TALKING POINT

WINDFARMS REVISITED –
Now A Major Landscape Issue

By Keith Miller
(MCofS Executive Committee Member)

The issue of the proliferation of windfarm proposals continues with increasing concern from both local residents and mountaineers about the location of many of the proposals, the number & size of turbines and the overall impact on Scotland’s landscapes. Many concern areas of land that are not designated in any way for their special character or scenic quality, but could nonetheless have a major impact on the landscape of the countryside that many people enjoy.

A significant change (“global warming”) in the global climate caused (or at least exacerbated) by the greatly increased emissions of several gases (particularly carbon dioxide (CO₂), methane and nitrous oxide) that have occurred throughout the 20^th century, and into the 21^st, has been accepted as reality by the vast majority of scientists. Politicians of most nations have accepted this scientific consensus and have been trying to agree actions. The best known is the “Kyoto Protocol” an international agreement which aims at reducing the emissions of the so-called “greenhouse gases” of which carbon dioxide is the most significant. This agreement has currently been ratified by 119 countries (Cook & Dewar 2003).

UK CONTEXT

Within the UK most aspects of energy policy is reserved to the UK Government. In its 2003 Energy White Paper (DTI 2003) the UK Government set out four goals for its energy policy:

• to put ourselves on a path to cut the UK’s carbon dioxide emissions - the main contributor to global warming - by some 60% by about 2050 with real progress by 2020;
• to maintain the reliability of energy supplies;
  to promote competitive markets in the UK and beyond, helping to raise the rate of sustainable economic growth and to improve our productivity; and
• to ensure that every home is adequately and affordably heated.

Energy, in one form or another, is used by all elements of society; in 2002 the final UK energy consumption by sector was (DTI 2003):
Transport 36%
Domestic 30%
Industry 21%
Other 13%

Clearly transport is a key sector and the Energy White Paper (DTI 2003) states that “the transport sector, including aviation, produces about one quarter of the UK’s total carbon emissions. Road transport contributes 85% of this, with passenger cars accounting for around half of all carbon emitted by the transport sector.” Hence the rating of vehicles’ carbon dioxide emissions and the application of graduated Vehicle Excise Duty and Company Car Tax which are both now linked to CO₂ emissions.

However, one transport sector, international aviation, does not figure in national inventories of greenhouse gas emissions as no international agreement exists and it is currently predicted that UK carbon emissions from international flights will almost double by 2020 (DTI 2003). This is being accommodated by the Government through favourable taxation on aviation fuel and the proposed construction of new airport infrastructure. This increase in carbon emissions amounts to somewhere between ¼ and ½ of the total cuts in carbon emissions estimated by the Government over the same period (DTI 2003).

Over the years the proportion of electricity generated from the different primary energy sources has changed and will continue to do so. It also differs substantially between Scotland and the UK overall. (See Tabe 1).

SCOTTISH CONTEXT

The promotion of energy from renewable sources and environmental protection are devolved to the Scottish Parliament. Specific targets for electricity generation in Scotland have been set by the Scottish Executive (Scottish Executive 2003):

• a commitment that 18% of electricity will be generated from renewable sources by 2010 (which is basically the same as the UK target given the 8% generated from existing hydro-electricity schemes), and
• an aspirational target of 40% of electricity being generated from renewable sources by 2020.

The Renewables Obligation (Scotland) Order 2002 (ROS), together with its counterpart in England & Wales, requires that energy suppliers provide an increasing proportion of their electricity from renewable sources. This proportion increases annually and has a target of 10.4% by 2010 (and plans for 15.4% by 2015). A full review of the ROS is planned for 2005-2006. Financial mechanisms and incentives have been put in place to facilitate and encourage an increase in energy generation from renewable sources.

ENERGY FROM RENEWABLE SOURCES

Energy can be generated from a variety of renewable sources, including: on-shore wind, off-shore wind, freshwater hydro-schemes, wave, tidal, deep-sea currents, solar, waste and biomass. In Securing a Renewable Future: Scotland’s Renewable Energy the Scottish Executive states that it wishes “to support and promote all renewables technologies” and that it believes “that methods of generation other than on-shore wind will makes an increasing contribution to the amount of renewable energy generated in Scotland”, and it includes actions relating marine energy, off-shore wind and biomass.

The very significant increase in interest in the generation of electricity from the wind is the direct result of the desire to tackle climate change by reducing carbon dioxide emissions. However, the generation of electricity is only one component of “greenhouse gas” emissions, with only 20% of primary energy use in the UK being electricity (Cook & Dewar 2003). Furthermore, this is a global issue that cannot be solved unilaterally: “UK emissions of carbon dioxide currently account for only about 2% of the global total” (DTI 2003). Very significant compounding issues are the differential between national (and per capita) emissions of “greenhouse gases” by Western and Third World nations, and the development aspirations of Third World nations (particularly those such as China and India).

Moreover the Energy White Paper (DTI 2003) states that “the cheapest, cleanest and safest way of addressing our energy policy objectives is to use less energy. The financial benefits of doing so are clear. Better insulated buildings and more energy efficient workplaces cut energy bills for householders and businesses. Reducing demand puts less pressure on energy supplies.”

