The National Trust, one of our country’s best-loved and most competent conservation organisations is plagued by pressure from Wind farms.Despite the fact that NT are using other renewable technologies that they consider contextually appropriate, they have to waste time and money fighting off wind farms.
Please take a moment to read this article and participate in the poll.
National Trust comes out against ‘public menace’ of wind farms
Again we have good reason to thank our MP for Penrith and the Border, Rory stewart, this time for being among the MPs who have written a letter to our PM asking for a cut in subsidies of onshore wind farms and a shift to better encourage alternative renewable energy. When Tony Blair committed our nation to an enormous emphasis on wind power he may not have foreseen the practical complications, cost and unhappiness associated with such a move.
Anyway, the mounting unpopularity of onshore wind farms has manifested in a letter to David Cameron asking that onshore wind farm subsidies be reduced and that subsidies be redirected to help adoption of other renewable energy technologies that people are more likely to find contextually appropriate.
There are some promising alternative renewable and energy saving technologies available for homes and businesses right now. In 2011 I worked on website text copy updates for Logic a local plumbing and heating firm headquartered in Appleby-in-Westmorland, and came to learn more about recent developments in accessibility of renewable energy for domestic and commercial applications. Technologies such as heat pumps, solar panels, biomass boilers and underfloor heating can dramatically improve our carbon footprint while reducing monthly bills. There are up-front costs in installation, and there’s assistance in the form of Renewable Heat Incentive and Renewable Heat Premium Payment schemes. You may find investment in your own property attractive considering the low interest rates at the moment. Along with the savings returns it is likely that you’ll enjoy a more comfortable home environment and add some value to your home while basking in the knowledge that you’re doing your bit to improve the nation’s climate change obligations.
If you want to see an air source heat pump in action you can pop along to Logic’s showroom and office building in Appleby’s Cross Croft Industrial Estate. On the left of their building you’ll see a very unassuming box with an intake reminiscent of an air-conditioner from which a corrugated hose runs into the building. Heat is drawn through this intake from the ambient air temperature and condensed by an interior unit to a temperature useful for your home heating. There’s is a Worcester Bosch model but I saw them install a NIBE heat pump into a nearby cottage recently when investigating options for our Maulds Meaburn Village Institute for EDC’s Rural Community Infrastructure grant application.
The Government’s Green Deal is coming in Autumn of this year and it aims to render renewable technologies more accessible and provide incentives for their wider adoption.
| Proposed Wind Farm in Washington D.C. Scrubbed
Posted: 10 Dec 2011 04:48 AM PST Plans to build a 32-turbine wind farm near the coast of Washington in a key breeding area for a threatened seabird have been halted to the relief of conservationists. |
PETITION – Wind farms and Planning Inspectors
Responsible department:
Department for Communities and Local Government
Stop Planning Inspectors summarily overturning the decisions of local planning departments, thus resulting in wind farms being built against the wishes of the local population.
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/5955
Thank you for your participation.
Best regards,
Dominic Mette
Secretary-General, EPAW
Forward this email to a friend
You are receiving this email because you are member or supporter of EPAW.
Our mailing address:
Jean-Louis Butré, Chairman of EPAW
3 rue des Eaux – 75016 Paris – France
Some disturbing news from the States about mass bird fatalities due to Wind farms. It seems that 75% of operational wind farms in West Virginia have been associated with mass killings of birds. This would seem to further strengthen the argument that wind farms are bad news for wildlife, not just from the considerable damage and disruption occasioned during the construction phase but from lengthy operation that presents only two options for birds and bats: area denial or death.
While it has been established that turbine-related bat deaths are caused by sudden lethal changes in air pressure. People are still wondering why it is that birds collide with wind turbines.
It might be that they are confused by the apparently slower rotation of the blades nearer the hub and extrapolating from what they can see, they miscalculate their chances of flying safely through the space of rotor arc closer to the faster moving tips which may be speed-blurred to a state of reduced visibility for them.
Certainly nothing in nature moves the way turbine blades do, with the exception perhaps of a certain type of spider in Namibia that cart-wheels down sand dunes as a method of rapid transit!
Conventional evolutionary pressures will not have prepared birds for the range of motion or variation in perceived speed of turbine rotor blades.
If they equate the static turbine shafts with tree trunks and the blades as branches, they might expect to be able to fly through the gaps.
