Author: iain

Please attend the Council Chambers, Town House, Haddington for 10 am on Tuesday 7th May to support our community wind turbine planning application. The planning committee will decide on our application at 10 am and your presence will show how the community feel. 

If planning consent is granted, we will pursue the option of raising part of the projects costs (c£1.7 million) locally through the creation of an investment opportunity for local people.

The investment proposal would offer returns of around 5% and provide people with a secure and ethical investment opportunity in these times of increasing financial insecurity. Such a model would mean cheaper finance for the project than if it is raised through a bank. It would therefore mean the generation of greater profits for other community projects, currently £200,000 per year.

With help from the people of East Lammermuir we are able to display our plans for the community wind turbine in the villages around East Lammermuir.

Wed 5th Dec – Friday 7th December  – Innerwick Village Hall

Friday 7th Dec Oldhamstocks Village Hall

Saturday 8th December – Stenton Village Hall – postponed

More dates to follow…

We hope that it helps people understand our idea. It would appear that some people still think this is a private development so we thought we would explain a few things :-

Which community ? – the community that would benefit from the  community wind turbine money is Ward 7. This is the electoral ward covered by our three councillors, four community councils and Sustaining Dunbar.

How do we benefit?

The community wind turbine will make money be selling electricity and making “green” electricity. All the money is then placed into a grant fund. Local people and projects can apply to the grant fund to finance ideas that support the local economy in  the areas of Food, Energy, Transport, Health, Enterprise, Skills and Education.

Why are we doing it?

Money is getting tight and jobs are being lost. By developing community energy we can make sure that some of the money we lose through our electricity bills comes back to be spent in our local community. Estimated £4 million over 20 years.

What happens next?

This project may not happen without local support. The people of the community need to tell the planning department that they support the idea.

 

 

 

We have applied for planning permission to put a community wind turbine on Blackcastle/Cocklaw Hill. Details of this proposed community wind turbine will be on display, all week, from Monday 19th November at Bleachingfield centre. On Thursday 22nd November we will hold a questions and answers session between 3pm and 7pm.

The exhibition will be on display in Innerwick Village Hall on Friday 7th December.

Over the next few weeks and months East Lothian Council planning department will listen to the views of many people to help them decide if they should approve the turbine application.

The best way to assist this project is to contact East Lothian Council planning department to tell them that you support the Blackcastle/Cocklaw hill community wind turbine.

 

Send an e-mail to:   environment@eastlothian.gov.uk

or write to them at:

Environment, John Muir House, Brewery Park, Haddington, EH41 3HA

You can also contact the planning department on-line via this link

Thanks for you support.

The other entry was a bit…. long! Sorry about that. We think it’s only fair to put all the information out there so people can make their own minds up. In short, what we are saying is… The Crystal Rig wind farm is growing bigger and the next stage, Crystal Rig 3, will add another 11 wind turbines to the 101 privately owned wind turbines on the East Lammermuir Plateau.

East Lothian Council Planning Department have experts saying that the landscape can’t take any more wind turbines in the area but East Lothian Council are thinking of adding 7, council owned wind turbines, to Crystal Rig 3.  How can we have 18 more turbines when the landscape is full?

 

Well, if some wind turbines are locally owned then they are looked at differently than if they are privately owned. Nothing needs to change in the planning department but local people need to voice their opinion. If local people support the locally owned wind turbines then it helps the planning department decide on the “visual impact.”

“there will always be people who are against proposals, but when genuine community initiatives-which use a genuine community fund, offer genuine community payback and make a clear connection between the proposal and the wider community-send a clear message to decision makers that the development is welcome in the locale. That goes a long way to offsetting other issues to do with landscape, noise, flicker and so on.” Chris Norman – Head of Planning Scotland.

“ the purpose of landscape character assessment is not to prevent change but to illustrate what change will look like in order to allow elected decision makers and their electorate to decide whether or not they want it.” Andrew Thin – Chair of Scottish Natural Heritage

“Rather than looking at it and saying‘that big company dumped it here to make profit’, they look at it and say ‘that’s ours and I get some profit from it’ and as a result it turns out aesthetic perceptions are deeply subjective and you say ‘I rather like it’ rather than ‘I rather dislike it.’”  Lord (Adair) Turner – Chairman of Committee on Climate Change

Dunbar Community Energy Company object to the Crystal Rig 3 wind farm extension as a privately owned wind farm. We will support a Crystal Rig 3 wind farm extension if 7 turbines are locally owned.  I hope this clears things up.