WINDFARMS IN SCOTLAND

Despite statements from the Scottish Executive regarding their support for all renewable technologies the current situation is that there is limited interest in biomass generators, marine generators are basically still at the experimental stage and there are only 2 proposals for off-shore windfarms (the approved Robin Rigg, in the Solway Firth, and the Talisman proposal in the outer Moray Firth) (SNH 2003b).

By contrast, as of 21 November 2003, there were 165 on-shore windfarms in the planning system, with a further 200 at a pre-application stage (SNH 2003b). By April 2004 these totals had risen to at least 188 and 231 respectively (SNH Personal Communication): - See Table 2.

Despite this number of proposals the Scottish Executive has offered no locational guidance nor prepared an overall strategy to guide on-shore windfarm development. Scottish Natural Heritage has prepared its own policy statement Strategic Locational Guidance for Onshore Wind Farms in Respect of the Natural Heritage (SNH 2002) and a guidance note on the Cumulative Effect of Windfarms (SNH 2003a). The former SNH document offers “a broad overview of where there is likely to be the greatest scope for wind farm development, and where there are the most significant constraints, in natural heritage terms.” Three broad categories of sensitivity are identified:

• zone 1(lowest natural heritage sensitivity) covering 26% of Scotland’s land area,
• zone 2 (medium natural heritage sensitivity) covering 48%, and
• zone 3 (high natural heritage sensitivity) covering 26%, which includes National Scenic Areas (NSA), core parts of the National Parks, Natura 2000 sites (sites designated under European Directives as Special Protection Areas or Special Areas of Conservation), World Heritage Sites, peatland & coastal Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and SNH’s indicative search areas for wild land (SNH 2003c) are included in zone 3.

Additionally some local authorities are developing their own specific policy regarding windfarms. For example, Perth & Kinross Council are currently consulting on their draft wind energy policy guidance [http:///www.pkc.gov.uk/livinglearn/planning/structureplan.htm].

MCofS Policy

The MCofS Development in Mountain Areas Policy adopted at its 1994 AGM makes a number of relevant statements:

• “The MCofS is concerned about a number of developments in mountain areas, such as superquarries, windfarms, hydro-electric schemes, or tourist developments ……….… The MCofS is also concerned about a number of linear developments through mountain areas such as roads, powerlines and water ducts or pipelines.”
• “The concern of the MCofS is that developments should not be at the expense of the mountain resource on which so much of the tourist trade relies. Unfortunately, in the past there has been far too much short-term thinking with poorly designed or placed developments which have had an adverse effect on the mountain resource. The MCofS does not believe that these developments are environmentally sustainable.”
• “The MCofS is concerned that developments, which may appear sustainable in one respect, should not be allowed to happen without a consideration of their overall impact. At the present time this is a particular concern in relation to renewable energy developments. Wind and water are found in abundance in the Scottish Highlands and it is precisely these resources which are likely to be attractive as renewable sources of energy in the future. The MCofS whilst fully supporting the development of renewable sources of energy does not believe that these should go ahead without due regard to their impact on the landscape, on flora and fauna and on recreational activities including hillwalking and mountaineering.”

However, the process through which windfarms are planned and are eventually withdrawn, rejected, modified or approved does not make it easy for the MCofS, its members or other interested people to input and make their views known. The following is a general, though not universal, sequence of events:

1. an embryonic interest in a site is generated by developers
2. an application to site one or more temporary anemometer masts is made to the local planning authority
3. the application is advertised locally, with a prescribed period for people to object or submit their comments to the local authority
4. local authority considers application
5. if the anemometer application is approved it/they is/are installed and wind speeds measured throughout the year
6. developer decides if they wish to take their plans further
7. developer may consult the local authority, Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH), Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) and/or other agencies about their plans (pre-application consultations). These may be in commercial confidence.
8. developer formally seeks a scoping opinion from relevant bodies (such as SNH, SEPA and the local authority) prior to preparing an Environmental Statement which will support their application
9. developer submits an application to the Scottish Executive for onshore windfarms in excess of 50 megawatts (MW) under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 or to the relevant local planning authority for onshore windfarms below this threshold, under the Town & Country planning (Scotland) Act 1997
10. application is considered by the relevant authority and there is a prescribed period for people to submit their comments or object.

During the whole of this process which may take several years there are very limited opportunities for the input of views by the public.

POTENTIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR SCOTLAND’S HILLS AND MOUNTAINEERING

The proliferation of windfarms raises a number of issues and has a variety of implications for the hills and mountains of Scotland, for the mountaineering community and for those with a concern and passion for Scotland’s uplands and wild land. Some of these implications are outlined below:

Size and number of turbines

Most of the proposals currently being developed involve turbines with a vertical blade tip height of over 100metres, with a significant proportion being 125m high. As they require minimum average windspeeds of above 7m/s upland areas tend to be targeted. This combination of size and siting means that the potential area from which they are visible can be considerable.

