Archive for the ‘Solar & wind power’ Category

Wind power from on-shore installations, dotted across the British countryside, especially if located in the windiest places, Britain’s magnificent hill and ridge tops, is increasingly giving rise to a major conflict between wider environmental concerns and the pressing need for action over climate change. Neither of the big environmental organisations, Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace, nor the Green party, have seriously confronted this issue.

Though wind power is Britain’s great asset in the shift to renewables in the struggle against climate change, on-shore wind has started to hit some formidable obstacles. Across the country, schemes for wind farms are having planning permission delayed in the face of local opposition. Most strikingly, a huge scheme to supply 20 per cent of Scotland’s domestic electricity from Shetland’s main island is now opposed by local conservation groups, the RSPB and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency.

This fits the pattern identified by the chief executive of the turbine manufacturer Vestas, explaining that creating wind arrays in Britain was heavily mired in “nimbyism”. People want renewable energy but they don’t want the machinery it takes to produce it set up in their local environment.

Shetland facing threat to natural environment.

This is becoming a major crunch point for the UK energy minister, Ed Miliband, since he has recently said it was now more or less socially unacceptable to oppose wind farms because of the pressing need to reduce our carbon output.

But is it really irresponsible to oppose wind farms? Are opponents of on-shore wind power installations really failing to face the hard realities of what creating a low or zero carbon future will involve? Objectors to the Shetland scheme claim it will seriously damage breeding sites for endangered birds, that concomitant damage to peat bogs will itself release significant quantities of carbon dioxide and that the scale of the scheme would amount to industrialisation of the landscape.

Is it just necessary to accept such consequences as inevitable if we are to have renewable energy? No, it isn’t. Objectors to on-shore wind power are on the right side in the longer environmental perspective. It is not necessary to spread wind turbines across the British countryside, in effect destroying its intrinsic character and beauty. It is also, in fact, pointless to do so. At such a heavy cost, little would be gained.

Low energy potential of on-shore wind.

The reason that this is the case is that on-shore wind arrays located in the British landscape could only ever provide a relatively small proportion of our energy needs.  

This is clear from projections by the OECD and the International Energy Agency of Britain’s technical land-based wind energy potential, published by the European Wind Energy Association. Using its maximum capacity, Britain could potentially supply energy equivalent to 30 per cent of its current consumption of electricity, and therefore only about six per cent of its total energy consumption. [1]

By contrast, the 2002 UK government strategic framework for off-shore wind energy determined that off-shore arrays in the North Sea could supply almost 10 times the UK’s electricity requirements.[2]

Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth overlook key evidence.

In a letter last week to the Guardian, Andy Atkins, executive director of Friends of the Earth, claimed that on-shore wind has “a major role to play in delivering a greener future” – which is simply not supported by the figures. He argued that local authorities should have “obligatory renewable energy targets” and that communities should be obliged “to take responsibility their share of low carbon energy production.”

This position seems to be based on the idea that all areas must make sacrifices, and must be prepared to accept extensive local environmental damage, in the fight against climate change. Given, however, the inevitably minor contribution that on-shore wind can make, there is little logic in making all sides share a burden which won’t achieve much anyway.

 A link on the Greenpeace website will assure you that wind power is “abundant…(since the) UK is the windiest country in Europe.” But it gives no figures to say how abundant it is, and swiftly moves on to the merits of off-shore wind power. The site claims that to produce 10 per cent of our electricity would take up one 20,000^th of the UK’s land area. This does not sound a lot, but the total energy yield is also small, equivalent to 1.7 per cent of our total energy use. Greenpeace is not forthcoming on whether it wants more, and where it would build it.

Green Party undecided between beauty and wind farms.

The Green Party has some excellent energy policies, and sets an ambitious and commendable target to draw 50 per cent of the UK’s energy from renewable sources by 2020. But their website does not say how much of this would be from on-shore wind. Its detailed energy policy does say it would “promote the full use of currently available renewable energy sources” and that there would be a planning presumption in favour of renewables schemes unless certain factors obtain, including that they are in “a nationally designated scenic area.” This suggests that it would enthusiastically support widespread on-shore wind power. 

 A key problem with this policy is that it can be foreseen that many people will consider their local countryside to be beautiful even if it does not have an official government certificate to say it is. Furthermore, the economies of scale required to lay down transmission cables economically will act as a driver towards larger sites. This is a major factor in the Shetland scheme. As a result, reasonably attractive but unexceptional open spaces will be turned into extensive unattractive industrial landscapes, which those living nearby are likely to object to.

Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and the Green Party are failing to consider the sheer scale of the energy problem. It is time to abandon the illusion that on-shore wind, in Britain at least, has a role to play in building a zero carbon economy. The future for renewables lies, rather, in off-shore wind, solar, wave and tidal power, where arrays can be laid out on the scale that the crisis demands.

[1] Renewable Energy. Ed. Godfrey Boyle. Open Univ. 2004 – Table 7.4
[2] ibid. – Table 7.5