The proposed Crystal Rig 3 wind farm extension will be an important test of how we feel about wind turbines. Do we prefer them if we benefit from them? Does community ownership of wind turbines increase our acceptance of them? Will East Lothian Council become a pathfinder for locally owned energy?

Earlier this year Lord (Adair)Turner, as chairman of the British Government’s Committee on Climate Change, talked about wind farms and said  “Rather than looking at it and saying ‘that big company dumped it here to make profit’, they look at it and say ‘that’s ours and I get some profit from it’ and as a result it turns out aesthetic perceptions are deeply subjective and you say ‘I rather like it’ rather than ‘I rather dislike it.'” 

The background

Natural Power, on behalf of Fred.Olsen Renewables, has been developing the Crystal Rig wind farm since 2004. Situated on the East Lammermuir Plateau, by the Monynut Edge, Crystal Rig has expanded to 84 turbines with an installed capacity of 240 MW. In July 2010 Natural Power submitted a scoping opinion to propose a further extension named Crystal Rig 3. Crystal Rig 3 is proposed as an extension of  9 to 18 wind turbines on the land known as Dunbar Common and Barnsly Hill.

As a statutory consultee East Lothian Council planning department submitted a response which included reference to visual impact. “The proposed extension appears to be based on the grid capacity in the area and wind speeds, rather than on any design or landscape capacity considerations. The degree of visual impact could vary significantly depending on the number of turbines proposed which range from 9 to 18 turbines. The ES should state the design rationale behind this proposal and the location of individual turbines and how do these relate in visual terms to the existing wind turbines.”

In December 2011, East Lothian Council ratified the Supplementary Landscape Capacity Study for smaller wind turbines (SLCS) for inclusion in the planning decision process.

The SLCS has defined areas that have capacity for development and includes the proposed site of Crystal Rig 3. The SLCS states “There is no scope for the larger development Typologies A and B to be accommodated within this character area.” (Typologies A and B refer to wind turbines from 42m to 120m to blade tip.) The wind turbines proposed for Crystal Rig 3 will reach 125 m to blade tip.

There is grid capacity for eighteen 2.3 MW wind turbines on the site. In February 2012 Natural Power confirmed that it would be seeking planning permission, from the Scottish Government, for 11 wind turbines.  This summer the leader of East Lothian Council said that they were looking into Crystal Rig 3 as an option for council ownership of wind turbines. “We know that there is going to be an extension of Crystal Rig, and we are just examining the possibilities.”

“We would have to sustain the capital costs, but the revenue would come to the council. We haven’t got into the details of the numbers, but I believe that there’s going to be space for up to seven [turbines].

“I think that’s probably the easiest option – just to ‘piggy back’ on a proposal rather than having to identify a site independently.”

What about the visual impact?

So, how could East Lothian Council add another seven wind turbines to a site that, by their own planning guidance, has no capacity for any more, not even the eleven planned by Natural Power? If you look at the maps you will see where the turbines are in relation to the trees.

We believe that it depends on how people feel about the visual impact, and it looks like that’s what the experts say too. East Lothian Council will have to refer to their Supplementary Landscape Capacity Study(SLCS).

The SLCS follows the same methodology as its predecessor, “Landscape Capacity Study for Wind Turbine Development in East Lothian 2005”. The report states “landscape capacity is described as ‘the degree to which a particular landscape character type or area is able to accommodate change without significant effects on it’s character, or overall change of landscape character type. Capacity is likely to vary according to the type and nature of change being proposed’ (CA-SNH, 2002)”

The report defines Landscape Character “Landscape character relates not only to the physical attributes of the land but also to the experience of the receptor. Landscape character is made up of physical characteristics of land such as landform, woodland pattern etc (which exist whether anyone sees them or not) plus a range of perceptual and value based responses to that landscape.”

