Our current major concern is EAST STOKE - the plan for 4 (formerly 6!) huge (higher than Salisbury Cathedral) wind turbines, clearly visible from the historic tourist town of Wareham. If evidence showed this would really help reduce Co2, there might be a slim case for it (barring better alternatives). However, the story is one of money over common sense. This radio 4 program gets right to the heart of the onshore wind problem: Costing the Earth 
ARTIST'S CONCEPT:

Please download Adobe Flash Player to view this content:

Get macromedia Flash Player

CLICK TO ENLARGE videos
VIDEO OF EXPLODING WIND TURBINE:more relevant videos videos
OBJECT NOW:
Use our online form to send your objections instantly to Purbeck District council
pdf downloadA Rebuttal for Seekers of the TRUTH! »
A document that debunks the British Wind Energy Association's 'Top Myths about Wind Energy'. Read now »
enlightening informationFACT: Wind turbines generate on average only between 7% and 27% of their "nameplate" capacity.
Sliced Red Kite: sliced red kiteenlarge »
Marsden Gate (Rushton Lane):enlarge »more photos »

Dorset Against Rural Turbines
Assessing the facts and acting before it's too late.

Watch This Space For Latest News


DART March 2014 News Update

  12 ⁄ 03 ⁄ 2014

Appeal Court Hearing

It is with some disappointment that we have to report that the hearing which was held on Wednesday 26th February, against the Planning Inspector's decision to allow the construction of four giant wind turbines in the heart of the Purbeck Hills, was unsuccessful.

Although this action was taken by a local resident, DART have been following the proceedings closely and understand that the solicitors and barristers representing the appellant are now considering whether to take the matter further.

Meanwhile DART is undertaking an investigation into other matters concerning this development which we hope will shed some light on the decision making process.

It may also be of interest to readers to note that the Government has just announced that it will be dramatically reducing the subsidies for these atrocities.

Wind farm plans in tatters after subsidy rethink

Plans to build wind farms in England and Scotland are being scrapped in the first sign that the Government's proposed cut to subsidies is taking effect

Wind farms facing the axe are likely to be ones completed after 2017 when owners will be forced to bid for subsidy from a limited pot of money. The successful bids will win subsidies at reduced rates.

To read the full account of the planned changes click here.

DART 2013 News Update

  16 ⁄ 10 ⁄ 2013

Our campaign against the proposed wind farm at Masters Pit on Worgret Heath, East Stoke has now been running for over 6 years and is still very active. For various reasons we have been unable to update this website for some time and what follows is a report on the latest developments:

Following the rejection of the application for the wind farm by Purbeck District Council, the developer and landowner sought a Public Inquiry which took place in May 2012. After some (inexplicable) delay the Government Inspector found in favour of the development in July 2012.

Following this decision, an individual householder, (not DART, as the recent article in 'The Advertiser' suggests) who is directly affected by the development, took the matter a stage further by seeking a Judicial Review of the Inspector's decision. That review should have taken place on October 15th this year at the High Court in London but the developer pleaded that this gave an unwarranted delay to the possibility of starting work and as a consequence a most unusual decision was made by the Court to bring forward the hearing to last April and for it to be heard in Bristol.

Consequently, the High Court hearing supported the Inspector's decision that the development should be allowed to go ahead. One should note that it is rare that at the High Court level, Inspector's decisions are overturned.

There then came the point when decisions as to the future had to be made. The QC who represented the individual at the Judicial Review was of the opinion than an injustice had been done in terms of the evidence presented. Accordingly he recommended that an appeal be lodged with the Court of Appeal. By its very nature this court is composed of very senior judges who, perhaps, are not so influenced by the views of Government departments.

The case for appeal was therefore lodged and we have recently learned that the appeal case is justified and therefore the appeal will be heard in London on either 26 or 27 February next year.

The costs of the public inquiry (about £25,000) the legal costs of the Judicial Review amounted to over £31,000 have placed an enormous burden on those in our community who have chosen to face up to this injustice. A significant proportion of the latter was due to the advance of the case and the move from London to Bristol. Although the these bills have been paid so far, there is an urgent need to raise money to support this cause.

Lodging the case with the Court of Appeal itself involved legal costs (£5000) and should the case be lost in February next year a further £25,000 will be payable. That said, if the case is won legal, compensation of around £70,000 will be payable by the developer.

This means that serious fund raising efforts need to be implemented before late spring or early summer 2014.

For those affected in the immediate vicinity of the development, please bear in mind that evidence obtained nationally illustrate unequivocally that a windfarm near your home, can seriously devalue your home, and affect the prospect of selling the property at all.

Tolpuddle Against Industrial Turbines (TAINT)

  28 ⁄ 11 ⁄ 2012

Proposed Wind Farm at Milborne

Following the recent revelations regarding the Milborne wind farm, an action group has been established by members of Tolpuddle, Southover and Affpuddle. More information will be posted here, in the meantime a Facebook group has been set up HERE.

The action group TAINT has been set up and a website is HERE.

Silton wind turbine campaigners jubilant at decision to dismiss Ecotricity appeal

  08 ⁄ 11 ⁄ 2012

SAVE our Silton campaigners are delighted that planning inspector Neil Pope has dismissed Ecotricity's plans for four wind turbines on land near Silton on the Wiltshire/Dorset border.

The Inspector's decision follows a 12-day public inquiry which began in February and resumed in October at The Exchange in Sturminster Newton.

SOS member Dee Worlock said: "This is brilliant news."

The inspector said: "When I undertake the balancing exercise in respect of the scheme before me, I find that the harm to the character and appearance of the area and the setting of heritage assets would be unacceptable and overriding. These adverse effects would significantly and demonstrably outwieght the benefits."

MP Bob Walter who backed SOS said: "This decision was reached following a thorough analysis of the evidence presented to the Inspector in February and September and is a victory for localism, common sense and the countryside."

Full story on the 'This is Dorset' Website.

Death knell for wind farms: 'Enough is Enough' says minister

  30 ⁄ 10 ⁄ 2012

Wind farms have been “peppered” across Britain without enough consideration for the countryside and people’s homes, a senior Conservative energy minister admitted last night as he warned “enough is enough”.

Hopefully that'll enable some rational debate on the things - perhaps the beginning of the end.

Has Dorset County Council Disregarded Planning Rules to Approve Single Giant Wind Turbine at East Stoke?

  21 ⁄ 09 ⁄ 2012

Dorset County Council Planning Committee has recently voted to approve the above planning application.

The two attached letters of complaint to the Chief Executive of Dorset County Council provide a comprehensive record of the many ways in which this Local Authority has chosen to interpret the rules on this planning application to the advantage of the developer.

*It is apparent from all the information available to date, that if this development is allowed to go ahead, Infinergy will apply for more single turbines at the same site.

