Protestors stunned by turbine go-ahead
OBJECTORS to a controversial application to build 20 wind turbines at Davidstow say they are devastated that the plans have been approved – but have vowed to fight on.
The application was approved subject to conditions relating to satisfying National Air Traffic Services and concerns from the RSPB .
-
Wind Farm protestors at Camelford council offices. REF:0910NCP2204wind
Objectors claim they have been "sold out" by Cornwall Council despite strong opposition to the plans.
The proposal by Community Windpower Ltd were recommended for refusal by planning officers when it came before Cornwall Council's strategic planning committee .
But despite objections from parish councils and Camelford Town Council, plus protest groups including Friends of the Earth, and insufficient data to satisfactorily demonstrate the development would not result in interference with air-to-ground aircraft communications, could have an unacceptable adverse impact on the protected golden plover and the thousands of starlings that roost in the vicinity, the plan was given the green light.
The decision sparked furore among protestors, who said they were taking legal advice to see what steps they can take next.
Julie Dowton, chairman of Davidstow Parish Council said: "We and all the other parish councils are absolutely shocked the application was approved.
"It seems clear that because so many statutory agencies, parish councils and individual objections have been totally ignored, there is a big question mark over local democracy. We are in shock and the parish council and individuals are looking at what course we can take.
"Legal people have indicated an interest in giving advice and we will take that advice and the various groups are meeting to discuss the next steps. This is by no means the end."
She warned that the decision had opened the floodgates for such applications for the rest of the county and said communities in Cornwall needed to be on their guard.
An angry Cllr John Lugg accused councilors of letting down north Cornwall.
"I have never known as much opposition as that and all the big guns were signed up against it, yet it made no difference.
"Cornwall One let them down," said Mr Lugg, who said the idea the council represented one Cornwall and one and all had " gone out the window."
"I think they made up their minds before they went in there. North Cornwall was let down by the fact the mid Cornwall members and those in the south decided to support the move to approve.
"I am a little disappointed in north Cornwall members, I thought they would rally round more than they did. Even our own members were not strong enough to resist this. I find the whole thing sad. I am not anti wind farms – it is where you put them."
The wind turbines will be 126.5 metres tall – about as high as Rough Tor.
Mark Gibbons of Trewen a landscape artist who says he has painted Rough Tor many times was among those in favour of the plan.
He said he felt the public did not understand the urgency to provide alternative power:
" It seems to me to object to the wind turbines is rather like passengers on a ship that is sinking objecting to boarding a lifeboat because they do not like the colour or shape of the keel. I do agree the view will be spoiled, but there is a price to pay and I think it is a price worth paying."
Rob Fryer, Community Windpower Projects Director, said work would begin within 12 months and hoped the wind farm would be producing electricity within two years.
"This is a fantastic decision and we are delighted that Cornwall councilors took the decision to support renewable energy in the region.
"Davidstow Community Windfarm will provide the remaining 47% of Cornwall's renewable energy target".
The company says development of Davidstow Community Windfarm will create seven jobs, with an investment of £54 million to build it and a further £1.5 million of local investment every year for its lifetime.
Colin Caudrey of STINC ( Stop Turbines in North Cornwall) described the approval as "a travesty for democracy."
He added: "The sooner Cornwall Council disband this ill thought through idea of councillors voting to save their own patch and return to it to a genuine local planning democracy that had soundly refused the application in August the better. This application still fails on many grounds and on many technical and legal issues, the applicants have shown their utter contempt for Cornwall's historic heritage and its magnificent landscape."
18 Comments
View all
by chris, cornwalll
Friday, October 30 2009, 10:00PM
“I am in favour of renewable energy sources and I think(not knowing the facts)that wave power may be a better option.Unless its a millpond they are always there.Please enlighten me.”
by David, North Cornwall
Friday, October 23 2009, 9:40AM
“Because there is sufficient capacity on the grid to supply the whole of Cornwall, even when the wind is not blowing, there is no justification for any wind farms in Cornwall at all
According to the DECC report for 2007, total electrical consumption for Cornwall was 2890 GWh. To put this in context, this is less than half the capacity of the new Langage power station near Plymouth
In order to reduce transmission costs, it makes sense to locate large generation capacity in the UK nearer to the centre of demand, ie the Midlands, so building a nuclear power station anywhere in Cornwall would not be sensible
Whilst turning rubbish into energy is obviously a good thing, Hayle is not an ideal location. St Dennis is better ¿ pity they did not choose a better technology”
by Gaz, Camborne
Thursday, October 22 2009, 2:04PM
“Ok, so we do without wind turbines, and you don't want a nuclear power plant on your doorstep.
We could kill 2 birds with one stone, and have a rubbish fueled electric power station, do without a need for a incinerator!!
