Pergamon Renewable Energy, Vol.5, Part H, pp. 1314-1321. 1994

Elsevier Science Lid Printed in Great Britain

0960-1481/94 $7.00+0.00

CLEANING UP THE WORLD WITH RENEWABLE ENERGY: FROM POSSIBILITIES TO PRACTICALITIES

Simon ROBERTS and Fiona WEIGHTMAN

Energy and Climate Campaign, Friends of the Earth, 26-28 Underwood Street, London N! 7JQ, UK

ABSTRACT

The increased exploitation of renewable energy sources is cent~-al to any move towards sustainable development. However, casting renewable energy thus carries with it an inhe~-er~t commitment to other basic tenets of sustainability: openness, democraticization etc.

The implications of this commitment for the developers of renewable energy projects are significant. Moreover, a failure to apply these broader principles to the development process risks alienating the very public whose views will determine the political future of renewable energy.

From recent experience of the development of wind power in the UK, it is clear that it is no longer enough just to know the future technical potential of renewable energy, or even the regulatory and/or fiscal framework that would enable that potential to he realised. Increasingly we must concentrate on the practical politics of developing renewable energy that will ensure it is accepted and embraced by the public. Drawing on UK experience, guidelines can he established for renewable energy developers such that the principles of sustainable development are as central to exploitation renewable energy as renewable energy is to sustainability.

KEYWORDS

sustainability; renewable energy; democracy; wind power; planning; best practice; guidelines.

INTRODUCTION: RENEWABLE ENERGY AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Sustainable development has been defined as development which meets present needs witi""'~m compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. As a goal it has been endorsed by governments the world over at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro.

A fundamental strand of such a future requires us to look closely at how we produce and use energy. The pollution problems caused by energy production - acid rain, the threat of climate change and the build up of nuclear waste - make our current rate of consumption of fossil fuels and nuclear power unsustainable. To achieve the necessary shift towards sustainability will require both a substantial improvement in the efficiency with which we produce and use energy and a significant growth in the proportion of our energy supply coming from sustainable renewable energy sources.

However, achieving sustainable development does not just mean introducing different types of energy technology. It also means establishing a differeiit way of making decisions about the use of those technologies. A founding principle of sustainable development is that decisions about the future should be made with local pubfic participation. It is not enough to expect people to rely on the say-so of a technical expert. The environmental problems caused by economic development without democratic participation have become manifest time after time. Unless individuals are able to share both in decision-making and in

1314

1315

the actual process of development, projects are likely to fail politically, even if they would have succeeded technically.

In other words, to ensure that the development of renewable energy is itself sustainable will require continuing public support. This cannot be taken for granted. That renewable energy is a 'good thing' may he manifestly obvicaas to the cognos~nt/. However, an increasingly cynical public, little versed in energy policy issues and practically excluded from decision-making, may remain to he convinced that such development is desirable in their back-yards (particularly when they perceive the alternative as being no development at all).

The question is no longer one of how much renewable energy could he delivered in theory, what technical improvements could he made, or even of what changes to the regulatory or f i ~ regimes in any one country could realise that potential in practice. The question becomes one of how to deliver the public

~ rt ~ will underpin political " "mi~vo~ such that good renewable ener~j projects are allowed to go and the positive envn'omnemal venems olrenewable energy are gainen. The focus is moving from

possibilities to practicalities.

Recent experience in the United Kingdom (UK) with the development of wind power shews the dangers of proceeding with developments without taking these factors into account. It also shows how, with a little thought and commitment from developers and planning authorities, these dangers can he overcome.

TAKING TOO MUCH FOR GRANTED: THE CASE OF WIND POWER IN THE UK

The development of wind power projects in the UK has been proceedin~ apace. On some estimates, it is taking place at rate faster than that of any other country, either now or m the past. This is principally the result of the Non-Fossil Fuel Obligation (NFFO) which provides a protected market and guaranteed price for the most economic projects for different renewable energy sources.

