Articles filed under Impact on Landscape from Europe
The turbine nearest the town, on land owned by the borough council just in Babergh district, has been dropped from the plans by Partnerships for Renewables (PfR). However the company still plans to go ahead with a second turbine at Pannington Hall. “It will still be very intrusive on the landscape – people won’t want to use the footpaths and bridleways around there.”
There is enough credible evidence and enough of an opposition to end a policy of support for industrial wind energy. Yet still we see wind farms popping up all around the country. Isn't it about time that we looked at all the evidence cumulatively? Isn't it about time that we just chalked it up as a loss and tried something else?
Around 160 people visited the exhibition when it came to Lighthouse Poole, which features visual and written examples on everything people may need to know about the Navitus Bay scheme. However, it seems that many questions were still left unanswered for some of the residents that the Daily Echo approached who came to visit the exhibition.
ScottishPower has been accused of contaminating a private water supply to homes in the shadow of Europe's biggest wind farm and of failing to tell the community that its drinking water could endanger health. ..."Given that the developer was ordered to take samples regularly, it would be illogical to suggest it had no duty to inform anyone the water was failing all the tests."
Trump filed suit in Scottish courts in an attempt to block the construction of the 651-foot turbine array that he argues will mar the view from his planned golf establishment, which is expected to be a lavish enclave of houses, hotels, ...and leisure activity facilities. ...Trump describer [Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond] as "a man whose obsession with obsolete wind technology will destroy the magnificence and beauty of Scotland."
The owner of a five-star tourism business in an isolated Wester Ross peninsula has launched a scathing attack on plans to build a community-owned wind turbine which he says is an "absolute violation" of the landscape. This week the Coigach Community Development Company (CCDC) unveiled their plans.
"The wind industry is dressing up their deception with so called community benefits and are telling our councils that wind energy is free and green. It is not free because our electric bills are still on the rise and it certainly is not green."
Mr Heasman said the turbines were drawn about 30 per cent smaller than they would actually be. Now, he has had a response from NBDL and its landscape architects LDA Design essentially admitting that he was correct, he says.
Serious concerns have been raised in a report about a huge wind farm off the north Devon coast. A county council report says the project would have negative impacts on the landscape and might not have any economic benefits for north Devon. It would be among the UK's biggest wind farms, with up to 240 turbines.
Wind farm campaigner Mr Grosvenor said this area of East Lindsey is unprecedented for the number of wind farm and singular turbine applications. He said: "This is an unprecedented push for turbines in this relatively small area when combined with applications for small turbines.
The company says it has listened so far, altering plans that came under fire for threatening tourism, marine life and shipping safety. Opponents have criticised previous drawings and models of the proposal, claiming they do not paint a realistic picture of what the turbines look like.
Mr Paterson's report is about the impact of all renewable-energy sources on the countryside and on the rural economy. "There has been a back-and-forth with DECC but we are doing this report," a source said. "We want some hard and fast evidence about the effect of renewables on rural communities. That is well within our portfolio."
Developers are facing fierce opposition over plans to build the world's second-largest wind farm in the Bristol Channel. RWE, a German energy firm, wants to construct 240 offshore turbines, each 722ft tall - more than four times the height of Nelson's column - to generate 1,200 megawatts of electricity.
The document says that if a conifer hedgerow, which has been planted around the boundary of their garden, was allowed to grow to 5.4 metres (17ft 7ins) it would "screen all views of the turbines." It also says further tree planting near the boundary of their garden, or closer to the house, would help to screen views within about eight years.
Commenting on the convoy of 40.2 metre long blades, Gwen Crew, chairperson of Denholm Community Council, added: "We should have been told about this when the application was submitted. People have to be made aware of this, as it will have quite an effect on local traffic. We are awaiting further information."
One of the grounds of refusal was the pollution threat to Doonbeg river, which contains 5,000 freshwater pearl mussels - the highest concentration in Clare. At a six-day oral hearing into the wind farm in April, the country's foremost authority on the mussel, Dr Evelyn Moorkens, said if nothing was done to secure the species' future, it would disappear.
The intervention marks a straining in relations between wind farm companies and the First Minister, who has championed the rapid increase in onshore turbines in the face of growing fury from rural communities. A Daily Telegraph investigation last month disclosed how the Scottish Government has pressurised council planners across Scotland that they have set aside too little land for turbines.
Diarmid Hearns, NTS's head of policy, said: "It is concerning that far too many people feel powerless when it comes to influencing local landscape developments - the planning system seems to be a complete mystery to them and they have no idea how to make their voices heard."
"This latest application is horrendous. If this gets approved, the whole of the Marsh and Wolds will become dotted in turbines. There will be no escape from them. Every which way residents look they will be there."
The Directorate for Planning and Environmental Appeals ruled that the scheme at Cairnoch, north of Carron Valley Reservoir, would result in "substantial, adverse and significant" landscape effects.