With regard to the 4 turbine scheme, the following statement appears in the Dorset County Council Planning Officer's Report:

"1.3. On 16 August 2012 an application was made to the High Court challenging the validity of the inspector's decision."

This challenge has been made by a private individual (not DART).

It is absolutely essential that as many individual complaints as possible are registered to the Council. Despite all the facts associated with this application being overwhelming, Dorset County Council appears to be determined to proceed without the appropriate public consultation.

If a satisfactory response is not achieved by such action then the matter must be followed by all individuals via a referral to the Council Ombudsman (please make your intention to pursue this option clear in your letter).

Write to:

David Jenkins. The Chief Executive.
chiefexecutive@dorsetcc.gov.uk
Dorset County Council
County Hall
Colliton Park
Dorchester
DT1 1XJ

Copy to:

And the following Councillors:

Finally write to the local newspapers about this travesty.

Do something now, before it's too late

Helen Crow
Secretary
DART (Dorset Against Rural Turbines)
www.dartdorset.org

*Extract from DCC Planning Officer's Report:

7.18 The applicant has indicated that it is not his intention to seek to implement both the scheme for the 4 larger turbines approved as the Alaska Wind Farm and the single turbine the subject of the current application (if approved). However, with the inclusion of the micro siting option in both applications there is a theoretical possibility that both could be implemented. At the time of writing this report discussions are still ongoing with the applicant to ascertain if satisfactory assurances can be given to remove this concern or whether it requires a legal agreement to ensure only one turbine is installed on the SW site. Members will be updated on these discussions.

7.19 The potential also exists for the turbine the subject of this application to be installed, accompanied, perhaps at a later date, by the three larger machines built on the NW, NE and SE locations of the original Alaska Farm proposal. According to the applicant this is unlikely, but the cumulative impact that this might have should be considered. The configuration consisting of 3 large and one smaller turbine is the same configuration as was considered under the original Alaska Farm proposal. At that time the issue of cumulative impact was fully assessed and considered to be acceptable.

10 Giant Wind Turbine plan for Dorset

  18 ⁄ 09 ⁄ 2012

The proposed Wind Farm near Tolpuddle would be only 6.5 miles from the Alaska Wind Farm site with even larger wind turbines standing at 126.5 metres in height.

The development would be visible from miles around; creating a huge blot on the landscape as well as impinging on the nearby designated Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, whose border at Crawthorne Farm is less than 1 km away.

The wind farm, if approved, would present a significant detrimental impact on several architecturally and historically important sites:

It would be visible from Rawlsbury Camp (an Iron Age Hill Fort on the Wessex Ridgeway) on Bulbarrow Hill;

North west of Crawthorne Farm, also in the AONB, is Dewlish House, a Grade 1 listed building, dating from 1720;

About 600 metres from turbine 9 (to the north east end of the site) is another historic monument - Weatherby Castle, an Iron Age Durotrigian Hill Fort. The Hill fort is about 101 metres above sea level, but would be dwarfed by the turbines. A website described it as follows:

"This medium sized Durotrigian hill fort just looks like a large copse even from a few feet away. However once inside the entrance, it is a sophisticated multiple ditch and banked enclosure. It has a high a c.30ft. bank all the way around its centre, on its western edge there is a c.60ft. terrace with a low earth bank which drops steeply into the valley below. The folly is a magnificent piece of 18th Century. pointlessness, but as this fort is so heavily wooded it's impact is limited."

Athelhampton House, a beautifully preserved 15th Century Manor and Grade 1 listed building, is about 1 kilometre away from the proposed wind farm.

The financial windfall offered to the local community is somewhat vague. The site is just inside the West Dorset boundary, but Milborne St Andrew, in North Dorset, is almost as close to the turbines as Tolpuddle and Affpuddle. Thus West Coast Energy's offer of a financial inducement to the local community (whichever one that might be) could be highly divisive. From the information made available so far, it would appear that most of the money could not be allocated for at least 15 years, after the capital costs of the project had been paid off.

One of the displays at the exhibition held by the developer, West Coast Energy, demonstrates that the wind resource in Dorset is only about 6.5 metres/second and yet they still are claiming an unrealistic 30% load factor(efficiency rating) for their turbines.

Finally, one of the staff at the public exhibition told a concerned member of the public that the company could absorb the recently announced 10% cut in ROCs (subsidies) but a 25 % cut would leave few of their schemes viable and they would be forced to cut back heavily on any new projects.

Buy one get 4 free: Infinergy's intention to add extra turbines to the single turbine proposal -

  05 ⁄ 09 ⁄ 2012

The Planning Officer's report for this Friday's decision making meeting at Dorset County Council for a single giant wind turbine at East Stoke, contains the following paragraphs:

7.18 The applicant has indicated that it is not his intention to seek to implement both the scheme for the 4 larger turbines approved as the Alaska Wind Farm and the single turbine the subject of the current application (if approved). However, with the inclusion of the micro siting option in both applications there is a theoretical possibility that both could be implemented. At the time of writing this report discussions are still ongoing with the applicant to ascertain if satisfactory assurances can be given to remove this concern or whether it requires a legal agreement to ensure only one turbine is installed on the SW site. Members will be updated on these discussions.

7.19 The potential also exists for the turbine the subject of this application to be installed, accompanied, perhaps at a later date, by the three larger machines built on the NW, NE and SE locations of the original Alaska Farm proposal. According to the applicant this is unlikely, but the cumulative impact that this might have should be considered. The configuration consisting of 3 large and one smaller turbine is the same configuration as was considered under the original Alaska Farm proposal. At that time the issue of cumulative impact was fully assessed and considered to be acceptable.

DART have 2 questions about this outrageous revelation. These are:

To read the Planning Officer's full report click here

REDUCE ELECTRICITY BILLS BY REFORMING THE SUBSIDIES FOR WIND FARMS POWER STATIONS

  23 ⁄ 08 ⁄ 2012

https://submissions.epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/22704

Responsible department:
Department for Energy and Climate Change

Electricity bills have soared, and more increases are in the pipeline. This punishes the 6 million people already in fuel poverty, restricts economic growth and makes British industry less competitive.

A key factor in this increase is the Renewables Obligation, which indirectly provides more than 40% of the income of wind farms power stations. These complex and covert subsidies (most of which goes to privately owned off-shore companies)are not paid by the government, but instead are ENTIRELY financed by increasing the price of our electricity bills. Climate-change policies have already increased household electricity by at least 14%, and have increased the electricity bills of business by at least 20%. Even worse, these tariffs are forecast to escalate.

By reducing or ending the subsidies for wind farms power stations, it would benefit the poorest members of society, boost UK manufacturing exports and while doing so, would help protect what remains of our precious countryside. Please sign up to this petition.