However, if the media is to be believed, progress on wind power is about the grind to a halt in the face of mounting pubfic anxiety about wind power developments, with a consequent withdrawal of political support. Much of the problem stems from five factors:

• a public which, while expressing 'support for renewable energy', is generally not well informed about wind power and its likely impacts and benefits;

• a small contingent of anti-wind power activists who are keen to prevent 'intrusive' development in 'valued' landscapes and content to play on public ignorance and distribute misinformation about wind power;

• a failure by some wind power developers to provide full public information about their projects and/or to engage in consultation with communities near proposed projects;

• a failure by some local planners to assess fully local public opinion of a project, thereby wrongly interpreting a vocal minority as representative of broader sentiments;

• a media keen to report 'conflict' rather than explore and reflect genuine public opinion.

Whether this ~nlcklash' reported in the media is for real is less important than whether politicians believe in it and act accordingly. It is a rare politician these days who reacts to carefi~y quantified objective data about public opinion rather than hysterical media hype of one or two outlandish views.

Of course, it is the case that opinion poll data does not support the media's conclusion that there is massive opposition to wind power development. Instead, it continues to support exactly the opposite conclusion, particularly in areas where wind power developments are already in place.

However, for developers to conclude that they can rely on these opinion polls to secure political support (and thereby planning permission) for their proposals would demonstrate extreme political naivet6. Developors who presume that the passive public support that can he exposed by opinion polls will be enough to see them through are ignorin~ the fact that politicians tend not to react to opinion polls but to the level of anger expressed in their mailbag or in the media. And it is politicians, not opinion pollsters, who will ultimately determine the fate of their proposals.

Developers must therefore seek to create active support for their projects from within the host communities. From our understanding of the broader vrin~vles of sustainable development, this re0uires

1316

active involvement of those communities in theplanning and decision-making about a project. In contrast, in response to the recent, orchestrated anti-windpower campaign in the UK, some wind power developers have been reluctant to become involved in local discussion, fearing (bizarrely) that they would he seen as attempting to unfairly influence the debate.

Rather than fear the public, we believe developers should start from the assumption that a well-informed local public will act responsibly as the true guardians of our countryside, giving support to projects that bring genuine benefits. The challenge for developers is therefore to provide members of the public with the information they require and the opportunities for consultation they desire.

On top of this, in the context of sustainable development, there is a challenge for planners and local politicians. Instead of relying on public participation in the oppositional UK planning system and political processes, planners and politicians should ensure that their decisions about particular wind power project proposals fidly reflect the opinions of the local population as a whole and not merely those of a sometimes vociferous minority.

In order to help developers, planners and local politicians rise to these challenges, we have been instrumental, through Friends o f the Earth, in establishing gnidefines they should follow. The rest of this paper is dedicated to outlining the guidelines.

Not only do the guidelines state clearly what should not be happening in wind power developments (eg sites not suitable for development, noise criteria etc.), but also to define minimum practice that should be carded out. We believe that, if there is comprehensive distribution of information and genuine local consultation, and if public opinion is subsequently accurately gauged, then high quality ~velcomed' wind power projects will emerge. Local people, fully informed, will act as responsible guardians of our countryside.

However, as seen in these guidelines, Friends of the Earth believes that it is essential that developers inform and consult communities, listen to and respond to people's concerns, and become involved in the debate. Such consistent improvement of practice across the wind power industry will lead to improved projects with increased public acceptability, stronger community involvement and community benefits, and the easier transition of individual projects from planning to development. All of these measures can lead to the enhanced take up of wind power with the resulting environmental benefits.

THE GUIDELINES: SITE SELECTION TO MINIMISE THE IMPACT OF WIND POWER

Friends of the Earth has always supported the sensitive development of wind power as a more enviroranentally benign method of generating electricity than those based on fossil fi~el or nuclear power sources. Wind power does not have the physical impacts on the environment that are created by these other methods, such as adding to climate change and problems with acid rain and nuclear waste (impacts which are often irreversible end large scale).

Nevertheless, windfarms undoubtedly do have some impact on the environment and Friends of the Earth has consistently urged for any potential impact to be minimised. This is applicable throughout the process of developing a windfarm, beginning with site selection.

