The European Wind Energy Association looked at the number of months it took for authorities to consider wind farm proposals across 22 countries. Finland has the quickest decision makers with an average time in planning of just over 8 months. Portugal is the slowest with a painful 58 months, closely followed by Spain with 57 months.

UK decisions take on average 26 months – quicker than France, Germany, Denmark, Netherlands and Sweden.

Justin Wilkes, EWEA Policy Director said: “If Europe is serious about reaching 20% renewables by 2020 some member states need to streamline their consent procedures for wind farms. There are a number of actions all Member States could take: creating a one stop shop approach for contacting the different authorities, writing clear guidelines for developers, and introducing better and streamlined spatial planning procedures. Implementation of the Renewable Energy Directive provides a real opportunity for targeted action in certain EU countries,”.

Despite UK decision making being faster than average what really matters is the final answer – consent or refusal. What could have been usefully looked at in the survey is the proportion of applications that result in being consented and eventually built.

Mark Wilding asked planners what they thought of using social media as a tool for planning application consultation and although a note of caution was urged with regard to the ability of these tools to contain detail, most respondents agreed there is great potential to engage people who do not usually get involved with planning issues.  That is, if IT managers would lift restrictions on the use of social network sites (particularly common within local authorities and large companies).

Two examples of social network sites currently dedicated to wind energy are the facebook sites “Yes to Wind Turbines at Spaldington & Holme on Spalding Moor” and “I want a wind farm in my back yard because I’m not an idiot“.

The former is an example of a dedicated project support group set up by the neighbour of two proposed wind farms near Spaldington – the membership is now up to 144.  There are links to the project websites and information about who members can e-mail and write to in order to express their views.  The latter sprung up further to the closure of the Vestas wind turbine factory on the Isle of Wight and now has over 36,500 members.  This membership reflects numerous public opinion surveys which time after time demonstrate that although not shouting the loudest, the majority of people support wind energy.

Denham replaces Hazel Blears who resigned dramatically earlier in the week amidst continuing MP expenses revelations. Blears’s allies accused the government of trying to ’smear’ her after a story appeared in one of the tabloids suggesting her decision to quit was connected to the revelation that she had avoided paying capital gains tax on a second property.

Rynd Smith, director of policy at the Royal Town Planning Institute told UK Planning Magazine: “We welcome John Denham as an astute appointment to this critically important role. John brings a wealth of experience as an environmental campaigner and local councillor, former housing committee chair and as Universities and Innovation Secretary to this role.

“Planning has a central role to play in managing the UK’s response to climate change and the RTPI also looks to John to further develop its role, particularly in the support of behavioural change and the adaptation of existing places to a greener, more sustainable future.”

Town and Country Planning Association Chief executive Gideon Amos OBE said: “There is a genuine opportunity to focus on the real priorities for the country, pressing climate change and housing need.

“John Denham has shown his keen interest in delivering genuine sustainable development and energy efficiency measures in his Southampton constituency these issue must take centre stage in CLG’s work.”

The Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change remains Ed Miliband, however wind energy advocate – Peter Hain returns to the cabinet as Secretary of State for Wales.

The Whitelee project is made up of 140 wind turbines and will provide enough electricity for around 180,000 homes. The £300m (US $474m) wind farm was built by Scottish Power – part of the Iberdrola group which employs around 9000 people in the UK.

The wind turbines are located on an area 55 km2 in size – roughly the same as the urban area of Glasgow. The wind energy project is expected to provide enough electricity to offset 500,000 tonnes of CO2 a year. At its peak over 500 people were working on the wind energy project.

A proposal to extend the wind farm by another 130 MW has already been approved by the Scottish Government, providing electricity for a further 70,000 homes. Further future extensions to the wind farm are also planned taking the capacity of the project up to a huge 600 MW.

What is interesting about Whitelee wind energy project is its proximity to a large population centre. There are according to Scottish Power more than 500,000 people living within a 30km of Whitelee.

Turning on the final turbines at Whitelee yesterday, Scottish Power’s Chairman Ignacio Galán said: “Whitelee is a milestone in the history of Scotland, not only representing the largest wind farm in Europe but also one of the largest in the world.”

Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond MSP visited the wind farm to congratulate Scottish Power on the completion of the wind farm and to talk about the future green economy in Scotland. Salmond said:

“Today we announce further investment, more jobs and greater progress of Scotland’s clean, green energy revolution.