Onshore wind farms power stations suffer massive setback

  15 ⁄ 08 ⁄ 2012

The Government will cut onshore wind farm subsidies by 10% from 2013, and has indicated its intention to cut all subsidies by 2020.

The Government is now considering how local communities can have more of a say over the building of onshore wind farms.

Support for tidal stream and wave power will be more than doubled as part of the new measures. Energy Secretary, Ed Davey's announcement also included £500 million in tax breaks for shallow water gas fields and an emphasis on the use of biomass in converted coal power stations, as a step towards the 'diversification of the wind centric policy'.

Simultaneously, Government Agency has finally acknowledged that properties can suffer a decrease in value when situated close to wind turbines.

In what could become a landmark ruling by a Government Agency, the Valuation Office Agency (VOA), which sets Council Tax bands has admitted that properties can sharply decrease in value when situated within sight or earshot of turbines-a factor that has previously been considered subjective.

In Devon, a couple recently saw £100,000 taken off the value of their home and its Council Tax band lowered from F to E as a result of the constant noise and visual intrusion of wind turbines.

The Government plans to break its own climate change law

Politicians are finally admitting that our 'carbon' targets and our energy needs are incompatible

By Christopher Booker

28 Jul 2012 - The Daily Telegraph

It is not often our Government lets on that it is intending to commit a very serious breach of the law – even if it does so in such opaque fashion that it hopes no one will notice. But that is what we can read between the lines of last week’s statement by Ed Davey, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, which revealed just what a catastrophic shambles he is making of Britain’s energy policy.

Renewable energy: Onshore wind subsidy to be cut by 10%

25th Jul 2012 - BBC News

The subsidy for onshore wind energy generation is to be cut by 10%, the government has announced.

The measures should also reduce the impact on household energy bills, it said, saving £5-£6 a year on average.

Under the current arrangements £44 of the average household bill would go towards renewables in 2013-14, rising to £50 in 2016-17.

Planning Inspector allows Windfarm

  17 ⁄ 07 ⁄ 2012

DART were shocked to learn of the appalling decision by the Planning Inspectorate to allow this development to go ahead. We are currently examining the report, in which the Planning Inspector has placed 39 conditions on the development, which have to be met before the wind turbines can be erected.

To read the Planning Inspector's report.

Fight on to keep wind power subsidies

  10 ⁄ 07 ⁄ 2012

Fight on to keep wind power subsidies. It's a funny old world - when we started opposing these great white elephants, the chorus from the industry was that there were no subsidies. Of course, there was and always has been the ROC scheme, OK that's not called a 'subsidy'. Now there's talk of reducing it and the cry goes up "don't take away our subsidy". Well well.

"I think subsidies should be drastically cut. The rumours of a 25% cut and zero subsidy by 2020 would be a good starting point"

Chris Heaton-Harris MP for Daventry

Good on you Chris.

Would the Single Giant Wind Turbine be an even Bigger Money Spinner than 4 Turbine Scheme? (As well as less efficient?)

  14 ⁄ 06 ⁄ 2012

“FITs” or “Feed in Tariffs” are the latest scam for wind farm developers.

The “FIT”s scheme is a system of subsidies designed to encourage investment in wind turbines which produce much lower power levels. If a development exceeds an output of 500KW, the Feed In Tariff halves. That’s right, it actually halves.

Land owners are being lured by promises of enormous cash returns on their investments from wind industry predators. Some companies are promising yields of up to £8 million over a 20 year period (the official duration of the FIT tariff) for a single turbine, provided it is unable to produce more than 500KW of power.

The new Planning Application at East Stoke is for a turbine with a maximum generating capacity of 500KW (0.5MW).

The Planning Application for 4 giant wind turbines (currently awaiting the Planning Inspector’s decision following the Public Inquiry) had a maximum generating capacity of 2.3MW for each turbine. Given that the latest wind turbine, at 102 metres would be four fifths of their height, (125metres), one would expect it to yield four fifths of the energy.

In fact, the single turbine’s maximum output of half a Megawatt represents barely a fifth of that figure.

Below are links for 2 documents, produced by the wind farm industry, designed to persuade greedy landowners to invest huge sums on these outrageously inefficient, ‘renewable’ energy schemes (this single turbine scheme would cost well over £1million):

EWT 500

Fishergerman

New Planning application for 102 metre

Giant Wind Turbine at East Stoke

in rural Dorset

  14 ⁄ 05 ⁄ 2012

Why it is so important to object:

  1. Holme Sand and Ballast have succeeded in persuading the planning department of Dorset County Council to classify the application as “minerals and waste”, thus removing it from the locally accountable planning system.
  2. The planning application was submitted at the same time as the Public Inquiry into the refusal to allow 4 giant wind turbines at exactly the same location, even though many of the subjects covered by the Inquiry are relevant and therefore linked to this new proposal.
  3. If this giant wind turbine is built, it will open the door to other wind turbine planning applications – Infinergy have already identified many other areas in Dorset which they consider suitable for wind farm development (regardless of low wind speeds).
  4. The proposed giant wind turbine at 100m (350ft) high will dominate the skyline for miles around and lies close to a designated Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. It would be the tallest structure in Dorset; with its moving blades making it extremely intrusive in the surrounding previously unspoiled, landscape.
  5. Once the precedent has been set, further applications will be more difficult to oppose.

Other points:

There is no evidence provided in the planning application documentation of Holme Sand and Ballast’s power usage. This is essential information as it is the sole reason why this planning application has been classified as “minerals and waste”.

The following calculations illustrate why the classification of this planning application as “minerals and waste” (therefore subject to decision at county level) represents a disingenuous attempt to bypass the local democratic process:

The proportion of time that the wind turbine’s electrical output would be available to Holme Sand and Ballast is about 30% of the total hours in a week (that is 61 hours of the total number of hours in one week which is 168). This simply cannot justify classification as “minerals and waste operations”.

A far greater proportion of the energy produced will be fed into the national grid than will ever be used by Holme Sand and Ballast. It will however, provide this company with a very high feed-in tariff for the electricity produced, which will be paid for by us, the consumers, in ever higher electricity bills.

Energy use at the sand and gravel pit is predominantly carbon fuel such as diesel. Electricity is used only for office power and lighting. Because of the nature of the site and the business, electricity usage is very limited as a proportion of the energy “spend”.

In view of the fact that the turbine will cost Holme Sand and Ballast over £1 Million, the benefits to the company and to Mr Bond, cannot justify the environmental damage to our countryside and to the wider community.