Site selection guidelines

The UK has the best wind energy resource in Europe and there is a clear environmental impel-afire to develop wind power. However, to ensure appropriate site selection, Friends of the Earth believes that the following siting restrictions should be appfied:

No windfarms should be developed within the boundaries of the following nationally designated areas: existing or proposed Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs); Special Protection Areas, Ramsar Sites; Local and National Nature Reserves; and Marine Nature Reserves. The new European Habitats Directive, implemented in the UK in June 1994, also provides for the new designation of Special Areas of Conservation, which should be avoided.

1317

By currentlyproposing a blanket ban on deveio.L~nem in such sites, Friends of the Earth is not implying that wind farm developments w.o.uld necessarily cause serious or large scale oamage to .,nature o r conservation interests. Indeed, this m rarely the case. However, areas such as SSSls are presently uncter

cant threat from development. Many of the designat~ areas listed above ~ve. alre~ly .been lied by quarries, roads etc, and Fnends of the Earth conunues to promote me pm~..pie ~ .mese

special areas should remain protected from any development. If exceptions are made to this prmctpte for the benefit Of wind power, the door may remain open for far less sustainable types of development.

• Larger ..windfarms should not be developed within_ the . ~ e s of National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Be, m~. or Heritage Coasts. l~or this definitton, a larger windfarm would be approximately 10 wind mmmes.

Friends of the Earth believes that there may be circumctances where small scale developments, carefully planned and sited, could be appropriate for individual sites within such areas. Any such potential development will need to have gone through rigorous consultation and.examination by the due process. Clearly, these areas have been designated chiefly for landscape rather than nature conservaUon.reasons. The vmual impact of any proposed development in these areas should therefore be a central cons~derauon in the consultation and planning process.

• Developers should also be aware of and take account of locally designated or sensitive areas.

Local authorities may have designated an .area .under a number of .c.at. egories - archaeological~, scenic, historical or wildlife - and the reason for designation and any potential unpact by ~ pro lx~l . wind farm would have to be carefully examined. In addition, the developer and local authority should identify any potential impact and consult with local organisations over possible concerns.

THE GUIDELINES: IDENTIFYING THE IMPACTS OF A WIND POWER PROJECT

As mentioned above, while the impacts of wind power are minimal compared to 'conventional' power generation, there is still a need to ensure that efforts are made to minimise whatever possible impacts there maybe.

As hamessin 8 wind energy becomes a reality, growing attention is focused on the nature of any potential environmental imp~..s of the resource.. It is of immense importance ~ . l o c a l c o ~ e s .me fully informed of the possible environmental unpacts of any development. Receiving cre&'ble informatmn may often help to address many of the queries, concerns - even fears - of local residents. Because it specifically addresses ecological impacts, the role of the Environmental Impact Assessment (ETA) is therefore ceI~t~al as an information provider.

Currently, the UK Department of the Environment has proposed a revision to the EIA regulations such that they will stipulate that wind farms over 10 turbines, wind farms over 5 Megawatts (MW) or wind farms within 2 km of a designated area will need to undertake an EIK For devdopments smaller than this it can be excessivdy costly to expect developers to undertake a full, formal EtA as defined by the regulations. Instead it is expected that an environmental impact report would be undertaken to provide much of the same information.

The EIA aims to ensure that the ecological impacts of a given development are known and understood in advance and that the decision-making process is not constrained or biased by uncertainty over the likely impacts. Friends of the Earth befieves that projects should only be granted permission when:

• all signi~cant mitigating measures identified in the Environmental Impact Statement (derived from the EtA) are adopted;

• monitoring is carried out of the actual environmental impact arising from the development (thus helping to extend understanding of the specific environmental impacts of wind power and enabling more accurate ELM in the future);

• the devdoper will take all reasonable actions necessary to limit the actual environmental impact such that it does not exceed that predicted in the Environmental Impact Statement.

In advance of the adoption of the Department of the Enviroranent's proposed change in regulations, the local authority should ensure that an EIA is undertaken for all provosals for proiects with more than 10

1318

turbines. Once the regulations have been changed, the local authority should still consider the need for an EIA on all other wind power project planning appfications, regardless of their size, and give reasons for its decision as to whether an EIA is required.

