You are not
logged in
» Log in here

Viewpoints

• Comments
• Soapbox

This story is tagged with the following keywords

Planning is the big barrier for renewables

23 February 2010

The UK has set legally binding targets to meet 15 per cent of its energy demand from renewable sources by 2020. This is an ambitious target and one that will go a long way toward helping the UK make its generation sector sustainable. It is also important to remember that these targets are not arbitrary - they have been set as part of the UK's contribution to combating global warming.
But while the target is laudable, progress has been slow. According to the latest figures from the Department of Energy and Climate Change, just 5.6 per cent of demand was met by renewable sources in 2009. One of the big barriers is planning.
Onshore windfarms and anaerobic digestion (gas from waste and other feedstocks) facilities in particular often meet significant public opposition. And as it stands, the default setting for many local planning authorities is to reject proposals for renewable schemes.
According to wind and marine renewables lobby group BWEA, local council planning approval for windfarms fell to an all-time low of 25 per cent in October 2009. Anaerobic digestion plants seem to be fairing rather better, especially where they use crops grown specifically for the purpose, rather than waste.
The low conversion rate of applications, allied to the long lead times needed for building, means we are seriously compromising our ability to meet our targets.
There are many reasons for rejection, but they are usually based on an element of adverse local environmental impact. For anaerobic digestion, odour, proximity to houses and associated traffic are frequently cited. For windfarms, visual impact is the most frequent reason for rejection, together with noise, impact on biodiversity and inappropriateness of location.
Currently, the policies that govern planning approval for these developments are too complicated and open-ended. The guidance notes - planning policy statements - issued by central government provide "something for everyone" and thus confuse rather than clarify the situation. Once you factor in the prohibitive application costs, it is easy to see that the current system discourages investors.
The root problem is that "environmental impact" is used as a get-out clause for those opposing a scheme, and is the chief reason for rejecting applications.
Weighing up what is an acceptable level of environmental impact is complicated. However, enough decisions have been made around the country - in different landscapes and settings and concerning different sizes of development - for central government to make a concerted effort to clarify the advice it gives. The decision will never be an entirely empirical one, but the dataset now exists to bring a lot more objectivity to the decision-making process. We need to harness this if we are to break the deadlock and improve the conversion rate of applications.
Furthermore, it needs to be accepted that all renewable energy schemes can potentially cause some level of adverse environmental effect, but the pros usually outweigh the cons. It is worth asking whether we currently over-value the local environment at the expense of the planet.
Our local environment must be protected, but not at any cost. Global warming needs to be countered with every tool at our disposal and we must be prepared to sacrifice some local priorities to meet global imperatives. At what level that balance is struck in policy guidance is another question, but certainly we could and should accommodate a higher level of environmental impact than is currently permitted.
If the UK is serious about meeting its renewable energy targets, we need to realise that we cannot build a sustainable energy infrastructure that will benefit the planet without localised adverse environmental impacts. We need to establish the local price we are prepared to pay for a global solution. At the moment, planning policy and the advice that goes with it simply does not allow us to make that judgement.
It is up to utilities - those that provide green energy - to voice their concerns to the government to change the status quo. We need to debate acceptable environmental impact now.
Ray Williams, head of corporate business, ADAS
Source: Disconnector

Comment on this story Screen name Comment Security

Highlighted Jobs