“Our potential for electricity generation from renewables is up to 60GW – more than ten times our peak demand. We have launched the world’s greatest single prize for innovation in marine energy, the £10 million Saltire Prize; we are developing and applying clean fossil fuel technology; we have an unrivalled competitive advantage in carbon capture and storage; we have approved Siadar, one of the largest wave energy projects on the planet; as well as developing and consenting hydro and biomass projects. Harnessing all these opportunities has the potential to create more than 16,000 jobs in Scotland over the next decade.”

Companies with deep pockets and healthy balance sheets, like Scottish Power are currently ruling the renewable energy marketplace. Big utilities are taking advantage of – previously very competitive opportunities to buy projects and companies to expand their businesses.

Last week German utility giant RWE Innogy, through its subsidiary company Agrupació Energías Renovables S.A.U. (AERSA), increased its share of the Spanish wind farm operator Danta de Energías S.A. from 44% to 93.7%. This move expands RWE Innogy’s wind energy portfolio in Spain to an installed capacity of around 400 megawatts. Speculators believe that the price paid for the 104 wind turbine development was in the region of 100 million euros.

Kevin McCullough, COO of RWE Innogy said “The Spanish wind market is among the most attractive in Europe, which makes it particularly important for our growth strategy. The wind farms in which we have now acquired a majority stake are an excellent fit for our existing portfolio.”

RWE has a target of investing US$ 1.4bn in clean energy per year and in the same month bought a 27% stake in Belgium offshore wind energy company – C-Power. The project company is developing a 300MW wind farm known as Thornton Bank in Belgium.

The UK government proposed a number of changes through the 2008 Planning Act including the controversial introduction of new government quango – The Infrastructure Planning Commission or IPC. The effectiveness of the new system and the IPC will be crucial to the delivery of large renewable energy projects, nuclear and electricity lines.

Kim Gauld Clarke from the Department of Energy and Climate Change talked about the new system for consenting infrastructure projects under the IPC. The IPC will rely on guidance set out in National Policy Statements (NPS) which are to be issued for specific renewable energy technologies, airports and nuclear power. Kim said the NPS’s are in the process of being written and that “the first tranches of NPS will be out for consultation in the summer, although the nuclear NPS will be later in the year“. NPS on onshore and offshore wind energy are expected to be amongst the first to be issued.

Tony Lamb from GL Hearn talked about the importance of public consultation which will be a pre-condition of an acceptable planning application. Local authorities will be a statutory consultee in the process and will produce “local impact reports”. He warned “just because you (the developer) are in line with NPS does not mean local issues will not be taken into account.”

Hector Pearson from National Grid talked about the electricity network issues facing the UK’s ambitious green energy plans. Hector said “20% of electricity demand is inside the M25 motorway” i.e. London. He went on to say “12 GW of coal and oil generating plant is due to go off over the next 5-10 years with 7.5 GW nuclear power coming on. Major issues will surround public consultation on electricity network projects and companies will need to demonstrate that local people’s rights have not been affected”

Hector said “under National Grid’s green scenario – i.e. under the scenario where the electricity network will allow the government targets on renewable energy to be met, 29% of our nations energy will come from wind. This will require second by second balancing achieved by flexing generation, smart metering, storage and flexing demand. We may have to look at ways of changing our behaviour for example pricing electricity so we don’t all switch on the kettle at the same time in the morning.”

Hector Pearson believes there are major issues that need to be tackled if we are to follow the green scenario. For example in Wales new electricity lines are likely to be needed through Snowdonia National Park and in Cumbria a new overhead line through the Lake District, because the new nuclear power stations have substantially greater generating capacity than the old ones that existed on the sites.

Generation is moving from inland, central areas to Scotland and the coast. 10 GW renewable generated electricity will be carried south from Scotland and 4GW of offshore wind energy is going to need to be connected. Hector pointed to the need for anticipatory investment i.e. strategic investment upfront rather than waiting for the electricity generator to knock on their door and ask for a grid connection. His view was that the UK electricity network can be developed to facilitate our green objectives, however it is dependent on 3 fundamentals:

- planning
- ofgem (regulator) supply solutions
- demand solutions

Talking about its written submission prior to next week’s budget, BWEA Chief Exec Maria McCaffery said:

“Large scale wind deployment is vital to reaching the UK’s goal of generating up to 40% of our electricity from renewables by 2020.

The current economic climate has caused a number of developers to put projects on hold, threatening the UK’s targets, and leaving the country exposed to volatile fossil fuel prices. Building a clean energy sector in the UK is an important part of our economic recovery, and we need to maximize the opportunities to develop sustainable energy projects which would otherwise be delayed by the recession.

We are keen to work closely with Government to deliver solutions to this renewables crunch, and to secure the UK’s long-term competitive advantage as a magnet for low carbon investment.”