Friends of the Earth considers that, in addition to the compulsory and optional areas already part of an EIA, particular issues concerning wind developments should be fully addressed within the EIA. It is undoubtedly of benefit to the developer and the community that all posu"nle impacts are fla~ed up in the EIA. Any attempt to avoid contentious issues will merely damage the crech~ility ofthe proJect and create greater problems in the long term. The EIA should therefore also detail:

• what damage may arise from construction of the windfanv_; • any possib'dity of electromagnetic interference; • posu'ble impact on bird life through habitat disturbance or collision mortalities; • potential impacts on the hydrology of the area (ground water flows, possible changes of surface

water).

Idemifyin" g the benefits of wind vower

In addition to details of ecological impacts, the potential environmental and econondc benefits of an individual site should be clearly detailed in the EIA, including: carbon dioxide and other emissions reduced; electricity generated; income for farmers and land owners; nmnufacturing, assembly, construction and maintenance employment; job opportunities in community liaison, information or research; eonummity benefits; tourism benefits etc.

Idt~ttifTing and miti_=ating noise inmacts

Considering current machine technology and current understanding of noise impacts, it is unlikely that there will be any site where reasonable noise limits can currently be met if turbines are placed less than 300 metres from the nearest dwelling. However it is noise levels at those dwellings rather than the distance from the turbines which should drive siting and planning decisions. Indeed, as turbine technology end siting knowledge improve it may be possible to achieve tough noise standards with closer distances.

EIAs need to give a sufficient analysis of the predicted noise impact and the local authority must set rigorous noise standards with which the developer must comply, taking ~ of other, background noise. As always, the benefit of the doubt must be given to the residents, and the developer should be over-cautious on questions of siting if necessary.

Issues that need to be addressed in the EIA are site specific information about the potential noise impact, site modelling and measurements, propagation, monitoring, mitigation and possible variants eg the effects of being situated in quiet rural areas or in steep hilly locations. There is an increasing pool o f knowledge being built up in the UK through planning experience, monitoring and lmbfic inquiries. Local authorities and developers can draw upon this to improve their predictive capacity of likely noise impacts in the particular topography chosen for the development. This knowledge should continually be assessed to improve siting practice and minimise noise impacts.

Identif~in$ visual im_oacts

While the visual aspect of a windfarm is a highly subjective issue, photomontages can be a valuable tool in helping to assess the potential visual impact of a windfarm. These photomontages should be taken from a variety of places including local villages and local beauty spots from which the turbines could be vim~nle. Larger developers could be specifically requested to provide different photomontages for different development options [including, perhaps, different turbine designs (two or three blade etc) and colour as well as layout on the site itself]. However, in the case of small scale developers it is unlikely that a small company with limited resources could continue to produce new photomontages. Smaller developers may only be able to afford to produce one photomontage to give some approximate indication of how the sight would appear.

1319

Whether a! visual impact is 'acceptable' is not subject to simple calculus that can provide a ~res' or 'no'. With beauty very much in the eye of the beholder, decisions about acceptability have to flow from consultations with the principle q~holders', the local conmamity.

w ~ "nnmcts after constru~on

There is a need to ensure that, if unforeseen impacts do occur after commissioning, they will be dealt with thoroughly and rapidly by the local authority and develops., and that the local residems will be informed as to what measures have been taken and why. Such conditions could be attached to planning permission for a proposal.

In addition, guarantees must be made by the site operator concerning the renovation and restoration of the site after the ~emoval of turbines. Through planning obligation it should be made clear who will be responsible for decommissioning the site and removing the turbines, once the site is no longer producing electricity.

THE GUIDELINES: INVOLVING COMMUNITIES IN DECISION-MAKING

While financing, wind speeds and 8rid connections are all important elements in choosing and developing a project, the supp.o, rt of local commun~ "es is o.~.. the d.~ermining factor as to ~ projects are taken forward: I t ls.nnportant to recogmse that It is the input of local commumUes that can ensure that app.ropnate projects are ~ developed. Consequently local ~ is vital not only to each individual project but also to tile ~ development ot wnm power Ua'ouglaout the UK. There is a paramount need for developers to make early public consultation c~ih--I to their approach to an individual development.