The majority of windfarm proposals are for between 20 and 50 turbines, though several are for more than 100, particularly in the Western Isles. To avoid air movement interactions turbines have to be constructed a significant distance apart. These windfarms therefore cover sizeable areas of land, with each turbine having a vehicular access track constructed to it.

Non-designated areas

Although designated areas and sites have a degree of protection from adverse developments, including the construction of windfarms, most of Scotland is not so protected. Many of the hills and crags that are frequented by walkers and climbers are in non-designated areas and potentially more vulnerable to windfarms proposals.

Access

A potential access problem with windfarms has recently come to light. At one windfarm site there is a large “Private No Access” sign on the gate across the new access track to the wind turbines. Is the area being treated as an industrial site?

Tourism

The importance of tourism to the Scottish economy is clearly recognised and the significant contribution made by walkers, climbers and mountaineers has been demonstrated by several surveys. Scotland’s countryside is the foundation on which tourism is based and therefore an irreplaceable asset appreciated by millions of people. This was highlighted earlier this year by the National Geographic Magazine. “A panel of experts in sustainable tourism has rated the Highlands as one of the top destinations in the world, using a "stewardship index" that assessed worldwide destinations in terms of management, integrity of tourism and the extent to which tourism has had a negative impact. The Scottish Highlands were ranked in 7th place in the WORLD, and was ahead of any other destination in the UK or Europe.” Details of the study are available on: http://www.nationalgeographic.com/traveler/scorecard/#anchor_5 .

Concentrations of proposals and cumulative effects

Some specific parts of Scotland are currently receiving considerable attention from windfarm developers with several windfarms in varying stages of consideration and planning. For example, in relatively restricted parts of Perthshire:

Aberfeldy / Dunkeld / Crieff area – 4 proposals from four different developers: Calliachar (46 x 100m high turbines), Griffin Forest (80 x 122m), Logiealmond (24 x 122m) and Abercairny (Sma’ Glen) (24 x c100m) (http://www.aswag.org.uk/)

NE Ochil Hills – 4 proposals from three different developers (http://www.oepg.org.uk/): Lochelbank (20 x 125m), Knowehead (29 x 120m), Green Knowes (46 x 95m) and Snowgoat Glen (18 x 96m), plus 3 further sites under consideration.

These concentrations of proposals have significant implications for the immediate area but the size of the turbines means that there are wider implications

The number of proposals somewhere in the development stage also raises the issue of their cumulative effect on visual amenity, landscape, habitats and wildlife. If this pace of development continues from what proportion of Scotland’s mountains will a windfarm not be visible in, say, 10 years time?

Transmission lines

Another significant issue relating to onshore windfarms is the need to strengthen the national electricity grid to facilitate the transmission of electricity generated from renewable sources in the Highlands and Islands to the centres of population and industry where most of it is consumed. This has resulted in proposals by Scottish & Southern Energy and Scottish Power to replace the existing 132,000Volt transmission line (on c30metre towers) from Beauly to Denny with a 400,000Volt line on 45-50m tall lattice towers, and to deviate into more remote country along several sections. MCofS have submitted comments on these proposals.

Clearly there are many issues surrounding climate change and the desire to reduce the impacts that humans are having: energy consumption, energy generation, energy efficiency & conservation, energy transmission, transport, etc. However, there currently appears to be an unbalanced approach with onshore windfarms being favoured by Government and developers. This could very easily lead to the largest change in Scotland’s upland landscape since the period of blanket afforestation.

The Mountaineering Council of Scotland would welcome comments and views on the subject. To facilitate MCofS input to the planning processes it would be very helpful if information on any proposals at whatever stage could be e-mailed to info@mountaineering-scotland.org.ukwith a “Windfarm + the location” subject. Information on paper can be posted to the MCofS office.

References and Sources

Cook, G (2003) Energy – subject profile. SPICe briefing 03/45 Edinburgh: Scottish Parliament [available at www.scottish.parliament.uk/research/briefings-03/sb03-45.pdf]

Cook, G & Dewar, J (2003) Renewable Energy. SPICe briefing 03/89. Scottish Parliament [www.scottish.parliament.uk/research/briefings-03/sb03-89.pdf]

Department of Trade and Industry (2003) Our Energy Future – creating a low carbon economy. [http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/whitepaper/index.shtml]

Scottish Executive (2003) Securing a Renewable Future: Scotland’s Renewable Energy. Scottish Executive [http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/environment/srfe-00.asp]

SNH (2002) Strategic Locational Guidance for Onshore Wind Farms in Respect of theNatural Heritage. Scottish Natural Heritage Policy Statement No. 02/02 [available at http://www.snh.gov.uk/]

SNH (2003a) Cumulative Effect of Windfarms. Scottish Natural Heritage Guidance Note [available at http://www.snh.gov.uk/]

SNH (2003b) Renewables Trends in Scotland: Statistics & Analysis. Scottish Natural Heritage [http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/strategy/renewable/sr-rt.pdf]

SNH (2003c) Wildness in Scotland’s Countryside. Scottish Natural Heritage Policy Statement