[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


News Home

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

Controversial giant wind turbine plans refused  

Credit:  By Gemma Edwards | Visiter | 11 Nov 2016 | www.southportvisiter.co.uk ~~

Controversial plans for twelve wind turbines to be built in Greenbelt Land have been refused.

Fourteen councillors agreed with the recommendation to refuse the wind turbines proposed to be built on the Greenbelt on farmland to the west of Cabin Lane in Great Altcar.

Local residents filled the room to hear the verdict of the application at the West Lancashire Borough Council planning committee meeting on Thursday, November 10.

Coriolis Energy wanted to build turbines which would be up to 136.5m in height and be on site for 25 years.

The turbines would provide enough electricity to power 24,000 average UK homes – while also reducing energy bills for local residents.

This is something that the applicant Trevor Hunter reiterated at the meeting.

Coriolis Energy project manager Trevor Hunter said: “We are saving emissions of more than one million tons of Greenhouse gases over its operational life. This is a scale delivery which cannot be supplied by any other site in the borough. It is the only wind block proposal to have ever come forward in West Lancashire.

“This application will pay a major part in delivering the council’s adopted local plan as Key Objective eight on the council’s commitment to mitigating climate change, which depends on the delivery of substantial amounts of nuclear energy.”

“This application is a vital contribution towards local and national obligations in the prevention towards climate change.”

Mr Hunter was interrupted when speaking with one angry local shouting it’s “just money making.”

Since the last meeting additional late information was submitted by the applicant to request that the application is deferred for at least with at least eight Planning Committee cycles.

This would be to allow an over-wintering bird survey to be carried out, potential mitigation to be identified and a Habitats Regulations Assessment to be undertaken.

Mr Hunter added: “In just one month we have worked with consultees to find a suitable solution to the proposals of refusal.”

Referring to the additional late information Labour Cllr Pendleton said : “I don’t fully understand and why the applicant hadn’t been able to do this survey last winter.”

“We need to act now and not put everyone’s lives on hold which is what you would be doing deferring.”

Alan Cunningham of 124 Carr House Lane represented Mr and Mrs Lewis of Railway Cottage on Carr Lane to refuse the plans and said the proposals do not have the backing of the community.

He said: “The turbines are enormous and comparable in height to Blackpool Tower and St. John’s Beacon in Liverpool. Do their, siting height and scale, the turbines would cause significant harm to the visual amenity and landscape and character of the Green belt.”

Ince Blundell Parish Cllr Kevin Sharpe backed Mr Cunningham that the community do not agree to the proposals.

He said: “No development should take place in the Greenbelt except in special and unique circumstances.

“Wind turbines do not in themselves amount to special circumstances, the applicant has not made out any special and unique circumstances.”

“Those of you who feel you should support this project do not hold the moral high ground on renewable. We at Ince Blundell do support renewable energy but it has to be in the appropriate place.”

“If the applicant is serious about renewable energy then we encourage him to be more ambitious not just build twelve turbines, put a hundred of them and put them out at sea with the rest.”

Source:  By Gemma Edwards | Visiter | 11 Nov 2016 | www.southportvisiter.co.uk

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.