.Whatever the basi.s.forsome of the recent anti-wind propaganda, there have also been genuine concerns rinsed by eommunmes faced with the new phenomenon of a modem wind energy development. Friends of the Earth maintains that these concerns most be addressed at the local level by local authorities, planners, d~..e~opers, loc~l.resi.'dants and other interested groups .c¢~.. .c~. an informed discussion as to the merits

nnpacts of individual proposals. Knowledge of the individual proposal and broader background information on wind power are essential to ensure this positive debate is conducted.

Friends of the Earth believes that the involvement of local communities, through the distribution of information and by early.comult~. "o~will lead to long term benefits and enhance the development of wind power, conversely, nnsinfonnaUo.n tram anti. "-wind .cmn .psigners. combined with poor local contacts from developers could lead to commumties resentmg and rejeetmg wind developments.

Friends of the Earth's imention is that developers should use the process outlined below before they apply for formal planning permission for each project. We believe that, by using this process, projects applying for formal planning permission will have developed into more appropriate proposals with the support of the majority of the community.

It is a more iterative and appropriate process where local residents would have a greater ability to be informed about and.have ".mflu. ence upon an individual development. During this process they would have tile opportumty to have then" concerns clearly and ratio..nally addressed. By being more involving,the prof ,~ ,c~ ensure tlmt a more ~ .ac~mt. e sense of local OlmUon could be gauged by both the local authority ano me aeveloper. As partot-t.his process, we would ho.pe to.see the developer conducting the EIA process m a more open arm nemme manner, w~th clear identiltcetmn of those aspects of the development (eg turb.ine ~n~g~m and colouring and some particular., of siting) which remain to be determined. Such ~ + . o pcqmess shoul, d be responded to . p o ~ b X the local community since it provides local re~aents wan a rein opportumty to affect some choices about the project.

By so doing, the EIA would become much more of a process of stages which gradually reduce this flem'bility to arrive at a final proposal. For example:

~ . Early " .reformation could be.provided to local, residents, interested groups etc outlining the basic emsttng informaUon on me propow - ate boundaries, potential turbine rmmberx, example layout, one photomoul~e. The reasons for the site selection can be outlined and the decisions that have already been

1320

taken can be identified. In addition, areas of flexibility can be identified, and areas where there have as yet been no decisions taken noted. Wider information on the broader development of wind energy (and its relative environmental benefits) may also provide a useful backdrop of information.

Local residents need to be clear that at this stage the developer will not have all the answers to all questions about the details of the proposal because these decisions have not yet been taken. To have a genuine consultation process means, by definition, that some areas remain undecided and unclear. If the developer has detailed answers to all queries then there is little point in consultation. If local people expect the developer to have everything worked out before local consultations then it will be too late for the consultations to lead to any changes. That there is some uncertainty at this early stage should be interpreted as a sign of flexibility from the developer, not of inadequacy.

Stage 2. The full EIA process could continue using some of the consultation processes outlined below.

After this extended EIA process, the full Environmental Impact Statement and final site layout can be presented to the local authority in applying for planning permission.

Providing inforr~tion and establishin2 local comact# for genuine consultation

At an early stage in the process of planning projects Friends of the Earth would expect developers to ensure that information is provided throughout the community. Information to local communities can be a very empowering tool and way well address many of the queries that will inevitably arise at an early date.

It may be the case that even on erecting an anemometer the developer could make clear the very early, exploratory nature of the monitoring mast. In addition, general information on wind energy could be provided to the local authority and to any enquirers.

When the EIA process begins and the developer has initial information on the project site, some developers have, wherever possible, had a local person as local lialson~'~ontact to ensure local issues are directly aired within the developer company. The nearest local residents should be able to find out about the project from a local contact before becoming made aware of the site from the media or other sources. In this way nearby residents have made an early contact about the development and have access to an individual for further information. More generally, all information that is circulated concerning posm~le plans should always include a contact name, address and phone number of the developer.

