Totnes Community Wind Farm: no regrets

The founder members of the Totnes Renewable Energy Society were, and still are, an ambitious bunch of people.  The sheer scale of the challenges of dealing with climate change and fossil fuel depletion demand big solutions.  Nor can the laws of physics be denied, and the simple fact is that wind turbines offer the most abundant and cost effective source of renewable energy available to us.  

Finding suitable sites for wind turbines that meet planning and commercial criteria is a specialist job and a very great deal of professional expertise is needed to prepare a planning application.  And so, in 2008, soon after the formation of the Society in 2007, we contacted Dorset based wind developer, Infinergy, to ask if they would be interested to work with a local community owned renewable energy society to explore the possibility of wind power for Totnes and the surrounding parishes.

When Infinergy ran their wind prospecting software they found, as other wind developers have found before them; that the best local site for wind development, taking all planning criteria into account, is at Luscombe Cross.  There followed 18 months of careful and confidential negotiation with the Agent before all agreements were signed and the first TRESOC share issue was launched in 2010.  

Infinergy confirmed that, taking all planning criteria into consideration it was the best site for wind development. It has been a 6 year journey of discovery and steep learning curves for everyone involved.  From the first desktop studies to find the best site for a wind turbine, contacting the land agent, negotiating legal agreements and preparing the planning application.  We are rightly proud of the quality of the work that was done by TRESOC working in close partnership with a highly skilled and well-motivated team of wind development professionals.  Sir Jonathan Porritt, in his letter of support, describes the Totnes Community Wind Farm Planning Application as “one of the best designed and well supported applications we have seen”  Not good enough though for the local planning authority who turned it down on the grounds of the view.  We had steeled ourselves for rejection by the local authority but were not prepared Infinergy’s decision not to appeal.

The choice to develop a large scale wind energy as the first project amongst our portfolio was a conscious choice. It remains the most cost-effective way of generating renewable energy and we had identified the best suitable site in our locality with the help of the developer. This was an excellent investment opportunity for our members and would be a significant generator locally. 

The substantial public engagement that we provided raised the profile of the development locally. With the benefit of hindsight, this unintentionally hindered the project, as it enabled local opposition to organise and gain strength earlier than in a normal planning application. However we don’t believe that this should have been done in a different way. The whole point of community renewable energy is to engage the local population and increase awareness whilst providing social and financial benefits.
 

Totnes Community wind farm has given us a good degree of experience from which we have learnt from. We want the embryonic community energy industry to gain from our insights, so if you have any questions please get in touch.

Ian Bright
Managing Director

View the Totnes Community Wind Farm project on our website.

Buffeted by political winds

This article was first published in August 2013, in the Transition Free Press.  Since it was written, TRESOC’s industry partner, Infinergy, has determined that the commercial risk was too high to proceed with Totnes Community Wind Farm and protesters have joined forces to defeat any proposals in the area (with no distinction made as to whether they are private or community applications).  What a tragedy for clean energy in community ownership.

It’s increasingly likely that the UK will miss its European Union energy target, which is to generate 15% of its electricity from renewable sources by 2020.  The European Renewable Energy Council (EREC) ranks the UK a depressing 25th out of 27 states on progress towards the 2020 green energy target.

This doesn’t come as a huge surprise to the 500 members of Totnes Renewable Energy Society (TRESOC).  Nor did the rejection in February of our flagship project – two wind turbines in rural Devon.  We expected our local Planning Committee would reject our proposal.  We just didn’t know what reason they would give.  In the end it was “substantial harm” to the view.

Rejection is the fate of most onshore wind farms in planning, but many are passed on appeal because planning inspectors conclude that they meet government policy and that local impact is not as great as councillors fear.

We did take the bull by the horns with this proposal – 2.3 megawatt (MW) turbines are big. But it was the best site for wind in our area, we had chosen the most cost-effective technology and in theory the government has a policy of encouraging renewables. It seemed like a huge opportunity.

Unfortunately, in June, the political wind changed direction.  In what felt like a huge blow to the government’s vision for renewables and our attempts to power 2,500 households, the Communities Secretary, Eric Pickles, wrote to councils giving them extra reasons to reject wind proposals.  Lib Dem Energy Secretary, Ed Davey, stressed that there would be more financial benefits for communities who accepted wind farms, but the media seemed to revel in the news that additional obstacles were being created.

The Pickles letter doesn’t constitute new legislation, but it will cause confusion. In particular, it cuts across the National Planning Policy Framework, which is in favour of sensibly sited wind farms.  So which should take precedence?  Giving communities the right to have more of a say is a good thing, but it must come with the responsibility to contribute to society’s wider, collective needs.

In the words of the Centre for Sustainable Energy’s Chief Executive, Simon Roberts: “Rights without responsibility is a recipe for short-term, self-interested decisions that pass the buck to others; someone or somewhere else will make up for any poorly informed, parochial decisions.  Yet this is what the Government seems to be doing with on-shore wind power; giving local views the upper hand over national interests in planning decisions on onshore wind farm proposals.”

Where does this leave TRESOC?  Buffeted certainly, but we’re not giving up.  Although we have only kilowatts of power production from our other schemes to show for huge amount of energy we’ve used to debate the pros and cons of onshore wind, we are now using knowledge gained and team resilience to move forward with the right solution for our wind project, and build our portfolio using a range of technologies including solar and river/tidal turbines.