This enormous turbine will provide a relatively tiny maximum power output of 500KW. Realistically, its over all efficiency will be less than 20% in the chosen location. This raises the serious question of how the installation could ever repay the embedded carbon costs of construction and ignores the fact that the carbon expenditure of turbine and base manufacture uses some of the most carbon expensive methods in industry, namely concrete, steel, grp (fibre glass and other non bio-degradable materials) and acetone as well as transportation of the huge structure, usually from abroad.

This carbon expenditure can never be regained and represents thousands of tonnes of CO2 released into the atmosphere.

This is environmental vandalism

Although smaller than the 4(slightly) larger turbines, there is a probability that amplitude modulated noise could still affect many of the nearby residents. Noise can depend on other factors as well as size, such as gear trains, rotational speed and the design of blades. This should be looked at by an independent consultant. Noise has been experienced in Cornwall from such ‘small’ turbines.

The letter presented to the Dorset County Council Planning Department by Mr Bond (Holme Sand and Ballast) as evidence of community consultation, was only sent to a tiny proportion of householders who live close to the proposed development. Its legitimacy as documentation of community consultation is therefore rather questionable.

To view all the documentation click on this link.

Address if you wish to send a letter:

Planning Case Officer,
Stephen Cornwell
Dorset County Council,
County Hall,
Colliton Park,
Dorchester,
DT1 1XJ

Kind Regards

Helen Crow

Secretary
DART

Wind slashes 16% off value?

‘Noise nuisance’ farmhouse is sold


  16 ⁄ 03 ⁄ 2012

National Wind Watch

The farmhouse at the centre of the high profile Deeping St Nicholas wind farm nuisance case has been sold at a 16% loss. Selling the house – valued at £165,000 in 2007 (£149k in today’s prices) – for £125,000, a £24k discount, could infer that a nearby wind farm cuts house values by 16%. This is believed to be the largest recorded drop in the valuation of a property caused by the building of a nearby wind farm.

The Deeping St Nicholas wind farm caused many unwelcome headlines for the wind industry. Fenland Windfarms built the turbines close to Jane Davis’s farmhouse and she complained of excess amplitude modulation. She claimed it was so bad that she had to move into rented accommodation. Eventually she sued the windfarm operator Fenland Windfarms for nuisance and damages and the case reached the High Court. After 13 days in court, the case was settled on a confidential basis and the terms of the settlement have never been made public (Noise Bulletin December 2011 p1).

However Noise Bulletin has now checked the publicly available records of the Land Registry which reveal that the farmhouse was sold on 21st February to Fenland Windfarms Ltd. During the course of the trial, and at a Valuation Tribunal, the farmhouse was valued at £160,000 at the time the wind farm was opening.

The confidential settlement of the High Court nuisance action was intended to avoid the matter becoming a precedent for others who live near wind farms and complain of nuisance.

Search it for yourself, feed the postcode PE11 3JX into www.landregistry.gov.uk. Our ‘today’ prices’ reduction of 9.67% was taken from Zoopla.com with the house valued at £165k in 2007.

the wrong sort of 'dinosaur coast'

Items wanted!


  16 ⁄ 01 ⁄ 2012

Are you running out of space?

Do you have unwanted Christmas presents?

Have a clear out and help DART in our continuing battle to prevent the erection of giant industrial wind turbines in rural Dorset.

Old CDs, DVDs & computer games

Old mobiles. Whether you've recently upgraded or fancy a rummage through your drawers we can use any old handsets.

Clear your book-shelf

De-junk everything. Don't stop there, whatever else you've got, if you don't need it and won't use it, we can recycle it. It may also release valuable space in your home.

Contact Phil Redl on 01929 555359 or 0785 9902327 to arrange for collection

££££££Happy New Year££££££

still the the wrong sort of 'dinosaur coast'


Download this article as a leaflet.

Blown away: gales wreck wind turbines as

Scottish storm wreck havoc


  12 ⁄ 11 ⁄ 2011

Daily Telegraph – 9 December 2011

Fears over the safety of wind turbines in high winds have been raised after one burst into flames and another crashed to the ground.

Wind turbine costs more than it saves


  12 ⁄ 11 ⁄ 2011

This is from February this year, but is apposite at the moment...

One of Britain's most visible wind turbines performed so badly last year that the energy is produced was worth less than the value of its public subsidies, it was reported...

The 280ft turbine situated in a business park near the M4 in Reading operated at just 15% of its capacity last year, meaning it generated £100,000 of energy, despite attracting subsidies of £130,000 from the Government.

Not a total surprise really - and it's not the only one...

The projected wind speeds at East Stoke indicate that the proposed turbines will generate around 16% of their stated capacity. Since there will be 4 turbines, the element of subsidy (compared to actual electricity sold) will be somewhat larger.

Bankers Pull the Plug on Scottish Wind


  05 ⁄ 11 ⁄ 2011

It seems that the banking fraternity are beginning to get a little worried about sticking their snouts in the Scottish wind turbine trough.

The "renewables" feeding frenzy becomes a busted flush...

You can see the full story on Bill'o the Wisp's excellent blog.

Citigroup warns against investing in

Scottish wind


  02 ⁄ 11 ⁄ 2011

UK: Analysts at Citigroup today issued a report warning the bank's clients against investing in Scottish renewables.

That sound you can hear is the clink of the penny dropping.

(Of course if you're happy to put more money in city bankers' bonuses, support wind-power.)

DART's APPEAL FUNDING


  29 ⁄ 10 ⁄ 2011

This letter outlines the action DART has taken in response to the appeal by Infinergy(Purbeck Windfarm LLP)to the Planning Inspectorate, against PDC's refusal to grant permission to build a windfarm at East Stoke.

Please support this important campaign.

INFINERGY APPEALS AGAINST DECISION

TO REJECT PLANNING APPLICATION FOR

4 WIND TURBINES AT EAST STOKE


  20 ⁄ 10 ⁄ 2011

Infinergy have submitted a last minute appeal against the democratic decision of Purbeck District Council who firmly rejected the Planning Application on March 31st this year, riding roughshod over the wishes of local people who do not want this development to go ahead.

Ecotricity recently used exactly the same tactics at Silton in North Dorset in order to allow the objectors (North Dorset Council who unanimously rejected the application) as little time as possible to prepare their defence against the appeal.

These appeals against decisions democratically arrived at by councils cost a great deal of money to fight. It is estimated that it will cost PDC £50,000 to contest this appeal. This bill will be met by every local council tax payer.

We at DART are also preparing to fight the appeal.

It has now been conclusively established that wind turbines produce only a fraction of their rated capacity and not always at times when power is required or even be accommodated by the grid.

This has been demonstrated most graphically in China recently, where there has been a huge increase in the number of coal fired power stations built in order to support the growing network of wind turbines. Ironically scientists are now siting these coal fired power stations as a reason for a drop in global temperatures over the past decade, as the result of a phenomenon known as global dimming, whereby particulate matter in the smog thrown up into the higher atmosphere blocks out sunlight. This has the potential to cause dramatic and catastrophic climate change.

The developer and landowners are solely motivated by money, the landowner standing to make up to £400,000 a year from the development. The Renewable Energy Foundation has reported that subsidies for Windfarms will be over £1 BILLION this year alone.

Support DART in its fight against the Wind farm at East Stoke.

180 Onshore Turbines for Dorset


  12 ⁄ 07 ⁄ 2011

This is about a strategy document, quietly being pushed through by Dorset County Council. This document seeks to industrialise virtually the whole of rural Dorset by building 180 on-shore wind turbines.

That's right 180. One Hundred and Eighty.

The DorsetForYou webpage holding the documents:

http://www.dorsetforyou.com/402620

The Draft Document

http://www.dorsetforyou.com/media.jsp?mediaid=163477&filetype=pdf

The Technical Appendix:

http://www.dorsetforyou.com/media.jsp?mediaid=163936&filetype=pdf

The good people of Dorset and DART have had some success defending their communities against useless Industrial Wind Turbine Complexes. Three such plans (Winterborne Kingston, East Stoke and Silton) have been successfully fought off. But the corporations are certain to go to Appeal, as has happened elsewhere.

Especially now, as the prize would be a planning precedent that would allow them to cash in all over Dorset with Dorset County Council's blessing.

If you think this is a storm in a teacup and only concerns two villages, DART have some very bad news for you. This is only the thin end of the big expensive wedge.

Over sixty communities and maybe as many as one hundred and twenty will be lined up for industrialisation. Like dominoes they will be picked off one after the other. Sixty rural villages, towns and hamlets in Dorset. All lined up for having Industrial Wind Turbine Complexes imposed on them. How many (if any) Dorset communities will be left un-scarred?

Just how many million of pounds will developers make from this scarring? Your money.

The Bournemouth Poole and Dorset Renewable Energy Strategy, has been prepared by Dorset Country Council. It is now nearing its final draft stage and has been quietly (a cynical view would be 'silently') released for public consultation. We have yet to find anywhere that tells the public it is available for comment or what it contains.

In this document, the recommendation is that Dorset should install 180 turbines. Each of these white elephants would be higher than Salisbury Cathedral. This 180 on-shore wind turbine plan is promoted as the "realistic" option. But the report does not rule out their preferred option which would be 360 turbines.

Why 60 villages? Look at a map of Dorset. Rule out the main conurbations. Rule our AONB's. Where is left?

If one village is affected by 3 turbines (or two by six), that is 60 communities blighted for 180 turbines. 120 communities ruined for 360.

This is NOT Off-Shore. This is On-Shore. Next to where people live. The planned Poole Bay off-shore turbine complex in addition this.

Which bit of Dorset gets ruined the most? Here's some screen shots from the PDF of the Technical summary. (Notice they even sell these figures as including noise mitigation - prior to this the figure was over 1400 turbines!)

First the "Maximum Scenario"

The 'Maximum Scenario'

Now the Medium (or as they say, "more realistic") Scenario

The 'Medium Scenario'

We half expect you not to believe us. It is so utterly outrageous. So go to the links at the top of this post and see for yourself.

Please contact DART if they "disappear", We have copies and can publish here...

When you read about the gallant defence of villages of Winterborne Kingston, East Stoke and Silton, remember their planned (and resisted) industrialisation is the thin end of a very large and ugly wedge...

...speaking of wedge, just who stands to profit from these - and by profit we mean millons of your £££'s.

If we allow their desecration; Your community is next.

Set your video recorders today!


  11 ⁄ 05 ⁄ 2011

"Must watch" for anyone opposed to industrial development in our precious countryside.

"Windfarm Wars" 7pm Friday 13th May BBC 2

4 part series following 6 years of "Windfarm Wars" near Dartmoor.

In 2005 BBC TWO commissioned Sevenstones Media to produce Windfarm Wars, then a single observational documentary following the building of a windfarm, a story that was to become one of the UK's most divisive issues. Six years later, following the unravelling of this dramatic story, Windfarm Wars has finally become a remarkable four-part series with unprecedented access to all parties.

Six years later, following the unravelling of this dramatic story, Windfarm Wars has finally become a remarkable four-part series with unprecedented access to all parties.

Filmed in Devon over this six-year period, Windfarm Wars reveals what happens to a community when a wind farm of nine 120-metre high turbines is planned to be built in an undesignated yet sensitive landscape just four and a half miles from the northern edge of Dartmoor National Park. From planning and protest, to propaganda and polemic, through two Public Inquiries and three High Court challenges, Windfarm Wars tells the story of those people most deeply affected by events.

There's the farmer, Martin Tucker, who's keen to have turbines on his land, as a result of which his family's financial future would be permanently secured. But his cousin becomes one of his most vociferous opponents. There's the passionate and frustrated wind farm developer Rachel Ruffle a woman dedicated to her mission of bringing renewable energy to Devon. There's the local action group who argue the turbines will have a detrimental visual impact and are ineffective, and who campaign to upset Rachel's plans. There's also, Mike Hulme, a local resident whose green conscience is torn. He wants to combat climate change but his home is close to the turbines and he believes his personal and financial wellbeing, and the tranquillity and peace of the countryside will be threatened if the windfarm goes ahead. As he becomes increasingly disillusioned with RES's actions, and following 2 Public Inquiries, Mike Hulme takes his fight against the Government Inspector's decisions all the way to the High Court. Rachel Ruffle is equally determined to resist these challenges and see through the battle for her company's windfarm to be built. This documentary series charts the human drama and conflict as a community reacts to the dilemma of how best to respond to climate change and the impact of a windfarm on their doorsteps.

It's a story that sets a precedent too. When it started, the internationally successful windfarm company involved, RES (Renewable Energy Systems) customarily refused to release the raw data of their wind and noise recordings except to a qualified expert. As a result of Mike Hulme's campaign, releasing raw data into the public domain is now a more established procedure. His battle involves criticism of the inadequacy of the government's guidelines controlling windfarm noise, as well as concerns about the level of noise he may experience, including a phenomenon known as AM or Amplitude Modulation.

Against a backdrop of the pressures of climate change and the complexities of charge and counter-charge, Windfarm Wars looks beyond the taunts of nimbyism and charts the democratic safeguards and processes by which such major projects are decided. In the end this series is about one man's search for 'truth' in the controversial and confusing world of onshore windfarm development, and one woman's crusade to build her company's windfarm, the windfarm she believes the community, and the world, desperately need.

Episode 1

The first of a revealing observational documentary series that follows what happened when a global windfarm developer tried to build a windfarm in the heart of some of Devon's loveliest landscape.