The original report refers to the Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) guidelines and we can assume that the supplementary report would have made reference to the latest guidelines from SNH.

Scottish Natural Heritage in the 2009 publication “Siting and Designing windfarms in the landscape Vol 1” Section 1.9 “…landscape is the basis for many of our social, community and cultural values”

Section 2.4 Landscape and visual impacts of Windfarms – “LVIA comprises two separate parts, Landscape Impact Assessment (LIA) and Visual Impact Assessment (VIA), although these are related processes as described within the GLVIA. LIA considers the effects of the physical landscape, which may give rise to the changes in its character, and how this is experienced. VIA considers potential changes that arise to available views in a landscape from a development proposal, the resultant effects on visual amenity and people’s responses to the changes”

Some research has been done into how people feel about wind turbines if they are locally owned. As study conducted in Gigha shows that people are much happier about locally owned turbines rather than privately owned wind turbines. Our own research shows that people feel better about the idea of locally owned wind turbines. Community Consultation 2012

 

When the planning application is submitted the Scottish Government’s energy consent team will decide about if Crystal Rig 3 goes ahead or not. How important is the opinion of the East Lothian Council planning department and the Supplementary Landscape Capacity Study?

During the spring and summer of 2012 the Scottish Parliament began an inquiry into the Scottish Government’s renewable energy targets. It is called the Renewable Energy Targets Inquiry (RETI) and many experts were called to give evidence including.

• Chris Norman – Heads of Planning Scotland
• Simon Coote – Head of energy consents (Scottish Government)
• Andrew Thin – chair of Scottish Natural Heritage

Heads of Planning Scotland represents the views of planning departments within local authorities; energy consents deals with large wind farm planning applications ( and extensions to wind farms) and Scottish Natural Heritage contributes to the decision making process of both.

During the inquiry Chris Norman stated that “it is very hard to make an assessment of a wind farm application” He confirmed that “We have guidelines but, at the same time, one has to interpret them and overlay them with community reaction.” Speaking on behalf of the Heads of Planning Scotland he added “Local authority planning colleagues’ clear view is that they should rely on the preferred areas.” With regards the influence of local authority planners on energy consents decisions he stated “ the local authorities, as I understand it, are very much the eyes and ears of the Scottish government in determining section 36 proposals” When asked how much weight the Scottish Government’s energy consents department place on the preferred areas defined by local authorities Simon Coote stated “It would become a material consideration. It is also worth pointing out that planning authorities play a pivotal role in the consents process under section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989, which I also oversee, in fact they are statutory consultees.” He went on to say “…the planning authority has the most fundamental role of any consultee”

When asked about community wind turbines Chris Norman stated “there will always be people who are against proposals, but when genuine community initiatives-which use a genuine community fund, offer genuine community payback and make a clear connection between the proposal and the wider community-send a clear message to decision makers that the development is welcome in the locale. That goes a long way to offsetting other issues to do with landscape, noise, flicker and so on.”

This suggestion that community wind turbines have a different impact on the landscape than commercial developments was not discussed further but the issue of visual impact was. Chris Norman said “I categorically state that the prima facie issues for us are the visual impact and the cumultative impact”.

Andrew Thin of Scottish Natural Heritage  added “Scotland is an entirely man-made landscape, or a people-made landscape, to be clear”

“ the purpose of landscape character assessment is not to prevent change but to illustrate what change will look like in order to allow elected decision makers and their electorate to decide whether or not they want it.”

 

On the 25th April media attention focused on Donald Trump giving evidence to the Scottish Parliament’s inquiry into the renewable energy targets. Another man giving evidence at the same inquiry was a more composed and reserved gentleman, Graham Lang representing Communities against Turbines (CATS). When asked the big question about how Scotland should deal with the energy problem Donald Trump roared about hydro, like he was an expert on that as well as tourism.  Graham Lang provided an acutely accurate summary of the solution that seemed to pass folk by.

“I mentioned the sustainable energy hierarchy: demand reduction; energy efficiency; and renewable micro-energy- combined heat and power, heat pumps, solar and wind, and small scale and community renewable, in relation to which there can be reinvestment locally for projects up the hierarchy, for heat and for electricity. The important thing is that most effort and funding should go into the higher levels of the hierarchy, where efforts will be most effective at reducing emissions and fuel poverty.”