It’s not all bad news – lobbying by community energy groups, including TRESOC, can work. In response to feedback on the type of financial incentive that works best for us, DECC is planning to increase the Feed-In Tariff threshold for community projects from 5MW to 10MW to enable larger installations to benefit.

Mostly, however, it’s a real struggle to make progress on community renewables in the current political climate.  But if politicians are finding onshore wind complex, one wonders how they’ll do when fracking companies start asking to blow up the countryside in search of gas.  Will fracking make wind seem more of a blast?

Jane Brady is Communications Director of TRESOC, www.tresoc.co.uk, and a member of Transition Town Totnes.

Legacy or an historic view?

What will be the legacy we leave for our children, and our children’s children?
We normally consider our legacy towards the end of our lives, but why not reflect continually throughout our existence?
When we look down the trail of lives, will we be proud?
The Children’s fire is an idea that I came across recently thanks to those at Embercombe. It states that no law or action can be taken that may harm the children (now and in the future). How would this impact the way you live your life and the decisions you make? What kind of society would not have this idea embedded at the heart of decision-making?
When we evaluate the SHDC Landscape Officer’s report for Totnes community wind farm, particularly the huge value given to maintaining the view from sites of history and heritage, confusion sets in. We assume that conserving these views is a duty that must be upheld for future generations at all cost. Would your children prefer an historic view over a secure source of renewable energy? Will these views help keep their lights on for many years to come?
I don’t have the answers, but what I do believe is that we should make decisions with our children’s rights in much higher regard. There is no doubt that the conservation of local history is an important task, but it must be set within the current context and with future needs in mind.
Totnes community wind farm offers us the opportunity to create a legacy to be proud of – that invests in our future and is part of the remedy for one of the most sinister diseases in modern life – myopia – also known as short-sightedness.

“Children are one third of the population and all of our future”, Panel for the Promotion of Child Health, 1981.

Olly Frankland

Cultivating energy farmers

A 50kW turbine at a height of 30m has eased into the landscape in Rattery. Having sighted the structure from afar I decided to investigate via bicycle, which allowed me to fully appreciate the high elevation of the site. Standing underneath the blades spinning at full capacity there was definitely some sound, but the feeling that most gripped me was of wonder.
The rejected Luscombe Cross turbines are three times the size, but provide 46 times the generation capacity. Yet this turbine has caused no controversy. If we are at all concerned about the growing generation gap, then surely the wrong decision was made.
Anyhow, the opportunity renewable energy offers to farmers is discussed in a recent article – “Is 2013 the year of the energy farmer?”. Rising costs, horrific harvests and unsympathetic banks, made 2012 a year of hardship for many farmers. The need to protect against future energy price rises and a new financial income stream, leaves the opportunity too good to refuse for many. Indeed there is a growing number of solar parks going through planning locally of some serious size – 13 hectares (5MW) and 15 hectares (8MW) within a few miles of each other near South Brent. A hectare is the area of Trafalgar Square in London or alternatively an international rugby pitch – in other words, big. Undoubtedly, these renewable energy installations will have an impact on our countryside, but to deny farmers a rare opportunity in gloomy economic times does seem a little unfair. I maintain my reservations that I stated in a previous post: solar is highly variable (2012 was a bad year for solar); provides little or no energy in winter and at night, when we use most; and is still expensive and carbon intensive compared with other forms. However it will surely form part of a diverse set of renewable energy technologies that we need urgently. Furthermore, the two large solar parks in question, offer no opportunity for local ownership, and therefore a much lower proportion of the financial benefits. This is in direct contrast to the model that Totnes Renewable SOCiety (TRESOC) and the Community energy coalition is striving to publicise and celebrate – local people finding resources and sharing the benefits with local investors.
There is space for all scales of renewable energy to play their part in securing a renewable future locally. Farmers can help cultivate a renewable future for all.
Olly Frankland

Dividing communities or taking responsibility?

There are two broad definitions of community:

  • a geographically-based community
  • and a community of interest.

The contentious nature of onshore wind turbines means that the they are often blamed for dividing  geographic communities. In the case of our development – Totnes Community Wind Farm – the opposition often seek to drive a wedge between Totnes and the parishes Harberton/ Harbertonford  – where the turbines will reside.

If the parishes of Harberton and Harbertonford were independent, the argument would have some justification. However, we are living in an increasingly inter-connected society, and therefore we are  reliant on other communities for our high standard of life. In energy terms, we impose the impact of living next to nuclear power stations, pylons, gas turbines, refineries, coal mines onto to other communities to maintain the status quo. Is this a fair imposition? We don’t question it, because it is so embedded as acceptable in our society. Our addiction to the existing system, means that we ignore these inequalities – we forget the current and future victims, that may suffer for us. A conservative estimate puts the number of serious accidents (more than 5 fatalities) in the coal, oil and gas industries as 2592 (1970-2008) within the EU (10 times that in developing countries). All communities are liable for these hidden discrepancies.

Now I’m am not suggesting that the two turbines proposed will totally transform this inequality, but they are a step in right direction.

If we take the second definition and broaden our view of community, from small geographic differences to a more general, community of interest, the discussion becomes very different. It is in the interest of every community to secure a vibrant local economy and produce renewable electricity. As I have explained previously (in my first blog post/ letter) the smaller parishes do not have the resources available for such a substantial development, that produces enough electricity for 2500 homes. So as a joint community of interest we respond to the needs locally in any way we can.

If we widen the geographic boundaries, accept we share common interests, and take into account the current energy system has many less publicised victims, we come to very different conclusions.