Reasons for struggling onshore and offshore wind energy projects are cited as the value of the £, rise in construction costs and availability of project finance.

The BWEA believes that timescales for some Round 2 Offshore wind energy projects are being stretched to avoid deteriorating finances and say that there are £10 billion worth of ’shovel-ready’ schemes, which could be released to boost the economy if project finance and economics are improved.

Specifically it calls for Government to:

- Underwrite floor prices in Power Purchase Agreements (the contracts between developers and consumer supply companies): Government would essentially be taking the role of insurer of agreements signed between generators and suppliers, removing price risk and giving greater security to lenders.

This, the BWEA says will “assist both onshore and offshore schemes, but would be particularly helpful for the onshore sector which is heavily dependent on bank-led project finance“. BWEA also proposes three policy options specifically for offshore schemes from which Government should choose:

- Socialising offshore grid costs: Relieving developers of the cost of the offshore grid would have significant cost benefits, and is done in other offshore markets, most notably Germany. This could be done without the use of Government funds by retaining the competitive offshore transmission regime but socialising the payment of transmission charges across all grid users, rather than just the project developers directly involved.

- Direct Capital Relief: A programme of capital grants or carefully designed Enhanced Capital Allowances would effectively ‘buy down’ the recent cost increases and make projects cost effective.

- Increasing the offshore Renewable Obligation Certificate (ROC) multiple: An emergency review of the ROC multiple for offshore wind to increase its value from the newly introduced 1.5 ROCs per MWh.

Such an approach appears to be an “about turn” from the BWEA’s submissions to the Renewable Obligation review last year where it a) advocated the continuation of the Renewables Obligation system rather than feed in tariffs (which is in effect what it is suggesting by underwriting Power Purchase Agreements). It was also cautious about increasing ROCs for offshore wind energy because of the risk of this lowering ROC values for onshore wind energy projects – making them unviable. The submission is therefore likely to cause friction within the wind energy industry.

Both the BWEA and New Energy Focus reported today that the number of wind farm planning applications submitted in the UK are down this year with the lowest submission figures since 2002. Both blamed the economic situation, however it is more likely to be the case that wind energy developers are too busy trying to get their wind energy projects out of the planning system to have time to put new projects in.

The ENA – an organisation made up of members who own and manage the UK’s pipes and wires said that networks have an essential role to play in our energy future. The organisation wants to see the UK Energy Act deliver on the renewable objectives it has set and said “we are campaigning to ensure it does by ensuring a clear licensing regime offshore and that the license process is established as soon as possible“.

Talking about its written submission to the Energy & Climate Change Select Committee inquiry into the future for Britain’s electricity networks, ENA said “achieving the Governments energy vision will require a flexible and supportive regulatory framework. To address this growing issue we have proposed that Government should supply the guiding mind for the future direction of the whole industry and ensure leadership and strategic direction. By this we do not mean state control nor some hybrid process such as the Strategic Rail Authority. We mean a level of clarity that allows us to make decisions and back those decisions with the necessary investment, which is estimated at over £235 billion across the energy sector by 2020.”

The Business Council for Sustainable Energy UK believes that by 2020 between two thirds and three-quarters of the new renewable energy generation capacity could come from offshore and onshore wind energy. ENA say that this will have implications for the supporting infrastructure needed to maintain energy system stability and that innovative approaches to optimising use of the present network as well as network expansion will need consideration.

The written submission notes that new overhead power lines are likely to be required and that these can only be delivered with supportive planning policies and a regulatory regime that enables timely investment in new network infrastructure.

The British Wind Energy Association (BWEA) said that it welcomed the report which it claims recognises that as part of a wider mix of renewable energy, a significant increase in onshore wind capacity, meaning a greater number of wind turbines, will have to be deployed in order for the UK to meet its objectives under the EU 2020 targets on renewable energy.

The RSPB emphasised this week that the Government must ensure the national and local planning process is well resourced, in order to handle an increase in the number and scale of renewable energy projects. The BWEA however raised a red flag of caution when it pointed out that the issue of spatial planning (mapping of go and no-go areas) raised in the report “must not be used as an excuse to tangle wind farm applications in red tape“.

The report carried out by the Institute for Eurpoean Environmental Policy says that there are genuine concerns over the impact of poorly sited wind energy projects upon nature conservation, which need to be balanced against the requirement to expand wind energy. It notes that at present, the planning systems for onshore wind are not always successful in guiding development to sites that are appropriate from a nature conservation perspective, at a pace of development sufficient to meet the demands of the next decade.

