Latest from SIT on Windfarms and court actions

I have been collating the latest completed surveys from residents and in fact will be delivering further survey forms this week in the final areas of Stoke Park.

In the meantime Stop Ipswich Turbines latest e-mail is full of good news and gives me renewed hope that we are spending good time in fighting the Thorington proposal

Thanks to jenny, I quote here

I'm sure you saw or heard something of the news about the National Trust winning their case about wind turbines close to Lyveden New Bield. In case you didn't catch it all, here's a clip from the ITV news

http://www.itv.com/news/anglia/story/2013-03-08/high-court-windfarm-ruling/ and a piece in the Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/9918022/Conservationists-win-landmark-High-Court-victory-against-wind-farm.html

Although it is not comparable to our situation, it is an implicit acknowledgement that there needs to be some restraint and consideration given to each local situation. The more important case for people like us is the Milton Keynes Council action, about setback distances and the right of a council to determine them. That still awaits a decision.

Here's a story that was carried in the EADT and the BBC about the transport issues at the construction phase. We have been told very little about this by PfR, except the route. I hope to have some more news on that soon.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-21711938Daily Mail Thursday 7th March - page 13. Incidentally this is a smaller turbine than those under consideration here.

Finally, to give us all a little encouragement, there are people in high places who share our point of view about appropriate siting of wind energy projects.

Cross-border turbine fight: Tories unite to fight windfarms

Thorington Wind Turbine Latest and What we Must Do

The SW area committee met last night and top of the agenda was the Thorington Wind Farm debate and presentations from both Peter Evans, a founder of Stop Ipswich Turbines, and the developers PfR.

Ipswich Spy summarised nicely on their website as follows:

Peter Evans, the Co-Chairman of Action Group SIT, told the meeting of the damage wind turbines would do to the lives of those living within the affected area, which SIT estimates is up to 2km. He pointed out that many countries do not allow these turbines to be built within 2km of people’s homes, even in Scotland this is an advisory limit. He raised the spectre of “flicker” which has risks for those who suffer from epilepsy, migraines and even for the general public. And he explained why the noise issue was not one that should be ignored, detailing how the turbines will be more disturbing than the A14.

Susanna Miller, spokeswoman for PfR, responded, explaining to the meeting that PfR were developing their plans for a maximum of two wind turbines for the site. The design was being finalised and PfR hope to hold further consultation events before making an application to Babergh District Council. She told the meeting that the worst consequences of flicker can be mitigated during the design process and that the turbines could well be much quieter than residents expect during normal operation.

The exact location of the turbines within the site has not yet been determined, but PfR committed to informing those residents who were likely to be directly affected by the issue of flicker once they have determined which properties these will be, and advising which mitigating factors are likely to be introduced for them. PfR expect a planning application to be submitted to Babergh DC in the Spring of 2013, and an Environmental Impact Assessment will be published at the same time.

I also challenged PfR regarding the fact they stated that 'New turbines' do not make much noise, because if that's the case then are the wind turbines at Kessingland different from the ones they are planning for this site? When asked, the room filled with gasp noises when they confirmed that they did not need to submit the details of the turbines in their planning application to Babergh, just some general information that gives a good brief on maximum and minimum criteria. They also said that Kessingland had a unique problem with noise (sorry didn't they deny there was any noise here? Or have I remembered it wrong?) and that 'noise' was a 'complicated' subject.  Not sure I understood why it should be so and how they would learn lessons in order for it not to happen here.

Oh, and apparently  the Scottish windfarm blew up when it was very windy!!! That's a bit like saying 'it's Ok, my car blew up because I put too much petrol in it'!

Although i have established that  lease will not be signed with PfR until the plans are passed, what IBC has signed is the option to do so within the next 3 years.

IBC as an authority is also not allowed to be seen to go against the proposals in a public way so that leaves us councillors to try to do something.

What we CAN do;

What the Labour administration could do is ask for an expert barrister's advice on exactly how much we would have to pay out in compensation, if we withdrew the options agreement. Perhaps 5 figures is worth paying the price, as we could find ourselves way down the line paying out more in compensation for negative affects to health etc. I think the Labour administration should look into this straight away and I hereby call on them to do so. I will also ask for this by way of e-mail to the leader of the council David Ellesmere.

Secondly we must now get going in readiness for Babergh planning committee. We need proper recorded measurement of the issues in Kessingland to take as proof and shore up the case for Babergh councillors to refuse PfR planning application.

We must go forward with solutions now, not look at how we came to this point, for it's fair to say that most of the people who were FOR windfarms in principal, are starting to feel a little duped and are finding the information and experiences of the Kessingland residents a real eye opener.

So everyone who will be affected by this must start building up petitions, momentum, facts, figures for the Babergh planning application 

because leaving all that just to the developers is like trusting a spin doctor to give all sides of a story.

