To everyone who showed their support on Election Day!
Big Wind’s depredations continue, whatever the results yesterday. If you did not already, you can contribute to National Wind Watch now and at any time. Every dollar (pound, euro, krone, yen, etc.) goes to keeping the web site running.
Stripe: |
PayPal/Venmo: |
Wind farm proposal rebuffed
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Translate: FROM English | TO English
A popular skydiving site has been saved from the threat of closure after planners unanimously voted against a bid to build a wind farm.
Peterlee Parachute Centre, at Shotton Airfield, feared it would have to put a stop to jumps if the go-head was given to install two 111metre-high turbines at Edder Acres Farm.
There were concerns skydivers could be blown into the blades, which would have put the viability of operations at risk, with one expert claiming the development would have been “tantamount to signing a death warrant” for one of the key sites for parachuting in the region.
All nine of the members on District of Easington Council’s development control committee agreed with officer recommendations the application from A7 Energy should be refused because of the impact it would have on the centre.
Dozens of parachutists and experts turned out to show the strength of feeling against the application, while residents of Shotton Colliery spoke in favour of the proposal because of the disruption they say is already caused by the airfield and backed efforts to create renewable energy sources.
However, the decision made at a special meeting last night may not be the end of the two-year saga after Frank Musgrave, who runs the farm with his family, told the Echo an appeal will be launched against the outcome.
Ian Rosenvinge, boss at the centre, told the committee £800,000 had been invested in the site and wished “to move the airfield forward.”
He also said he faced personal financial ruin if it closed, with expansion plans for the site now on hold for the third year because of the wind farm application.
16 November 2007
This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.
The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.
Wind Watch relies entirely on User Contributions |
(via Stripe) |
(via Paypal) |
Share: