wind farms will need at least five times more land than previously estimated to make a significant contribution to the UK’s energy needs.
He states: “The average energy used per person in the UK is 125 kilowatt hours per day. To achieve even 20 kilowatt hours per day per person it will require enough wind turbines to cover an area the size of Wales. It is an incredibly large area and with the difficulties in getting planning, it is hard to imagine how it could be achieved. The government needs to look at some of the other options such as tide energy. We need a plan that adds up.”
Ministers have pledged to provide 20% of energy from renewable sources by 2020 and have relied on wind energy to provide almost all of the capacity.
The Environment Agency will today reveal plans to build up to 80 wind turbines on its own land.
A spokesman said: “We have a duty to look at our own sites and see if it is possible to be sustainable. The idea is that we produce power for our own buildings, with any excess energy going into the national grid.”
The site of Wylfa nuclear power station on Anglesey is likely to be up for sale, causing speculation a new power station could be built.
---------------------------------------------
PRESS RELEASE 7TH NOVEMBER 2008:
WIND SPEED SUSPECTED TO BE TOO LOW AT SILTON
The wind speeds are suspected to be too low to support the development of 6 industrial wind turbines at Silton, say local campaign group Save Our Silton (SOS). This view is in part based on the fact that average load factors recorded for wind turbines located in England is now only 23.3% (compared to 35.2% recorded for the turbines in Northern Ireland).
Although some people discuss capacity of the proposed site as 12 MW, this figure is relatively meaningless as it relates only to the maximum instantaneous rate of output of electricity that the power station can sustain. Whilst people in the industry talk about wind farms operating upwards of 85% of the time, for a large part of this time they would be producing only a trickle of electricity in spite of their massive size. The Load Factor is useful as it gives a far better indication of actual likely performance. Load Factor is calculated as Actual energy (MWhs) generated divided by the theoretical Maximum MWhs generated.
For example, for a 2MW wind turbine in England, the theoretical maximum energy generated would be 2 MW x 8,760 hrs in a year = 17,520 MWhs. But, the actual electricity generated by the 2 MW wind turbine is roughly: 2MW x 8,760 x 0.233 = 4,082 MWhs -far, far less.
Last week permission was given for a wind measuring mast to be erected on the site and SOS are calling for at least 12 months of data to be gathered before any decision on the development is made. Chairman, Chris Langham said, “The planning system can’t reasonably be expected to balance the positives and the negatives of the Silton wind farm application without knowing how much electricity might be produced. To make up for the terrible local impact this wind farm would have to have an extremely high load factor, but as we now know, English wind farms are actually very ineffective, particularly compared to offshore generators.” END
For further information please call 07968 049 832
Note for Editors : Save Our Silton now has close to 500 local, individual and family members.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Brown puffs the great wind scam By Christopher Booker
Last Updated: 12:01am BST 26/10/2008
Even in these dark times, it is still possible to be shocked when our Prime Minister personally endorses a flagrant perversion of the truth. Last year, for example, many of us felt outraged when Gordon Brown pretended that the Lisbon Treaty was somehow totally different from the EU Constitution, in order to wriggle out of his party's manifesto promise of a referendum. Last week Mr Brown in effect did it again when he endorsed the deception at the heart of his Government's wildly exaggerated claims about the benefits of using wind to make electricity.
In a video for the British Wind Energy Association, the industry's chief lobby group, Mr Brown claimed: "We are now getting 3 gigawatts of our electricity capacity from wind power, enough to power more than 1.5 million homes."
This deliberately perpetuates the central confidence trick practised by the wind industry, by confusing "capacity" with the actual amount of electricity wind produces. In fact, as the Government's own figures show, wind turbines generate on average only 27 to 28 per cent, barely a quarter, of their "capacity".
In other words, far from producing those "3 gigawatts", the 2,000 turbines already built actually contributed - again on official figures - an average of only 694 megawatts (MW) last year, less than the output of a single medium-size conventional power station. Far from producing "enough to power more than 1.5 million homes", it is enough to power barely a sixth of that number, representing only 1.3 per cent of all the electricity we use. Yet for this we have already blighted thousands of square miles of countryside, at a cost of billions of pounds.
Indeed, at the same BWEA-sponsored event, Mike O'Brien, energy minister, went on to perpetuate the second confidence trick practised by both Government and industry, which is to conceal the fact that all this is only made possible by the huge hidden subsidy given to wind energy through the Renewables Obligation. This compels electricity companies to pay way over the odds for the power generated by wind turbines, a burden passed on to us all in our electricity bills.
Mr O'Brien claimed that the cost of electricity generated by offshore wind turbines would drop by 8 per cent, failing to explain that it would then be raised by 50 per cent through the hidden subsidy. He then soared even further into make-believe by saying that he was "assessing plans" to build a further 25GW-worth of offshore turbines by 2020, "enough electricity for every home in the country".