Join the debate on Windfarms

I bring you another subject that's very much part of my ward in Stoke Park. In fact, I have to declare an interest here, as this is going to affect my street, being on the very edge of the boundary of Ipswich, overlooking the site where 2 x 130 mtr turbiness are proposed.

The land (Thorington) belongs to Ipswich Borough Council but it is sited in the Babergh district, which is the planning authority involved.

The photo has been taken from my street and shows what it will look like, calculated by Peter Evans who has instigated the Stop Ipswich Turbines campaign.

I think it is important that all sides are listened to and understood and then people can make their own minds up. To this end, I have organised and posted leaflets, with my colleague Bob Hall, and this has resulted in some dialogue and sign ups for further information, details below.

I happen to think wind turbines are rather graceful & beautiful but this opinion is not shared by everyone and, even if it was, it is only one of the many concerns that residents and SIT are campaigning on.

Kessingland Wind Turbines

There are residents in Kessingland who have first hand knowledge of living with turbines and tell their own story. They attended a meeting with SIT campaigners and are struggling to resume a quality of life that they had before the turbines were built. Please look at their website but I quote a paragraph which gives a flavour of the problems they are enduring and are fighting against (directly from their website www.turnthemoff.co.uk)

'Noise and the effect on health.

The issue of noise produced by wind turbines is controversial as there are widely conflicting views. An apparent shortage of scientific research and planning regulations are based on outdated data significantly contributes to the problem.

Wind turbines produce three types of sound - (a) mechanical noise from the gearbox and generators, (b) aerodynamic noise from the movement of the blades through the air and (c) low frequency infra sound. Research has shown that low frequency sound can cause serious health problems for people sensitive to its effects. People living near wind turbines have reported experiencing health problems including sleep difficulties, headaches, irritability and stress. Wind turbines now dominate the landscape for miles around and can impact on the quality of life of thousands living in the area. Some residents are, however, not affected by them. Even if they live next door to a resident who is.
This is not a NIMBY issue.

This website has been created to inform people about the adverse affects the two turbines are having on their quality of life. Either through health issues, noise, flickering, vibration, amplitude modulation- AM, devaluation of properties, effects on wildlife, the holiday businesses and the damage to the natural beauty in the surrounding area.

Two public meetings have already taken place with W.D.C (Waveney District Council), the developers and our MP Peter Aldous, another is planned in June.
At the last public meeting over 100 residents attended, all bringing their private issues, concerns and worries. Many raised issues of noise, the resultant sleepless nights and having to leave their own homes to get some peace. Others related to their quality of life having been adversely affected. Some had moved bedrooms to get a good nights sleep, others were unable to relax in their own gardens due to the noise from the turbines.

We must fight to get our former quality of lives back. Together, we can win this fight through the 'Power of the People'.
Please add your issues to this Website and be sure to ring Waveney District Council asking for the Environment Department. They will log and record your complaint of noise and disturbances. The more complaints recorded on noise issues, the more power they will have to argue to act.
Please support our Campaign'   end quote.

This is not a question of Nimby. the campaign in question is stating that it should not be in anyone's back yard (the nearest house to the proposed site, for the 2 turbines, is only 600 yards.) There are many more houses that will be affected by potential noise,visual impact, flicker etc in Pinewood, Thorington Park, Belstead village, Stoke Park and Sprites wards.

You can read more at www.stopipswichturbines.com


Now onto the developers, Partnership for Renewals. They have a website for Thorington Park here
http://pfr.co.uk/thoringtonbarn

They say that the turbines on this planned site will be different from the Kessingland site. I am looking forward to hearing their explanation of this at one of the consultation meetings. They have promised to attend to talk to local residents at a public meeting.

I quote Benefits from their website;

Green electricity

If two 2.5MW turbines are installed, they will generate approximately 11 GWh of green electricity on an annual basis. This is equivalent to the amount of electricity used annually by approximately 2,400 households.

CO2 savings

A wind energy development of this scale is expected to avoid approximately 4,700 tonnes of CO2 emissions per year.

Please note: The environmental benefit figures are based on two 2.5 megawatt turbines, operating with a 25% capacity factor; average household electricity use of 4602kWh per annum; and the electricity generated displacing electricity generated from CCGT / average fuel mix - approx. 430gCO2/kWh.

Additional income

In addition to Ipswich Council making a positive contribution towards the fight against climate change, Partnerships for Renewables will pay rent for the site, bringing in additional income.

Community benefit fund

A market-leading community benefit package will be provided alongside any future development. This will consist of a community fund, which will receive an annual payment at the rate of £2,500 per installed megawatt.

If three 2.5MW turbines are constructed, the fund would receive £18,750 on an annual basis for the operational life of the project (20-25 years).

The fund will be administered by representatives of the local community, to be spent on local projects.

A separate community benefit fund consultation will take place later on in the development process

This article is for info and to point you in the right direction, should you want to know more or attend any of the meetings.

From SIT - The next meeting will be held at Pinewood Community Hall on September 30th 2012 time tbc