Obviously it is important to contact the statutory consultees and planners at a very early date to receive indications of potential problems. However, Friends of the Earth would also expect the developer to distribute information to the wider community before officially applying for planning permission. This contact could he made in several of the following ways:

* by initially contacting the immediate, local residents; • establishing a local contact person and publicising his or her details; • sending introductory information on the proposal to bodies other than the statutory consultees e8 local

environment or wildlife groups, countryside groups, outdoor pursuit groups, parish councils within reasonable distance of the project, nearby residents and local and county councillors,

* distributing leaflets to homes, organisations and public buildings outlining the basic proposal, • holding well-publicised public meetings, • using local media to distribute information (through press releases or advertisements) which should

focus on seeking views and feedback from residents about the proposal, • holding exhibitions/displays in the area, • holding open presentations to local councils, • ensuring developers are prepared to meet with individuals or organisations who have specific queries; • holding open days or site visits to the proposed area; • sending introductory information to local MPS, • sending information to local and county councillors for both the planning authority and relevant

neighbouring areas.

Friends of the Earth would therefore urge that this distribution of information be as wide as possible and as early as possible in the development process. Information provided should contain details of how individuals could raise their concerns with the developer (eg through a contact phone mnnber or address).

1321

It may seem time-consuming, but we believe that this is a wise and essential inve~ment that will save time in the long run, ensure that problems overlooked by the developer are pinpointed and addressed early, lead to a greater level of public acceptability for a project, and thereby increase the chances that it will be given the go ahead by the planning authority.

Specifically, Friends of the Earth expects developers to formally note the queries they have received and how they have responded to them. We do not expect eve~ concern of every member of the public to he allayed (or necessarily allayable). However we do expect concerns to he treated seriously and promptly, and answered with due courtesy. In addition, the responses the developer has given to points raised should be publicly available.

THE GUIDELINES: GAINING AN ACCURATE ASSESSMENT OF PUBLIC OPINION

Judging from opinion poll data taken around existi~ and proposed wind farms over the last few years, public sentiment is favourable towards wind power In general and the projects themselves in particular. This is not the impression one would receive from examination of the local media's coverage of the issue (which has tended to focus on the conflict of interests rather than the overall balance of them). Nor is it the impression that would be received fi'om examinin~ written representations to planners and local politicians which have principally come from those against wind power. Even public meetings have proved an unrepresentative yardstick of the overall nature of local public opinion if assessed in isolation.

Much of this results from the oppositional nature of the planning process in the UK, which is used mainly to voice objections to proposals rather than support. Thus the process captures an inaccurate, or at least incomplete assessment of local public opinion about a particular development.

Friends ofthe Earth would therefore urge planners (and the politicians ultimately responsible for planning decisions) to examine how best to assess the enuine public feeling about a wind power project proposal. w , b -yet. there is o en, who suppo, wind d opmt . It i s , ch enS, for

h ?to..be abme to the o.f the I.o . rath than on ~tab~S~ti~ o, ,eclm 8 ot- t lze anti-wm¢l power cent..pm~, m so, dome., p!aral~., should .also .attempt to • an sn me reasons underlyn~., these negative opmmns to esmDusu me=r technical validity, smce many have, to date, been based on nnsinformation, particularly about noise nuisance.

.Beyond ~ o n a l yardsticks like attendance at public meetings and the size and views of the 'mailbag' on the Issue, additional measures, such as local public opinion surveys, could be used by local authorities for these purposes.

BEYOND THE GUIDELINES: LESSONS FOR ALL RENEWABLE ENERGY DEVELOPERS

Sin~ they are e ~ , " . ~ about incorl~...r~ing the principles., of sustainable development into the project oevempment ano planmng process, we believe that these guidelines are relevant to all forms of renewable energy p.roj.ects. A community that is involved and consulted as the project being developed is a .co. mmumty.tltat can reel part ot a positive development. A local people which is informed and engaged in di~ogue ~ a. d ,evelop~'r can un¢l. erstand an.d be proud of how they locally are conm..'[rating to a cleaner ana more m staL, uml¢. n ~ t r e . ~ucn.commumty sprat would also. be ~ through.increased effort by aevempers to snare me I~netits of aevelopment locally. Thus will be provided the basis for the continued and extended political support for the development of renewable energy which is so important to the achievement of sustainable development. It is down this path that Friends of the Earth urges all developers to go for the benefit of us all.