As someone who sits on the East Riding of Yorkshire Council (ERYC) Planning Committee, I have voted to approve and refuse renewable energy applications based on their merits. But what we are seeing now with Central Government consistently over-ruling the Council at appeal is very disturbing.
Renewable Energy – Some New Thinking Required
As yet another windfarm application (Sixpennywood near Howden) goes to the Government to decide on appeal, renewable energy is again high on the agenda as one of the most emotive subjects faced by rural communities, with many residents feeling they have little say in the location of windfarms or biomass power stations. The perception is that the siting is very much at the behest of speculative developers who appear to submit planning applications at will, with little consultation, little regard for local feeling, or impact on the landscape or roads.
The East Riding of Yorkshire Council Planning Committee has a good record of supporting renewable energy applications in appropriate locations, a significant number of which are now either up and running, under construction, or awaiting commencement.
Conversely a number of applications at inappropriate locations such as Routh, Withernwick, and Tansterne have been refused. Unfortunately Secretary of State Hazel Blears has seized the decision-making from the Council by upholding developer appeals at these sites, allowing them to go ahead.
The message from Central Government is becoming very clear – the opinions and decisions taken by locally elected Councillors count for very little and our voices are worthless, something that’s clearly wrong and very worrying.
A Change of Driver
At present speculative developers are the driving force in the siting of renewable energy facilities. This is not acceptable and a way must be found to give greater power to Local Authorities in site selection. The ERYC has endeavoured to offer guidance to developers in the recent Interim Planning Document on Renewable Energy, but I fear this will not stand up to the will of the Government.
There needs to be some new thinking on site selection from developers, the Local Authority and central Government. To consider the East Riding as a whole is essential, there are areas of natural value that should be avoided, but others that are appropriate. Wide-ranging consultation should be carried out, not only with developers, but communities, stakeholders, radar installations, airports, highway authorities and English Nature to determine suitable sites, and facility size/type able to be accommodated. These can then be prioritised and put out to developers for tender. The money raised could supplement existing off-site contributions provided by developers to deliver meaningful community or infrastructural projects.
Addressing Local Opposition Through Community Ownership
Many have commented on the size of the larger generation turbines that make up the Lisset windfarm, and how these turbines can be seen for many miles in all directions. There are obvious benefits of scale for a developer to have a larger more profitable turbines and maximum turbine numbers on any site, but this must be balanced against the environmental and visual impact.
In communities where a windfarm is planned there is invariably a significant minority of residents who are unsupportive and even hostile to windfarms; this can then spread to the normally ambivalent majority. Then there are pro-renewable energy groups, whose supporters can come from further a field and tend to misrepresent local opinion.
Experience shows renewable energy developers only play lip service to consultation, and this is where further new thinking is needed. Developing community ownership of windfarms would be a way forward, as presently there are few perceived benefits, and disproportionately small financial grants from developers for community projects. The value of these grants must be increased.
Prior to an application, developers could conduct full and meaningful consultation with communities neighbouring a site, setting up liaison groups to allow residents to be part of the decision making process, for funding community projects and infrastructure. This could be expanded to include constructing an ‘extra turbine’, which in theory would be owned by the communities, with the net profits providing low cost green energy to residents within say 5km radius. This would create a viable partnership, with those living in the shadow of a windfarm benefiting financially, plus having a ‘unique selling point’ for their houses.
Waste heat produced by straw burning/biomass power stations should be used to heat homes or industrial buildings, with facilities located close to communities or industrial premises, and good road links for the transportation of the raw materials. A good example being the heat and power facility at Goole’s Capital Park Industrial Estate, next to a motorway junction, which satisfies both criteria. Unfortunately the Tansterne application satisfies neither.
The transportation of large wind turbine components also attracts controversy; with increased vehicle movements, and long lorries causing damage to roundabouts and junctions. The developer must be made responsible for this and be required to foot the bill accordingly.
Finally, let’s not forget the East Riding has the River Humber and Ouse running along the Southern edge and the North Sea to the East – are these not untapped opportunities for the development of tidal and wave power installations? After all the tide comes in and out, the rivers continually flow – but the wind doesn’t always blow!
Yesterday I spent a very interesting morning with David Davis MP meeting Holme on Spalding Moor residents at a drop in coffee morning. Over two dozen people called by to talk to David on issues, ranging from MP’s expenses, Europe, taxation and the economy, to parental access to children after separation, and life as a member of Parliament. A number of local issues were also raised.
I was not allowed to escape from the questioning - particularly regarding local issues, with some very interesting points raised regarding composting, dog fouling, parking and speeding. 
