News RSS Feed


Proposed wind farm is dealt a blow by inspector


CAMPAIGNERS are celebrating after plans to create a wind farm on the outskirts of Worcestershire were dealt a blow.

Inspector Graham Cundale of the Planning Inspectorate dismissed the proposed Strensham wind cluster access track appeal after Wychavon District Council refused the application last April.

The access track was to service three large turbines proposed by Wind Prospect Developments on land south west of Upper Strensham, but we previously reported how Wychavon had refused the application on the basis it encroached on an area of natural beauty, would have an impact on historic parkland and would cause the loss of part of an historic wall.

The turbines and associated infrastructure are currently being considered by Tewkesbury Borough Council.

A spokesman for Strensham Windfarm Action Group (SWAG) said: “We are extremely encouraged by the planning inspector’s decision to dismiss this appeal. He has rightly recognised the impact this development will have on the character and appearance of the locality.”

Alastair Smith, development manager for the Strensham wind cluster, said: “We’re obviously unhappy that the inspector didn’t take account of the potential benefits of the proposed turbines in his decision.”

However, Mr Smith said the inspectorate’s decision did not mean the end for the project.

“Whilst disappointed that the appeal was refused, we welcome the inspector’s statement that any harm from the track could be outweighed by the wind turbines’ benefits,” he said.

“We are proceeding on this basis in the knowledge that the proposed turbines will help combat climate change and contribute to energy security.”

Mr Smith said the three proposed turbines were estimated to produce electricity equivalent to that used by about 3,000 homes a year. “In the event that the turbines are approved, we will again approach Wychavon District Council with an application for the access track”, said Mr Smith.


Comments(5)

Logik says...
7:37pm Tue 9 Feb 10

“We are proceeding on this basis in the knowledge that the proposed turbines will help combat climate change and contribute to energy security.”
.
More like there is a large subsidy and we intend to get our hands on it.
.
IPCC reports supporting AGW are falling apart on a daily basis. Why therefore do they insist in continuing with this nonsense? - the answer is simple. FOLLOW THE MONEY!!

topspin says...
2:16pm Wed 10 Feb 10

Hopefully they will be able to reach a compromise that will allow these wind turbines to be installed.
Limiting climate change and improving energy security are both very important.

Energetic says...
3:55pm Wed 10 Feb 10

Wind energy is not viable being intermittent and so unavailable during periods of high pressure in the winter when it is really cold. Its electricity output is difficult to interphase with the Grid and, far from saving carbon dioxide, requires conventional fossil-fuel power stations to be kept ticking over but ready to start up as necessary backup when the wind drops.

Wind farms occupy many times more land area than conventional plant per kilowatt generated even when actually working. They are unsightly, noisy, a health hazard for local residents, destructive of wildlife and accompanied by an infra-structure, mostly roads, which blights beautiful countryside or sea-scape for evermore. Their installation is guaranteed to wreck local tourism.

Although an illusory peak- performance output is always cited by government and the makers, Danish experience indicates about 25% efficiency and electricity costs up to four times those of fossil fuel or nuclear. As Logik says, no one would build them were it not for the subsidy which you and I are forced to pay on our present bills under the EU-inspired Renewables Obligation.

Virtually no new jobs have been created in Spain which has helped to ruin its own economy for the imaginary benefits claimed by topspin. Germany has reduced its new-build wind almost to zero in favour of nuclear.

We need nuclear (for base-load) and more coal-fired and gas-fired units which are all relatively cheap, tried & tested, plus 4-6 weeks back-up storage for natural gas/LNG. Nothing else is economically or technically viable on a large scale at the present time.

topspin says...
5:36pm Wed 10 Feb 10

I think you're being a bit hard on wind power, Energetic. As part of a mix of energy sources, it can play an important role in our energy supply.

New Kid on the Block says...
6:39pm Wed 10 Feb 10

Wind power is expensive, unreliable, and visually extremely intruseive.
I agree totally with Energetic.
If we are going to use renewable power we should look far more closely into domestic solar hot water as a means of reducing demand. Tidal energy would be a lot more reliable than wind.


Most popular


Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »

Local Businesses