We could park it somewhere horrible!! Anyone for Hayle???”
by David, North Cornwall
Thursday, October 22 2009, 12:37PM
“If wind energy is so good, why the need to deceive? Why do developer¿s visualisations always minimise the impact on the landscape? Why the need for the unnecessary and misleading claims that a particular development will save so many tons of CO2 and will power so many thousands of homes, when it is obvious that it cannot do that when the wind is not blowing. Why are we not told the full story about government incentives and subsidies? Why does the industry deny that there is a real problem with noise from wind farms?”
by R english, Camelford
Thursday, October 22 2009, 10:47AM
“Mark Gibson The artist quoted should realise that haveing wind turbines is like stepping out of a sinking boat into collander.”
by Gordon, Ex-Exmoor
Thursday, October 22 2009, 10:33AM
“Thought it was only a matter of time before we got the, 'Would you rather have nuclear' argument in these posts.
Wind does not substitute for nuclear and never will.
Nuclear power is base-load power that works best when operating at constant load. It is not used for load balancing like coal and gas.
This is why even Jonathan Porritt and the Sustainable Development Commission, in the most rabidly pro-wind report to date, state:
"It would be unrealistic to assume that wind energy would displace any nuclear capacity," ('Wind Power in the UK', Sustainable Development Commission. 2005. p35).
And yes, I and many other informed people, would rather have a small, modern nuclear power station that produces some 2,000MWe of reliable base-load electricity rather than seeing all of Cornwall covered in turbines that will still need fossil-fuelled power stations to back them up.
Whatever their mud hut and wind power fantasies, windies will have to live with the facts of nuclear power and radiation.
In Cornwall, we have some of the highest background radiation in the UK - from the ground. Higher than from encapsulated high level nuclear waste.
The French have 59 nuclear reactors, several of which are on the channel coast. An accident in a French reactor is no different from an accident at Wylfa or Dungeness.
European nuclear power is here to stay. The French are not going to give up 75% of their power-generation (some of which we import).
Nor are they going to give up the lowest CO2 emissions and the lowest electricity prices in Western Europe. All thanks to nasty nuclear power.”
by max power, st austell
Thursday, October 22 2009, 9:46AM
“The rights and wrongs of wind turbines is one thing. But the location sets the precedent that they will be sited anywhere. More worrying is that local democracy was damaged by the puppet Uniitary and future controversial schemes (incinerators, nuclear power/hazardous waste disposal waste, large housing schemes etc.) will be decided from London. No point in having councillors as there will not be any democratic decisions to be made. Also there is no political party worth wasting a vote on.
Was this the freedom and rights we were promised by Bliar and Mandy?”
by David, North Cornwall
Thursday, October 22 2009, 7:34AM
“A good reason for objecting to wind farms is that they will do little to reduce CO2 emissions in the UK.
Another is that they will also lead to massive increases in electricity prices, increased costs to manufacturers and major job losses within the UK
To see what happens in reality take the case of Denmark (with more than 6,000 turbines generating 19% of its electricity, It has the highest per capita wind power capacity in the world). Yet It also has the highest consumer electricity prices in the developed world - even though their supply is heavily subsidised.
Because Denmark is not as windy as the UK, the average load factor achieved is only about 22%. On the other hand they have the advantage of proximity to their neighbours Norway, Sweden and Germany. They can sell their excess electricity (at very low prices) at times of high wind and low demand and buy it back (at higher prices) at times of low wind and high demand. This arrangement with Norway is particularly beneficial as the latter has large hydropower resources, which provide an environmentally friendly load-balancing function. This is good for the world but not so good for the Danish economy.
The informed Danish public naturally object to their taxes in effect subsidising the electrical supply of other countries.
But, according to the UN Human Development statistics, Danish annual per capita CO2 output is actually greater than that of the UK
Not having the benefits of large neighbours, here in the UK the back-up supply required for when the wind is not blowing, will have to be by new thermal plant running inefficiently. So the situation would not be as favourable as in Denmark”
by Steve Leverton, Camborne, Cornwall
Thursday, October 22 2009, 12:34AM
“I echo the thoughts of Gaz, Ben and Anj. I am all for democracy and freedom of speech - however I get so frustrated when people are so against renewable energy sources, which are such an essential part of the years to come....As you lot do, I like wind turbines, think they actually fit in well with the countryside, and I wish more were planned for the South West. Would the protesters and objectors rather have nuclear fuel produced on their doorsteps? I know how I'd feel about that!!!”
by Rob Sargeant, Camelford
Thursday, October 22 2009, 12:23AM
“I would like to see published the names of the committee and how they voted! Or is that a similar secret to the planning notices the council refuse to publish?”