In this episode, passionate developer Rachel Ruffle puts forward plans for the Den Brook Windfarm. Its nine 120-metre-high turbines will transform the landscape in a shallow valley that lies four-and-a-half miles from Dartmoor National Park. One of her allies is farmer Martin Tucker, who stands to gain hugely if the development goes ahead. Set against them are the local action group, including Martin Tucker's cousin, which mobilises to fight the proposals, claiming the turbines are visually intrusive and ineffective. And there is Mike Hulme, an increasingly disillusioned local resident who starts off on good terms with Rachel, but whose conscience is torn between the need for action on climate change, and his fears that turbine noise could blight the countryside's peace and tranquility.

Before the local authority West Devon Borough Council votes on its decision, there are acts of vandalism, angry scenes and tears of frustration and disappointment.

Small Rachel Ruffle

Developer, Rachel Ruffle stands in the shadow of a wind turbine.

Good news…


  02 ⁄ 04 ⁄ 2011

Wind turbines Refused

...from the Alaska Wind Farm Hearing by Purbeck District Council, on Thursday 31st March 2011 the Planning Committee was minded, by 8 votes to 2, to REFUSE the application. The original application by Infinergy for four 125m high wind turbines near Wareham in rural Dorset.

This planning proposal was recommended for refusal by the Planning Officer (outside consultant, Mark Wood) last November, but the Planning Committee voted to be 'minded to accept it subject to agreement on a number of conditions.

Last Thursday's meeting was extremely well attended, by those for and against. Almost all of those objecting were local residents. whilst many of the supporters, clearly were not.

The main reason for the Councillor's final decision was that the planning conditions were not sufficiently rigorous and did not provide sufficient protection for vulnerable groups such as autistic residents of the nearby care home at Binnegar and in particular to the local international Scout Campsite at Buddens Farm. In the case of the Scout campsite, Purbeck Council's own noise consultant was very clear; in his view the European guidelines on noise emissions (ETSU 97) provided no protection whatsoever from noise for the users of this facility.

In his words;"...We just don't know what the effect will be".

The Chairman of the Planning Board also pointed out that the Scout campsite was used by children from deprived backgrounds, some of whom came from parts of Europe which are highly industrialised and who do not have the option to enjoy peace and quiet in a natural environment. He said that the secluded location of this site, provided an opportunity for a break from their often troubled and difficult lives. To place giant wind turbines right next to their camping field, with no guarantee that the noise could be kept to a reasonable level would effectively destroy the value of this facility to these vulnerable young people.

• another issue raised, concerned the substantial visual impact these enormous structures would have on the rural landscape which would impose upon the wonderful views from many parts of the nearby Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). It was pointed out that the conditions proposed by the Planning Officer were clearly inadequate as a means of alleviating the damage and loss of visual amenity in this unique and ecologically sensitive landscape.

Once permission is granted in this location, it will be very difficult to refuse other applications. The importance of this decision as a precedent should not be underestimated. There is only one chance to make the right decision.

• the difficulties in enforcing conditions in practice, were pointed out by several speakers, who noted the financial cost to the council (and us the local council tax payers), of carrying out this responsibility.

The development of onshore wind turbines is currently suppressing support and consuming valuable resources for other much better renewable technologies such as tidal and biomass, which are capable of producing far greater amounts of reliable power.

So to those who were bitterly disappointed about Thursday's decision, take heart, Dorset County Council have, with hardly any publicity or celebration, recently given approval to New Earth Energy company's planning application for a Combined Heat and Power plant (CHP) at Dorset Green Winfrith (the site of the old nuclear power station) near Wool.

The plant will produce at least TEN TIMES as much power and run consistently twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Furthermore, it will be unobtrusively sited at a business park unlike the wind turbines which would be on top of a hill and visible from many miles away.

Lastly, on the matter of other vastly more efficient renewable technologies, which should be given more attention, Dr Turnock of Southampton University(who spoke at the meeting), might have mentioned the Southampton District Energy Scheme which serves buildings within a 2km radius of the energy centre, via 12km of insulated distribution pipe. Users include TV studios, a hospital, a university, a shopping centre, a civic centre, residential buildings and a hotel. The Scheme produces over 40,000 MWh of heat per annum, 26,000 MWh of electricity from the CHP plant, more than 7,000 MWh of chilled water.

For more information go to Southampton-geothermal. It is estimated that this scheme, which is sourced by geothermal energy, provides around 7% of the energy requirements for Southampton which is the 2nd largest city on the South coast after Plymouth with a population of 236,000.

So on behalf of DART all that remains to be said for now is:

Please consider the environment before building a wind farm.

Final Decision Meeting


  28 ⁄ 03 ⁄ 2011

Thursday 31st March at Furzebrook Village Hall, Wareham BH20 5AY at 9.15am

Directions:

1. From the council offices (Westport House) in Worgret Road, Wareham, head east on
Worgret Rd/B3070 toward South Street

Continue to follow B3070 (0.2 miles)

2. Turn right at South St/B3075

Continue to follow B3075 (1.3 miles)

3. At the roundabout, take the 2nd exit onto Furzebrook Rd

Furzebrook Village Hall will be on the right: just before the road crosses the 
railway line.

Make sure you get to this decisive meeting to make your council representatives fully aware of your objection to this truly horrendous planning proposal.

Otherwise this below is what Infinergy will do to our countryside (below):

Landscape Impact: The Reality


  24 ⁄ 03 ⁄ 2011

The following images have been commissioned by DART to illustrate the devastating effect
these monsters would have on our landscape here in Dorset
	
Photograph 1: Road near Lime Kiln Dairy
Photograph 2: South Heath (Scout Camp)
Photograph 3: Wareham Roundabout
Photograph 4: Stokeford Farm Field
Photograph 5: Wareham Walls

Photography Data
Camera: Nikon D700 (full frame)
Lens: 50mm & 70mm-200mm
Height: 1.5m
Date taken: 21.03.2011
Panoramas stitched with Photoshop CS4, Photomerge

View of Turbines from Lime Kilns

View of Turbine from South Heath

View of Turbine from Wareham roundabout

View of Turbine from Stokeford Farm

View of Turbine from Wareham Walls

View from Church Lane in East Stoke


  14 ⁄ 03 ⁄ 2011

wat

Flight Dates

Thursday 17th, Friday 18th & Saturday 19th March - at:
Rogers Gardenstone, Puddletown Road, Wareham BH20 6AU
Witness for yourself how the proposed giant wind turbines will ruin our 
beautiful Isle of Purbeck
A public demonstration with press and TV coverage will take place at 11.00am
on Saturday 19th March at:
Primrose Farm, Primrose Farm Lane, East Stoke, Wareham, BH20 6AN
Turn right on the A352 between Wareham and Wool, just before the Stokeford Inn 
(DART will ensure that the turn off is clearly sign posted).