So, we’re in agreement on that one…. community energy can provide people with energy advice and  micro-renewables which reduce energy demand and the need for more turbines. By doing this locally we maintain and create local jobs. Nice one Graham.

 

On the 26^th April 2012 Harper Macleod LLP (legal advisors to Fred. Olsen Renewables) will host the Scottish Highland Renewable Energy Conference in Inverness. It will be attended by Jeremy Sainsbury (director at Natural Power and Chairman of Scottish Renewables); Community Energy Scotland and the key note speaker is Fergus Ewing MSP Minister for Energy, Enterprise and Tourism. More info here

With these key players in the same room we could see a radical change in the way we develop Scottish resources for the benefit of the people of Scotland as well as the big businesses that are currently securing the benefits. Forestry Commission Scotland (FCS) has divided up the Scottish Forestry estates and offered them to “Development partners” including Scottish Power, E-ON, PNE Wind and Fred. Olsen Renewables.

Forestry Commission Scotland are also giving communities a chance to get involved..

A coalition of charities in East Lothian, Dunbar Community Energy Company and Voluntary Action East Lothian, is offering to help one of these major developers, Fred. Olsen Renewables (Natural Power), become a leading example of how to work with communities and share the benefits of wind farm developments in Scotland.

Fred. Olsen Renewables (Natural Power) are planning a third extension to their Crystal Rig wind farm in East Lothian. The wind farm has the grid capacity for 18 wind turbines but Natural Power is submitting planning permission for 11. The communities of East Lothian could have ownership of the remaining 7 wind turbines.  If this potential  “pathfinder” project was realised it would bring £1.5 to £3.5 million each year in revenue for community projects throughout East Lothian.

Should Crystal Rig 3 happen without our communities getting a chance to benefit?

During a recent speech in parliament Fergus Ewing, Minister for Energy said “From meetings and discussions that I have had with companies, and not just big companies, I can report that many—probably not all, but many—desire to move away from paying as little as possible and want communities to feel that they are involved and valued, not exploited and abused. That is a very good thing and I strongly welcome it.”

What would happen if :-

• Fred. Olsen Renewables (Natural Power) as a FCS Development partner, agree to work with Dunbar Community Energy Company, and partners, on the Crystal Rig 3 pathfinder project as a model for community energy projects on FCS estates.
• The Scottish Government will maintain its’ support for community energy through schemes such as CARES and REIF.
• The £50m Warm Homes Fund is launched and targeted at helping low-income communities access the benefits of energy generation
• Communities are encouraged to invest some of the revenue to meet the Scottish Government fuel poverty and carbon reduction targets. Thus reducing the amount of energy we need and the cost of the energy we use.

The latest news on community energy within the Scottish Political arena is a very positive one. Recent activity has resulted in a confirmation of cross party support of locally owned energy. More information about the debate is available here but this is our summary. The first bit is very political, scroll down for the views of different parties.

Motion approved by Scottish parliament 29^th March 2012

That the Parliament reaffirms Scotland’s ambitious targets on climate change and renewable energy; considers that the private, public and third sectors, including co-operatives and community bodies, all have a role to play in developing a clean energy future for Scotland; is concerned by the growing perception that the renewables agenda is benefiting only big business, instead of serving the common good; believes that great public benefit could be achieved through the work being done by the Scottish Futures Trust in partnership with COSLA to help local authorities realise this ambition, highlighting opportunities to provide exemplary community benefits from renewables schemes on the public estate, publicly owned renewables and the lease of public assets to appropriate renewable energy developers; believes that public sector involvement in the renewables sector can generate clean energy as well as revenue for valuable new public services such as energy efficiency investment and support for community-owned renewables projects and that the shared and community benefits would help to foster public support for renewable energy, and calls on the Scottish Government and the Scottish Futures Trust to continue to work with COSLA, local authorities and other organisations in developing proposals, and asks that the Scottish Government reports back to the Parliament on progress.