Biomass heating, air, ground and water source heat pumps, anaerobic digestion and solar thermal and solar voltaic panels may well be better renewable energy options for the environment. They’re kinder to the wildlife and easier on the eye.
Massive Bird Kill at West Virginia Wind Farm
Posted: 29 Oct 2011 08:22 AM PDT
With the deaths of nearly 500 birds at the Laurel Mountain wind facility earlier this month, three of the four wind farms operating in West Virginia have now experienced large bird fatality events, according to American Bird Conservancy (ABC), the nation’s leading bird conservation organization.
Read full article on FocusingOnWildlife.com in the news section
Responses have to be in before Tuesday 13th September. Please take a look at the attached pdf, the illustrative photo-montage is striking, the proposed development is just 360m away from the nearest non-associated home (that would not be allowed in some countries), is in an AONB, and in an area that affords some of the finest scenery from the A66 if my memory serves correctly. I saw a similar turbine off the A6 recently. It stuck out like a sore thumb. I venture to suggest that these would too.
Dear SOS supporters
I write to inform you that an application has been made to Eden District Council for 3 x 18 metre tubines at Bleathgill on Stainmore. Planning application 11/0622.
Details can be found at:
http://eforms.eden.gov.uk/fastweb_upload/2011%20Planning%20Applications/11-0622/0622-DandA-Statement.pdf
I do not believe that it is appropriate for SOS to object to this as an organisation as we were set up to fight the large-scale windfactory at Moudy Mea envisaged by Community Windpower. However I am writing to bring this application to your attention so that you have an opportunity to study it for yourselves and to object if you feel you wish to do so. Whether to object is obviously a matter of personal choice for all SOS members but as you care for the beautiful, wild, unspoilt countryside on Stainmore you certainly have a right to know that an application has been made.
I have objected personally (no mention of or link to SOS). My reasons are mainly that
1) The development is inappropriate within the AONB and against planning guidelines
2) This is not a domestic development but a small scale wind farm and the turbines are situated a long way from the farmstead involved
3) A precedent will be set if this is allowed which will allow further development within AONBs 3 tubines will quickly become 30 and Community Windpower may well return to Stainmore if this application is granted.
4) Visual impact
5) Noise – disturbing the area’s valuable tranquility
6) Recent precedent – one turbine proposed to serve a property was recently rejected by the Planning Inspectorate on appeal due mainly to the fact that it would cause “material harm to the landcape of the North Pennines AONB”.
Please read the application for yourself and see what you think. If you decide to comment you may email the planners on planning.services@eden.gov.uk. Give your name and address and quote application number 11/0622 Bleathgill Barras Stainmore
I am happy to answer any questions you may have and welcome comments.
Many thanks for your continued support and very best regards
Linda
Chairman SOS
EPAW News: UNESCO Steps In To Protect Mont-Saint-Michel
UNESCO says NO to windfarms in the World Heritage site of Mont-Saint-Michel
Press release – Paris, June 24, 2011
UNESCO : NON AUX EOLIENNES DU MONT-SAINT-MICHEL
La Fédération Environnement Durable (FED) se félicite de la décision du Comité du patrimoine mondial de l’Unesco qui le 23 juin 2011 a officiellement demandé à la France la suspension des projets de parcs éoliens, y compris ceux déjà approuvés, qui pourraient avoir un impact visuel sur la baie du Mont-Saint-Michel .
Pour sauver ce site emblématique la FED et la plateforme européenne contre les éoliennes industrielles (EPAW), avaient organisé le 26 septembre 2009 une marche internationale dans la baie du Mont-Saint-Michel, qui avait regroupé des citoyens de plus de 23 pays.
Depuis cette date avec la Fédération régionale Basse Normandie Environnement (BNE) elle a mené un combat sans répit en faisant appel à l’opinion internationale pour sauver le Mont-Saint-Michel des 11 projets éoliens en cours qui le menacent. Elle s’était révoltée notamment contre l’accord par les services de l’État d’un premier permis de construire d’un parc éolien à Argouges Manche.
Elle remercie l’Unesco et l’association Europa Nostra regroupant plus de 250 organisations non gouvernementales et dont les prises de position ont été sans ambigüité.
Elle prend acte de la clairvoyance des Sénateurs de la Commission de la Culture du Sénat qui se sont rendus sur place et ont exprimé leur vive inquiétude de voir ce site déclassé du patrimoine mondial de l’Unesco.