Based on analysis of planning systems across the UK and in Germany, Spain and Denmark, certain actions are identified that it believes could improve the planning process, help increase acceptance of onshore wind, take account of nature conservation concerns and simultaneously accelerate the expansion of environmentally sustainable onshore wind capacity. What it fails to recognise is however the natural and human geographical differences in each of these countries and how these features and characteristics affect the availability of economically viable wind energy sites and the nature (size, design etc.) of the resulting wind energy projects.

Recommended measures to meet the above objectives in the report include the early engagement of stakeholders and fully clarified reasons for nature conservation objections. The report authors however worryingly believe that the introduction of nationally mapped sensitivity areas will increase the understanding of the potential locations and their appropriateness for onshore wind. Mapped green, amber and red traffic light areas are hinted at to “clearly support appropriate site selection and project design”. What the authors do not realise is that this mapped information is already held by wind farm developers on their mapping databases – they know where potentially sensitive designations are. The problem is that the number of potential sites is so few that they have to look in more detail at these areas which often offer good wind resource, away from dwellings.

The major problem with a mapped traffic light system is that it is not based on detailed bird survey work which is a requirement of Environmental Assessment and this survey work is the only way of really knowing what the impact of a wind farm might have on bird species or habitat. It fails to recognise that there are a raft of mapped non – nature conservation related constraints which also have to be taken into consideration. Such a traffic light system may work in countries which unlike the UK are less constrained e.g. Germany is a much larger country with a much greater land area away from dwellings and the coast. Here the number of potential wind farm sites away from designations is greater – albeit there are relatively low wind speeds. The UK is an island and is different to other countries in that much of its wind resource is in coastal areas.

The report is written without an understanding of the restricted number of potential wind farm sites in the UK and the other constraints that are experienced such as dwellings, cultural heritage and protection of special landscapes such as national parks. It does however recognise that high quality environmental impact assessments offer a solid information base and opportunities for local nature conservation benefits.

Commenting on politics, the report notes that England has yet to implement a forward looking, clear and robust approach to onshore wind but that “there is now a need and, with the development of the Renewable Energy Strategy, an opportunity, to do so“. This is not going to be achievable if individual planning applications have more ammunition against them through the introduction of spatial mapping which is likely to be politically influenced. Unfortunately although the motives of this report are I am sure well intentioned, it is flawed through a lack of understanding and through its recommendation for introducing a traffic light mapping system – effectively a wind energy trip wire. If the recommendations about spatial mapping are introduced, it will frustrate rather than push forward the delivery of well-sited and potentially ecologically justified wind energy projects in England.

Pitt – a civil engineer, spent many years in local government and is expected to receive a near £200k salary. He claims political independence will result in no conflicts of interest within the IPC. Legal challenges are however anticipated to rise as a result of the introduction of the IPC – due to concerns surrounding the rights of the public to be heard when it comes to big infrastructure projects including new large wind energy projects (over 50MW), nuclear power stations and airports.

Margaret Beckett, Planning Minister will on Monday confirm the appointment of Pitt. But the appointment won’t be long term if the Conservative party get into power, as shadow planning minister Bob Neill Bob Neill has clarified his party’s position by saying “I don’t think that the IPC has any legitimacy“.

Further stirring in the UK planning sector has arisen from changes to the appeal system, which from April 6th, will allow the independent ‘Planning Inspectorate’ to decide whether an appeal is to be dealt with by written representations, informal hearing or a public inquiry. Benefits of the new rules mean that costs can be awarded against parties who have acted unreasonably, meaning accountability is improved.

The Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) believe that most complex cases will continue to be heard at public inquiry. Debate was described by a DCLG spokesperson as “unnecessary” for simple straightforward cases who also claimed that inspectors can determine the appeal on the basis of the written information available “without any effect on the quality of decision-making.“

In Richmond, Virginia an amendment to a bill was proposed which would allow all residents to utilise wind energy by hanging clothes outside. However according to the Post, the proposal put forward by Senators Puller and Sickles turned into a class row “what happens when someone from northern Virginia comes and says ‘this looks like a West Virginia subdivision” said opposing Del. Orrock. Apparently he backtracked fast saying “If I preface that with ‘God bless them,’ does that make it ok?”

The bill for clothes line freedom needed a two-thirds majority to pass because it applies only to one region of the state and on this basis failed with a 60-40 vote. If you go to the Washington Post website you can vote for yourself.

In the UK the Conservatives have just brought out their new proposals for more local discretion on decision making and funding, together with ditching regional level planning. I hope that this is not going to lead to detailed debate on the visual merits of clothes lines in UK towns over doing something about climate change such as trying to get good transport and renewable energy infrastructure in place. As Post writer Fisher notes – this is (an example) of how a “Democracy, or perhaps majority-based governing system works”.