Patrick Harvie (green party) “There is the opportunity for a transformational vision, not just of meeting our renewable energy targets in Scotland but of local, public and community ownership

Sarah Boyack (labour) “The motion talks about the perception of renewables as being all about the benefits to big companies. It is vital that local communities and individual members of society are able to get direct benefits from the renewables revolution.”

Mark Griffin (labour)“I am glad that the Green party lodged the motion, because it has given us the chance to debate public ownership and the change in public perception that could be achieved if the renewables revolution was being driven by the public sector to benefit communities and not big business, with profits being reinvested in reducing fuel consumption and fuel poverty rather than electricity bill premiums delivering dividends for shareholders.”

Liam McArthur (Liberal democrats) “I, too, congratulate the less spiky, new-style Patrick Harvie on bringing the debate to the chamber, and confirm that his motion and Sarah Boyack’s amendment will enjoy the support of the Scottish Liberal Democrats at decision time”.

Mary Scanlon (Conservative) “There are undoubtedly benefits and merits in local energy companies”

 Fergus Ewing: SNP Minister for Energy

“We clearly and explicitly want to encourage communities to own renewables schemes. There is no dubiety about that so far as I am aware. That is the best model—in which there is ownership, and not just the receipt of a cheque, albeit a bigger cheque than used to be the case, because the tariff is now moving up to £5,000 per megawatt. The best model—the one to which we aspire—is one in which communities have a stake in the ownership, such as Falck Renewables in Fintry. We want Scotland’s communities to benefit as owners and not just as recipients of cheques, no matter that that in itself creates great benefit. Once again, Mr Harvie and I are in agreement.
The SFT and COSLA have been working to highlight examples of public sector involvement in renewables and the main commercial structures for local authorities to take forward those schemes. We welcome that work and we will support it where possible. 

We are driving up the tariff and companies are following. From meetings and discussions that I have had with companies, and not just big companies, I can report that many—probably not all, but many—desire to move away from paying as little as possible and want communities to feel that they are involved and valued, not exploited and abused. That is a very good thing and I strongly welcome it.”

The final results of the community consultation are available. Not much has changed since we published the early results. We needed to find out how people felt about community wind turbines and what they thought about our idea for a community wind turbine on Cocklaw Hill.

Final Results community consultation

We decided it would be good to show the results by area.

Public opinion by area January 2012

A breakdown of these figures can be found here

Public opinion by area – details

The on-line survey showed similar results and the information can be found here

On-line survey graphic results

 

Thanks again to all the local people who took the time to answer the survey. Thanks to the local people who went out and about in January to knock on doors and thanks to Alan for making sense of all the numbers.

 

There are few reasons for an Enercon E48 500kW community wind turbine.

Wind

The “wind resource” is very good and suits a larger class 1 wind turbine.

Bankability

We need to get a commercial loan to buy the wind turbine. The bank wants to know the wind turbine and manufacturer are reliable. This makes the bank happy to loan the money and makes the wind turbine “bankable”. The Enercon E48 is a very “bankable” wind turbine. Enercon made the E48 an 800kW machine that could work as a 500kW machine to fill the gap of “bankable” wind turbines around the 500kW size.

Grid Connection

The original idea for a community wind turbine on Cocklaw Hill was to put a wind turbine at the top of the hill and connect into the electricity line that leads up to the TV mast. Our consultants have worked out that the electricity line that leads to the TV mast is not very strong. It could only take electricity from a very small turbine which would not make very much money for the community.

Different parts of the grid network can take different amounts of electricity depending on how far the electricity line is from a “sub-station”.  Some parts of the grid can take electricity from a 100kW wind turbine. Other parts of the grid can take electricity from a larger wind turbine.  As electricity moves further from a substation it loses its strength. This is called transmission loss.

We have to put our own electricity line in and connect to the grid. The nearby grid is not very strong but should be able to take the electricity from a 500kW wind turbine. The cost of putting an electricity line is very expensive. If we had to connect an 800kW wind turbine to the grid we would have to put more expensive electrical cable into the ground, and make it go further to make up for “transmission losses”.

We still have to check the grid connection and road access as well as other things but, at this stage, the Enercon E48 500kW wind turbine is looking like the best for the community to own.