Mr O'Brien must know that there is not the remotest chance that we could build the 10,000 monster turbines needed to achieve this, at a rate of more than two a day, when it takes weeks to instal each vast machine. At present, of the giant barges needed for the work, there is only one in the world. Even if it were possible, the construction costs alone, on current figures, would be anything up to £100 billion - the price of 37 nuclear power stations, capable of producing nearly 10 times as much electricity - while the subsidies alone would add £6 billiion a year more, or 25 per cent, to our electricity bills.
Why do our ministers think they can get away with talking such nonsense?
What is humiliating is that they do it largely to appease the EU, which has set us the wholly impossible target of producing 32 per cent of our electricity from "renewables" by 2020. What is dangerous is that even contemplating such a mad waste of resources is diverting attention from the genuine need to build enough proper, grown-up power stations to keep our lights on. For that the time is fast running out, if it hasn't done so already. It is on that Mr Brown should be concentrating, not on trying to pull the wool over our eyes with such infantile deceits.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Save Our Silton
PRESS RELEASE
17 October 2008
British Horse Society Study shows that Silton Turbine Site is Inappropriate
The results of a new survey commissioned by the British Horse Society (BHS) shows that the proposed site for 6 giant industrial wind turbines at Silton in Dorset is inappropriate because of the danger to riders using the nearby bridleway.
The BHS sent 400 Consultations out to bridleway officers, development officers, and affiliated bridleway groups. Of those who responded 16% rode near turbines, the majority of which were on, or very near a right of way (the remainder being on private land).
Problems for the rider that this survey identified included; the turbines casting shadows, creating noise, the risk of flying ice in winter, and horses being spooked by the movement of blades. All of these problems often also caused the rider to fall or become unseated (with several of the respondents requiring hospitalization).
Even those people who responded that they had encountered no problems, stated that this was only because they were riding horses who were accustomed to the turbines or riding very steady older horses, and they acknowledged that they could understand how other people’s horses may be upset by the presence of a turbine.
In one particular instance, a report of over half the members of Haworth and Oxenhope riding club experiencing problems was reported, this being over 100 incidents.
Respondents were also asked if the presence of turbines would deter them from taking their horse to a given place, e.g. an equestrian holiday - of particular relevance to the Silton case. Of those who answered the question, two thirds would not take their horse on holiday where there were turbines present, both because of an uncertainty of their horses’ reaction to the turbines and because they thought the turbines spoilt the landscape.
This latter finding will have particular implications for the three tourism business which are owned by residents located closest to the Silton site.
Chris Langham, Chairman of Save Our Silton, commented:
“Although responses to the planning committee are already in, we hope that the Officer will take into account this additional damning evidence as to why the Silton site is not appropriate for the development of giant wind turbines. Horses are regularly ridden across this location and the BHA evidence shows this development would be an accident just waiting to happen”
END
For further information please call 07968 049 832
Notes for Editors
1) Save Our Silton now has close to 500 local, individual and family members.
_______________________________________________
SaveOurSilton
PRESS RELEASE 28 August 08
WIND FARM WILL BE VISIBLE EVEN AT NIGHT
The giant wind turbine project proposed at Silton in Dorset will not just be highly visible during the day but is now revealed would also cause a substantial visual impact on the local area at night.
The reason for this is that in an unprecedented ruling, the Ministry of Defence have stated in their letter to the Dorset County Council planning officer that, should the 120m giant turbines be constructed, they would each have to be lit.
Miss Cyranne Taylor the “Safeguarding Officer - Wind Energy” for MoD, Defence Estates, writes;
“If construction goes ahead there will be a requirement for 200 candela fixed omni-directional red lighting on each turbine due to their location in the Night Low Flying System.”
“This information is vital as it will be plotted on flying charts to make sure that military aircraft avoid this area.”
This is only the second time that lights have been proposed on turbines in the UK, and the first time that MoD have actually required them.
The lights would be mounted on each on of the six turbines at hub height, which is 80m. Because of the positioning the blades will from 180 degrees of the visual field give the impression of flashing.
Chairman Chris Langham said, “SOS have long argued that the visual impact of this development on the area would be severe, and now we learn that there will even be an impact on our night skies and dark tranquil countryside. When we flew our red blimp over the site we had no idea how prescient this was.
”Mr Langham continued: “We don’t blame the MoD at all; they’re doing what they have to do. However, the developers, Ecotricity, should reconsider their position and withdraw this ill-considered and inappropriate application. This proposal was always going to have a severe and unacceptable impact on the local environment, and now that impact would be felt 24 hours a day.”
END
For further information please call 07968 049 832
Note for Editors:
Save Our Silton, a local residents organisation, now has more than 500 local, individual and family members.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Save Our Silton PRESS RELEASE 7th November 2008: