“Charter for Wind Farms” is a disaster for citizens

The Government’s new Planning Policy Framework

Don't you just love 'em?

Up and down the country, groups of concerned citizens have formed protest groups, worked for many months to raise funds, hired specialist advice and lawyers, fought wind farm planning applications, and won, and opened the champagne.  Then they’ve faced an appeal from the developers, and the man from Whitehall has listened to both sides of the case for a few hours, and then overturned the local democratic decision, and decided in favour of wind power, on the basis that it’s “Government Policy”.  In fact, of course, it’s really Brussels policy passed down second-hand by our government.

Meantime there’s been a huge battle over the government’s revised and shortened Planning Policy, which many felt would be a license for developers.  After much campaigning and a battle royal in the media, the government has come up with a still shorter document of fifty pages, which it says will reassure protesters.  Many concerned with the wind farm issue hoped it would offer some good news.  Perhaps more weight for local opinion — from this government that loves to talk about “localism”.  Maybe tighter noise standards, or a minimum set-back from dwellings for new turbines.

If so, they will have been disappointed.  Let me quote the key words from the document:

17.  …. support the transition to a low carbon future in a changing climate, taking full account of flood risk and coastal change, and encourage the reuse of existing resources, including conversion of existing buildings, and encourage the use of renewable resources (for example, by the development of renewable energy);

There is a series of paragraphs all in the same vein, effectively giving carte blanche to the developers, and cutting the ground from under protesters.  So much for localism.  See the Daily Mail report under the heading “Charter for Wind Farms”:

A key driver of this policy has been Greg Clark, “Minister for Planning”, who calls himself a Conservative, yet cut his teeth as a social-democrat and a disciple of Shirley Williams.  An MP who has said that Tories are wrong to treat Churchill as a role model — saying we should rather follow Polly Toynbee, the extreme leftist.  He is the kind of “Conservative” who convinced me that I could no longer support the Party.

Here at the United Kingdom Independence Party, we’re used to Conservatives coming across to join us because they’re fed up with lack of progress on the EU issue.  But more and more we’re seeing Conservatives, and disgruntled wind farm protesters, coming over to us because they’re fed up with this government’s planning policies, and with the steady march of the turbines.  They feel angry and frustrated.  They feel that no one is listening, and no-body cares.  But we’re listening.  And as UKIP’s spokesman on Industry & Energy, I can say “We agree with you”.

The government has a single policy here which infuriates voters, blights local communities, drives up the price of electricity, forces energy-intensive businesses and jobs and investment off-shore, drives pensioners into fuel poverty, threatens economic recovery and jeopardises our energy security.  Not very smart thinking.  That’s what I’d call a lose-lose policy.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to “Charter for Wind Farms” is a disaster for citizens

  1. David Ramsbotham says:

    We need to get the Government onside, as well as local councils and others, if we are going to stop these wind turbines being built.

    Are you disillusioned by rising electricity prices, over dependence on the “green” dream [especially uneconomical and inefficient wind farms] and the destruction of our countryside then please register your objection to the Government on


    or by GOOGLING “E-PETITION 22958” and following the link.

    Please pass this message on to Councillors, members of your community and anyone else you know to persuade them to sign up too. If you are really concerned about wind turbines please write a letter promoting this petition to your local Newsletter and to the Editors of your local newspapers.

  2. georgyporgie says:

    The sad fact is that wind turbines do not save any carbon emissions because they still need the build and operation of a fossil fuel power station to provide security of supply to the UK power network, These necessary marginal generation plants have to run partly loaded and therefore operate less efficiently which causes more carbon emissions. It is fact that if more of these marginal reserve generators were efficient combined cycle gas turbines operated from new shale gas developments there would be no need for any wind turbines at all, and no new transmission infrastructure, no new power station sites, no new interconnectors with Europe, no need for the smart meter roll-out and most importantly there would be less carbon emissions.
    Wake-up Ed Davey and DECC, just think if you sanctioned nuclear replacements on existing sites combined with only new CCGT’s electricity prices would be 60% lower with Britains industry being far more competitive.
    George Wood, Electrical Power Systems Expert.

  3. georgyporgie says:

    The very,very sad fact is that wind turbines deliver no carbon reductions when the operation of the power network is considered as a whole. So this planning farce is defeating its very objective which the planning inspectors are not correctly advised upon and so they are simply stooges to government policy.
    If the UK were to press ahead with the extraction of shale gas vigorously, gas prices would drop by 50% as has been experienced in America. Then building and operating new combined cycle gas turbine installations to replace ageing coal and oil-fired power stations on their existing sites would in itself cut carbon emmissions even without carbon capture developments. Wind turbines are causing more and more conventional plants to run part-loaded because of the wind-turbines unreliable intermittency which causes significant losses of efficiency of the marginal reserve generators.
    Thus, as the UK seems to be adopting a ‘head-in-the-sand’ approach to build more and more wind turbines, the back-up reserve requirements increase exacerbating the inefficient operation of the reliable reserve generators and causing more carbon emissions.
    Also, if the wind turbine developments were abandoned forthwith, then there would be less costs involved for new transmission and distribution networks and interconnectors with Europe. The UK would not need the ‘smart-meters’ or ‘smart-grids’ roll-out programmes saving at least £100-billion taking account of the very expensive per MW infrastructure costs of wind turbines.
    What does this mean??? Well, adopting a shale gas extraction policy plus a nuclear replacement strategy would result in our electricity prices actually going down in the future, not up!!! And whats more, actual carbon emissions would fall and also stop the staggering waste of building vast wind turbine capacities in Scotland and offshore and the prevention of 15% of their very ineffective outputs as additional transmission losses, my interpretation of this is ‘electric-fire-bars-in-the-sky’ waste.
    Wake-up Ed Davey and DECC, your being duped by European policies and the heads of the electricity companies are seeing their fortunes and salaries grow astronomically.
    George Wood, Retired Electrical Power Systems Expert.

  4. The UK Government’s Ministerial Team on this issue is completely devoid of any expertise or experience in this field, except of course for the prime mover, Chris Huhne who has since been moved on for unrelated reasons, and Greg Barker who is still incumbent Climate Change Minister. Both of the aforementioned persons were members of the Green Fiscal Commission, whilst Gordon Brown was still PM. The stated focus of the Green Fiscal Commission? …..

    “The focus of the Commission’s work was greening the UK tax system – that is moving taxes from ‘goods’ like labour, to ‘bads’ like environmental damage. The key to a green tax shift is that the proportion of tax revenues raised from green taxes should increase over time. “
    There is much more to be gleaned from examining the vast reams of bunkum and nonsense on this website, which although it states the following … “The Commission was an independent body, not affiliated to any political party and aimed to examine the evidence impartially. Its results have been made public to encourage debate in this area.” … It is in fact an overtly political socialist bureaucratic body, whose ranks are stuffed with “green” advocates, climate alarmists, and megalomaniacs, who want to foist their own mistaken fatuous World view upon us.

    The reality is that those Government Ministers who were involved with the commission and indeed some Labour MPs as well, as Conservatives & Liberal Democrats have connived to degrade the UK’s industrial manufacturing base, in a deliberate and underhanded fashion, by imposing excess costs on fuels of all types, including Oil, Gas, Coal & Electricity, by the idiotic device of unnecessarily raising excess taxes based on fraud and bunkum in the fields of environmental and atmospheric sciences.

    Government Ministers have failed to keep abreast of the latest research and empirical experimental results, but instead are content to continue with hokum schemes which have been proven to damage the environment as well as the economy. The end result is an increased balance of trade deficit, a lower standard of living, degradation of the environment, reduction in public services, and increased unemployment. This quintuple whammy is not only asinine, but has elements of deliberate and premeditated Fraud. Persons have made a gain for themselves or another, or have exposed others to a loss, or the risk of a loss. They have done so on the basis of information which they knew was either untrue or might be untrue, contrary to Section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006. They have manufactured “articles for use in frauds” contrary to Section 7, and have participated in “fraudulent business carried on by company etc.” contrary to Section 10, and indeed other infrigements could be lodged.

    Carbon Di-Oxide is not a dangererous gas in the Earth’s atmosphere. It does not require to be saved or reduced by mankind. In fact there is an acute shortage of CO2 in the Earth’s atmosphere. All CO2 related arguments with respect to the Earth’s Climate are Hokum and Bunkum. Mass Solar, Vast Wind Farms, CCS, are among the vacuous and inane ideas that are simply exacerbating the UK’s economic woes, and all subsidies on such schemes should be scrapped immediately.

    (remove squred bracket – copy & paste – saves being flagged as spam by Akismet)

  5. http://www.elp.com/index/from-the-wires/wire_news_display/1621584677.html
    “China will accelerate the use of new-energy sources such as nuclear energy and put an end to blind expansion in industries such as solar energy and wind power in 2012, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao says in a government report published on March 5.

    China will instead develop nuclear power in 2012, actively develop hydroelectric power, tackle key problems more quickly in the exploration and development of shale gas, and increase the share of new energy and renewable energy in total energy consumption.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s