News Home

[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Concern about windfarm red tape  

Shetland Islands Council is to reopen a consultation on where are the best places to site windfarms on the isles, it emerged yesterday (Thursday).

The news comes amid concern that planning authorities are treating community-owned windfarms on the same basis as large commercial operations.

Last year the SIC’s planning department consulted locally about where would be the best place to put windfarms, drawing up a map which suggested the best site was the central mainland of the isles.

Now the consultation is being re-opened after the Scottish Government appointed a group of experts to provide advice to local authorities on how to approach windfarm developments.

As well as the major 550 megawatt windfarm proposal for central Shetland being drawn up by locally owned Viking Energy and power giant Scottish and Southern Energy, there are two community scale wind projects being proposed on the island of Yell.

The North Yell Development Company want to site five turbines south of Cullivoe, while plans for a district heating scheme in Mid Yell using wind turbines to heat the proposed new school and the existing leisure centre are also on the drawing board.

Highlands and Islands Community Energy Company (HICEC), which is behind the recent erection of 12 wind turbines at local halls in Shetland, have called on planners to look on community-owned windfarms in a favourable light.

Shetland HICEC officer Patrick Ross-Smith said: “We have been talking a lot to planners to raise the profile of smaller projects delivering a high degree of local benefit and a lower environmental impact.

“We have been putting the case for a more open minded approach from planning officers and organisations like SNH and RSPB to look at factors such as the socio economic benefit as relevant.”

Mr Ross-Smith said that HICEC had more difficulty getting the Wind2Heat public hall schemes through the planning process in Shetland than anywhere else in the country.

“Some of those took 18 months from the time of application to being cleared. Interestingly they have all gone through because there were no community objections and there has not been one complaint during or since their installation.”

HICEC holds up the community wind farm on the isle of Gigha as an example of how an energy scheme can help a community, where three turbines are generating an income of £100,000 per year for the isle’s 150 residents.

HICEC secretary Marion O’Hara said a similar scheme on North Harris had been called in for a public local inquiry even though it involved just two turbines and had the support of 98 per cent of the local community.

“There seems to be no recognition of the local economic impact of the community scale projects,” Ms O’Hara said.

SIC planning officer Hannah Nelson said the council was re-issuing its own consultation on where windfarms should be sited in Shetland later this year, having shelved the original document.

“We reined the original consultation because there is a significant amount of new information coming out of the Scottish Government to assist local authorities,” Ms Nelson said.

She added that the strategy only concerned windfarm developments above 20MW, more than any of the small scale community schemes currently on the table in Shetland.

Pete Bevington

The Shetland News

4 April 2008

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 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 Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.