Shhhhh...Wind Data


  17 ⁄ 02 ⁄ 2011

The anemometer tower at East Stoke is now gone. But its data still remains confidential.

If this data was freely available it would allow the people of East Stoke and our local Purbeck councillors to build an accurate, understandable and unbiased assessment of the true potential of the proposed Alaska wind farm. This could then be weighed against the harm and suffering it will inflict on the good people of East Stoke.

But this data is not available. It is apparently, a secret.

If this is such a wonderful green and productive enterprise, and not merely a money making exercise, why are they not shouting the figures from the rooftops?

The suspicion has to be that these secret figures are embarrassingly poor.

With the structure of the ROC subsidy and the guaranteed purchase of the power generated, even with dismal figures an operating company will turn a very nice little earner. While the locals can go to hell.

Although we do not have the secret figures for East Stoke there are reliable national figures. These figures show that for the critical three month period from October through to January, the total UK wind output was 12% or less of the supposed rated output for a third of this 3 month period. On several occasions the national wind power output fell to almost zero. For 75% of the period, the output was significantly less than BWEA's often hyped 30% Capacity Factor.

But these are national figures. They include off shore wind generation, consequently, they will display a higher capacity factor and less intermittency than either the land-based turbines, or individual land based wind generation sites.

It is highly unlikely any wind farm at East Stoke could ever come close to even these dismal results.

But of course we may never know, and our councillors may never know.

Because for some unknown reason, the figures are secret.

 

Wind farms becalmed...


  01 ⁄ 01 ⁄ 2011

......just when needed the most*  

Daily Telegraph - 1 January
Wind farms in Britain generated practically no electricity during the recent cold spell, raising fresh concerns about whether they could be relied upon to meet the country’s energy needs.

Despite high demand for electricity as people shivered at home over Christmas, most of the 3,000 wind turbines around Britain stood still due to a lack of wind.

Even yesterday, when conditions were slightly breezier, wind farms generated just 1.8 per cent of the nation’s electricity — less than a third of usual levels.

The failure of wind farms to function at full tilt during December forced energy suppliers to rely on coal-fired power stations to keep the lights on — meaning more greenhouse gases were produced.

Experts feared that as the Government moved towards a target of generating 30 per cent of electricity from wind — while closing gas and coal-fired power stations — cold, still winters could cause a problem in the future.

Prof Michael Laughton, emeritus professor of engineering at Queen Mary University London, said wind turbines became still just when they were needed most, meaning that the country was reliant on imported oil or coal.

The wind turbines may even use up electricity during a calm period, as they were rotated in order to keep the mechanical parts working. There are more than 3,000 turbines in Britain and the Department of Energy and Climate Change planned to have up to 6,000 onshore and 4,000 at sea by 2020.

The Met Office said yesterday that there would be a bit more wind and unsettled weather, particularly in the North, this weekend, with colder weather returning tomorrow. The week ahead would be cold again, with overnight frosts.
It was confirmed yesterday that December had been the coldest since national records were first kept in 1910, with the average temperature little more than -1.5C.

Click here to read the full article

 

Happy New Year!

 


------------------------Previous updates below-------------------

Planning Decision Deferred

“The Planning Board has not granted permission for the wind farm.”B. Downton Head of Planning Services for Purbeck District Council

Members of the public and a local Scout troop filled the Council Chambers at Westport House, for last Tuesday’s full District Council meeting. The sheer numbers who wished to express their anger about the previous week’s planning meeting meant that the public participation period lasted almost 45 minutes instead of the usual 15.

Following are some of the points raised at the meeting:

  • Changes had been made to accepted practice, concerning the order in which speakers should be called: Parish Councillors should be last, as they represent everyone in their Parish. They were called first on this occasion, thus denying their right of reply on behalf of constituents.
  • A local resident reported that that construction work has already begun, with turbine footings and vehicle tracks in place. He pointed out that councillors, who had recently been on site visits, must have known this.
  • The developer had been given 10 minutes to speak and members of the public were restricted to only 3 minutes.
  • There was criticism of the Bovington Middle School teacher who claimed to represent the views of his pupils –
  • A parent voiced concern about a visit made to Purbeck School by a representative of Infinergy 
  • A resident of East Stoke said that she had not been allowed to speak, even though many activists from outside the area were given a slot.
  • After intensive questioning, Head of Planning Services, Bridget Downton, promised that all those who had commented on the application would be written to individually. She also stated that the PDC website had been amended to reflect the fact that the go ahead had not been given for this development.
  • The Planning Officer’s report was criticised for giving more weight to identical pre-printed letters sent in by supporters of the scheme than individual letters and over a thousand name petition opposing it.
  • Following loud complaints from one or two of the councillors, an East Stoke resident reminded those present that they were only in their position because we had elected them.
  • The Scout leader present,  reminded councillors that the Scout’s had objected to the proposal.

At the end of the session The Planning Committee Chairman announced that a final decision is unlikely to be taken before March 2011

.And last but not least

In response to official notice from DART and CPRE, that we are preparing to commence judicial review proceedings, Ms Downton has sent the following reply:

“As I am sure you are aware, I have now had an email from your solicitor. She was under the impression that the planning board had granted permission for the wind farm subject to conditions that it delegated to officers to agree. This is not the case. The planning board has not granted permission for the wind farm. The planning board was minded to grant planning consent subject to appropriate conditions being agreed by the planning board (not delegated to officers). This was in principle support and therefore if appropriate conditions can not be agreed, it will still be reasonable for the application to be refused. I am currently working up the timetable for this next stage of the work including consultation processes. “

Best wishes

Bridget Downton
General Manager, Planning Services
Email BridgetDownton@purbeck-dc.gov.uk
      Direct line 01929 557268

Merry Christmas Everyone!

 

 

Council U Turn

Local residents stunned as Planning Officer’s recommendation overturned.

Democracy was put on hold last Tuesday night (30th November) when an 11th hour amendment was submitted without warning at the planning decision meeting.  The Councillors voted on whether the controversial Alaska wind-turbine plant was to go ahead.

The Planning Officer had recommended the application be refused on grounds of excessive noise and the inability to reduce the visual impacts on the local and wider landscape.

In spite of valid concerns from speakers that the turbines would visually blight the Purbeck AONB and cause noise disturbance to the local international Scouts camp as well as local residents, 6 councillors on the planning board voted to support the application.

The amendment would allow the windfarm to go ahead, pending agreement on ‘mitigating actions’. This was an admission that noise and visual impacts were unacceptable in this planning application. 

A disturbing feature of this planning application is the complete absence of any assessment of the effect on people’s homes to the North of the proposed site at Trigon and at Worgret. Such an omission is barely credible in a planning application of this scale.

It is abundantly clear that this planning application is incomplete and not fit for purpose.

Infinergy has recently tried to sign up local residents to green electricity tariffs, which if accepted would allow Infinergy to ramp up the local noise level still higher through a `perceived resident benefit` loophole in the noise regulations.

- Children’s need to sleep at night ridiculed by a councillor

- Scouts told by one speaker to find a new camp site

-Activists from outside the area rubbished local older people’s views

-Over 50s viewpoint dismissed as irrelevant by one of our own district councillors who was himself a member of the planning board. He did not vote however, because he had declared a business relationship with the applicant.

Evidence about the threat to wildlife was dismissed by one councillor as irrelevant.

Meeting ‘packed’ by out of town pro-wind activists as well as students and lecturers from Southampton University.

Identical letters printed on mass by environmental lobby groups were given greater weight than over 1200 local signatures and personal letters from local people most affected by the proposals.

Infinergy's consultant Derek Moss, who wrote Derek’s Blog on the ‘Yes to Wind’ website spoke at the meeting in favour of the development.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Planning Meeting  for proposed windfarm

7.00pm at Purbeck School, Worgret Road, Wareham (Next to the Sports Centre)  

Please arrive early (6.30pm) - We would like to invite our supporters to express our objection to this development with a short, peaceful but well attended protest before the meeting starts –

The Planning Officer has recommended that the planning application should be refused. However it is vitally important that local people be there to oppose this development, as there is still a possibility that it could go ahead.

The elected Planning Committee still has to vote on the final decision, and input from the public at these proceedings is often very influential.

The Planning Officer’s Report - Grounds for recommending refusal are summarised below:


1.  “………….it is considered that the height, form and layout of the proposed turbines would detrimentally affect and detract from, those landscape elements which contribute to the natural beauty of this nationally designated landscape.”

2. “………the proposed layout, the overbearing and dominating height of the proposed wind turbines and predicted noise emissions when in operation, would fail to satisfactorily take into account, and minimise, adverse effects on the visual and residential amenities of; dwellings located to the south of the application site, the Scouting Association Campsite and public rights of way to the north of the application site….

3. ……….the applicant has failed to satisfactorily demonstrate that noise emissions arising from the operation of the proposed wind turbines would not give rise to unacceptable levels of disturbance that would adversely affect the amenities of the adjacent Scouting Association Campsite.

– A report commissioned on behalf of Purbeck District Council by Robert Davis Associates, makes the following observation relating to the ETSU-97 noise regulations:

4.2   (The ETSU noise limits). …are generous to wind farm developers, because they seek to permit higher noise limits than would normally be permitted for other types of industrial development. These limits do not represent levels at which there is negligible or no noise impact.

DART support the Planning Officer’s findings in respect of Landscape and Noise but we will be challenging some of its assertions (concerning environmental damage including the effect on wildlife, in particular to birds, bats and reptiles).

Europe’s Ill Wind is a video about the views of people living near existing and planned wind farm developments. Their objections have been dismissed by the wind industry and pro-wind campaigners as selfish NIMBYism, leaving unanswered, many questions about the reliability and environmental credentials of wind energy.

CLICK HERE TO SEE THE FILM

 

 

MAS Environmental were commissioned by DART to analyse

the noise assessment submitted by Infinergy, relating to the

proposed Alaska Wind Farm.

The following is a summary of the report’s main conclusions, including the likely effects on the Dorset Scouts Camping Fields and Purbeck Residential Care Home:
  • The extent of the anomalies and inadequate information are such that Infinergy’s noise impact assessment should not be relied upon. Further analysis is required but more information is needed to enable this to occur, including the raw data on which the analysis is based.

  • The data obtained from Trigon Fisheries should not be used to assess the background noise environment as it is corrupted by atypical noise. Unusable data from Trigon Fisheries results in just three background noise surveys having been conducted for the site; this is not sufficient.

  • Because of lack of spacing between the North West, North East and South East turbines, turbulent airflow would result in excess turbine noise...
Read full article »
Purbeck Hills:

The tiny, intermittent output of electricity and the negligible CO2 savings from the proposed East Stoke wind turbines cannot possibly justify the huge sacrifice of that most finite resource - our countryside. It is our duty to protect our rural heritage for present and future generations from such gross and unnecessary industrialization.

Combined Heat and Power


added   20 ⁄04⁄ 10

A real alternative for Dorset

Dorset Green Winfrith
New Earth Energy has recently submitted a Planning Application to Dorset County Council for a Combined Heat and Power (CHP) facility at Dorset Green Technology Park, near Wool, which was previously known as Winfrith Technology Centre.

The CHP plant will be a Renewable Energy facility with a feedstock of partially-treated domestic waste that will thus be used as a resource rather than being sent to landfill which is presently taxed at £48/ton and soon to rise to £72/ton. The facility could also be powered with other biomass fuels such as willow coppice or miscanthus. It will consist of ten independent units which will produce a total of 10 Megawatts of electricity for the National Grid (no new pylons will be needed) and 10 Megawatts of heat to be used for the central heating of buildings throughout the site at Dorset Green. Read full article »

Dorset Threatened by Massive Industrial Turbines


  16 ⁄ 02 ⁄ 2010

The Fight Begins (AGAIN!)

Infinergy have announced their revised planning application for 4 industrial wind turbines at East Stoke near Wool, the previous application having been withdrawn in the face of strong objections from Natural England, the County Council and the Dorset Wildlife Trust and from local people. They have now applied to Purbeck District Council for four turbines 410 feet (125 metres) high at the same location.

East Stoke Church showing the planned turbines. Click to enlarge

Four other applications for windfarms have recently been refused mainly because of noise pollution to nearby houses. Homes here are within some 550 metres – and some residents have been driven out of their homes by the noise from a windfarm. The turbines will visually dominate the Purbeck Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and the World Heritage Coast and will be visible from much of Dorset.

Although DART will be requesting an extension to the consultation period, letters of objection need to be sent as soon as possible. We also hope to be holding a public meeting in the near future.

Read the full article, including our Golden Rules of Objecting & Grounds for Objection, click here »



Important Planning Decision


added   25 ⁄03⁄ 10

Noise Impacts on Nearby Residents taken into Account

A planning application for a single 125 metre wind turbine in Bradford has recently been refused by a government planning inspector on the grounds “that the turbine would be overbearing and oppressive to a number residents and the noise produced could lead to the neighbours losing sleep”.

The decision was based on World Health Organisation, British Standard guidelines and codes of practice, as well as ETSU-R-97.

Below are links to 2 of the latest in a series of information sheets provided for the Councillors on the Planning Committee of Wychavon District Council in Worcestershire.

Planning_Matters_Bradford.doc »

Planning_Matters_Askam.doc »