The approval of a 12-turbine wind farm has made County Durham the first county in England to hit its renewable energy targets. The Banks Development project, located between Tow Law and Lanchester, was passed by Derwentside councillors in December 2005 meaning County Durham will hit its target of 82 MW of renewable energy generation by 2010 Real power Issue 5 BWEA
Consented Wind turbines: The above is very misleading. See DECEPTION
Operational: Only two wind farms in the North East appear to be meeting their stated claims whilst the majority seem to be performing at less than 20% and second hand ones around 10%
In planning ;. I question why applications that do not progress as hoped are not updated .eg Teeswind North (TNEI) Teeswind South ( TNEI) and Redcar offshore( EDF) See DELUSION
v Blyth Offshore, Blyth harbour, must be mentioned particularly as they have been given a high profile. When the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) document was launched for consultation, Bob Gibson, Chair of the North East Assembly named Blyth Harbour and Blyth Offshore Wind farms as Flagship projects (Source NEREG).Neither Blyth onshore or offshore wind turbines are working as expected I have read Blyth onshore turbines are to be increased in capacity
v Great Eppleton Note: Variation of condition 13 planning permission 96/O597 to enable retention of non operating turbines for an additional 12 months
v High Volts, West of Hartlepool. I have included as it is one of the wind farms collectively named the '3H's 'and used as a Dti Case Study. Described as one of the most modern windfarms in the UK and said to be typical of many proposals for the North. The 3H’s are not working as anticipated.
As I explained at the Aberdeen All Energy Conference May 2006 there is a ‘missing link’ Selective statistics and incomplete information are masking the real facts though I am not sure who is responsible for this. At the Conference, the Head of Safeguarding Defence Estates (DE) explained that wind turbines do affect radar. DE are looking for possible solutions. BUT national Safety and Security are paramount
High time to strike back, by Lyn Harrison, Wind Power Monthly Editor, September 2004
Why should the reactionary antics of a has-been island off the north European coast be of concern to the international wind power industry? Because if Britain's current energy policies give way under the pressure, the wind market will collapse, taking with it the reputation of this entire industry. The reverberations of the media onslaught are already reaching far and wide, with press in Australia, New Zealand and the United States picking up the falsehoods rampant in British newspapers.
Choosing the weapons
If the wind industry is to stop the anti-wind power rot in Britain it needs to take serious action on two fronts. First, it must put huge sums of money into an aggressive counter campaign, noting less that a painstakingly informed, beautifully articulate, highly professional, well orchestrated, wide reaching and proactive public relations crusade.
From Lilli Matson, Head of Transport and Natural Resources, Council for the Protection of Rural England, published in The Times on 19/01/99
Your article of January 9 paints a sorry of wind development in the UK. This is a tale which is not so much about landscape preservationists triumphing over green-energy developers as about the failure of successive governments to deliver effective policies to expand renewable energy.
Ever since the introduction of financial subsidies for renewables in 1990, CPRE has highlighted the conflicts inherent in a system where subsidies are awarded to the cheapest projects with no reference made to their environmental impacts. This has led developers to focus on the very windiest sites, which frequently coincide with our best upland landscapes. Financial contracts have been given to projects in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and surrounding our National Parks. No wonder people cry out in defence of the landscape.
The solution does not lie in weakening planning protection for the countryside, but in improving the way in which we fund renewable energy. This should ensure that environmentally damaging schemes are ruled out from the start and encourage a wider range of renewable technologies to be developed. The result would be less controversy over the location of renewable energy projects and more support for their growth.