Jean-Louis Butré
Président Fédération Environnement Durable
+33 680 99 38 08
www.environnementdurable.net
Contact presse
Hervé Texier
Président Basse Normandie Environnement (BNE) / Vice-président FED
+33 689 58 70 27
vdcenpb@yahoo.fr
Communiqué de la FED
http://environnementdurable.net
Forward this email to a friend
You are receiving this email because you are member or supporter of EPAW.
This slideshow requires JavaScript.
Reasons Why Reagill Should Be Included
Farming in National Parks is much less problematic than it used to be. Many of the farms are in Stewardship Schemes run by Natural England anyway. Many of the fears and horror stories associated with being in a National Park are vestigial memories from 40 odd years ago.
The National Park Authority could encourage sensitive restoration of dilapidated Westmorland barns and maintain footpaths with ring-fenced money (sadly EDC can’t afford to set up an AONB nor do they want to lose about 7% of their planning revenue by losing planning control of the area.)
The coniferous forest is an important refuge for Red Squirrels and should not have been an impediment to Reagill’s inclusion according to the Sandford Principle and in accordance with the Natural environment and rural communities act 2006.
The limestone buildings and limestone walls in Reagill are characteristic of the Orton Fells section of the park and should be included. Where there is sandstone, it is the buff variety characteristic of the carboniferous coal measure geology.
Our current Parish council voted for Crosby Ravensworth Parish not to be included in a National Park at the last Parish Council meeting, but our Chair read out, what I consider to be a very good model response to Natural England’s consultation acting in accordance with public wishes as expressed under our previous Council to include Reagill.
While Parish Councils are expected to be representative of their residents, councillors are allowed to act in tune with their personal perspectives and conscience. This case is complex ( see below ) they may have been doing both.
Please note that Table 1 on page 2 of Natural England’s E1. Summary of results of 2009/10 consultation Lakes to Dales Landscape Designation Project document states that 85% of resident respondents in our area (152 out of 178) were in favour of our area being in the Orton Fells National Park extension (Reagill was never included in the plan, but many people asked for it to be). 67% were in favour of being in LDNP and 56% in favour of being in YDNP, but the percentage of our Parishioners is unquantified, it could be the same, or more, or less.
Natural England say that due to the eclectic nature of the responses they can’t work out this percentage.
Please let Natural England know your thoughts whether you wish our area to be included or otherwise.
Here is a response arguing for Reagill to be included within the NP, produced in good faith before the recent Parish council vote.
I can print off this communication if it would help you and I have six response packs to give out should you know people who are not on the internet.
I can also email your response if you have one written but don’t have access to email to nwdesignationproject@naturalengland.org.uk
If people want to respond using Natural England’s formal response form, they can do this online either via www.lakestodaleslandscapes.org.uk and scroll down to the downloads section or better still from this direct link: http://www.smart-survey.co.uk/v.asp?i=34213rsycg
In your email to Natural England, you might wish to add a bit saying the National Park should consider paying for maintenance of any toilet blocks not EDC, because this seems right and fair in light of EDC losing out a small percentage (estimated to be about 7%) of their planning revenue if Natural England do manage the area.
You might want to add that Crosby Ravensworth’s Community pub due to open this year and local hospitality industry
is likely to benefit from the tourism.
Also in any response to NE, please include your full name and postcode and state your Parish.
——- The Response begins – note this was a suggestion that would extend the boundary to the M6 (in keeping with Lakes to Dales rationale).
B1
The Orton Fells area is located at the boundary of both national parks. The M6 seems to be the natural boundary, being discernible as opposed to the “wiggly line” across open fell previously suggested.
As your recommendations are to include the area of the Yorkshire Dales National Park, we would like to suggest that the title of the new enlarged National Park be changed to the Westmorland and Yorkshire Dales National Park, this would most likely be very much more amicable to those residing and working in both counties.
B3
Addition six, we would also recommend that edition six begins further south at Sproat Ghyll Farm, adjacent to the M6 and continue further northwards to the underpass, which takes the C3053 eastwards. The “limestone landscape” of the Orton Fells extends much further north than shown as “addition six”. These extended portions hold much evidence from time is long since passed.
Further information and evidence is related in part D: additional information.
Part C: C1 strategic environmental assessment, page 16. Orton Fells. 5.17 to 5.20
We agree with most of the various statements. Emphasis must be on the highly sensitive core area in regards to any large-scale or major developments such as car parks, toilet blocks etc. We feel that the National Parks authority should have responsibility for managing any public conveniences. NB. There will be a community pub opening in 2011 in Crosby Ravensworth.
Narrow roads prevail with agricultural machinery having to use them daily, including weekends. Farming being the main enterprise, to which its transport and business needs must have priority – no parking should be allowed in farm gateways or in passing places, and we do not condone the proliferation of signs.
We disagree with the statement saying the area is lacking strategic management, etc. when the majority of the uplands, Commons and farms are now in environmental schemes, organised by natural England, to conserve and maintain those particular sensitive areas.
Part D:
Extend addition six northwards and eastwards, to include Hardendale and Reagill, to the C3053 road. Then eastwards, across the C3056 then to High Whitber, then across the C3058 still going east to Peaslands to join the C3057 then directly to join the B6260.
This suggested boundary follows public roads and incorporates important habitats for a number of wildlife species, such as deer, badger, brown hare, along with County Nature Sites identified by the Cumbria wildlife trust, namely, Hardendale Meadows, Potrigg Limestone Pavement, Threaplands Gill and Little Beck Farm meadow. The coniferous plantations, when mature, are being replaced by those consisting of deciduous species. But at this time they are important habitats for the native red squirrel (one of their main strongholds in Cumbria) and must not prevent them from being considered an area of natural beauty. (Natural environment and rural communities act 2006)
The northern boundary, as proposed is very difficult to determine on the ground, it is based on features that no longer exist, i.e. field boundaries removed, with most of the boundary in private hands, and not following rights-of-way. Definite and visual boundary must be recognisable on the ground to alleviate any contradictions from planning authorities, and land management agencies.
This boundary change would take in important cultural heritage assets, mainly Hardendale Quarry (to become a nature reserve in 2018), where the limestone strata and formation are visible to all, the stone circle at Harkeld Common Hardendale Nab, with its unique limestone scar (reproduced in the building of Rheged visitor centre), the unspoiled Hardendale Hamlet, dating back to the late 1600′s, lime kilns at Wintertarn, the Tarn uniquely formed by winter rains fed via karst features and high rainfall springs. Reagill village with little change, the Grange farm, a survival of times connected with Shap Abbey, Byland Abbey and Whitby Abbey, coal mines used to keep Lowther Castle warm (vertical shaft type), a nationally renowned image garden, sculpted by Thomas Bland, (1798-1865), other local monuments sculpted and erected by him include the Addison monument at Maulds Meaburn, Black Dub monument on Crosby Ravensworth fell, the Victoria Jubilee monument on Beacon Hill and the Victoria monument near Shap Wells erected in 1842 that bears the statue of Britannia.
Gunnerkeld concentric stone circle, along with that at Oddendale are two of only 12 in England.
From high ground at Reagill, can be seen a panoramic view of the Lakeland hills, the northern landscape stretches to the relay masts at Skelton with the eastern panorama taking in the Pennine range from Castle Carrick to Stainmore and wild boar fell.
The above should be based on “the Sandford principle“.
——- Response ends ####
Please address emails to nwdesignationproject@naturalengland.org.uk
I expect the minutes from the PC meeting on 9th June are included in this month’s Link, but I would like to make mention of it for all those with an interest in the National Parks review. I understood that the Council would be submitting a response to the latest round of consultation in accordance with their own submission last year. They will not.
Last year, in response to proposals for an extension to the local National Parks, meetings were held in the parish and representations were made to the parish council. Following this process the council took the decision to support the proposed extension and to ask for more of our area, including Reagill and towards Sleagill, to be included.
Natural England have published the latest proposals and are consulting once again. At June’s Parish Council meeting the Chairman introduced the agenda item and reminded council of the original consultation and of the 85% of responses from residents (to Natural England) in favour of inclusion. He then read a draft submission confirming support for inclusion in the NP and giving grounds for inclusion of a greater area.
At this point one councillor wanted to vote on whether “we should be in at all”. The Chairman and Vice Chair both pointed out that “we are way down the road from there” – that decision had already been made. Yet a vote was taken and the result was 4 – 1 against.
I find it astonishing and disappointing that a council can turn a decision on its head without any consultation, without the parish even knowing the decision is to be reviewed and without giving any reason.
Georgina Perkins
