Dorset Against Rural Turbines
Assessing the facts and acting before it's too late.
Press Archive:
Success for Save Our Silton!
added 04 ⁄09⁄ 09
SOS heard and answered...
Application for Wind Farm at Silton, North Dorset, rejected by Council:
On 2nd July, North Dorset District Council Development Control Committee voted unanimously to reject the Ecotricity proposal to build 6 wind turbines at Silton Gillingham. Subsequently, Ecotricity withdrew its application. However, as the anemometer mast is still in place, the campaign against this development, Save Our Silton(SOS), remain prepared for the possibility that Ecotricity will submit another application at a later date, - either for fewer turbines or to try to take advantage of the new draconian planning rules due to come into force later in the year.
The reasons given by North Dorset District Council for rejection of planning application for 6 wind turbines at Silton can be summed up as follows:
The full, official wording is in the full article, here »
On 2nd July, North Dorset District Council Development Control Committee voted unanimously to reject the Ecotricity proposal to build 6 wind turbines at Silton Gillingham. Subsequently, Ecotricity withdrew its application. However, as the anemometer mast is still in place, the campaign against this development, Save Our Silton(SOS), remain prepared for the possibility that Ecotricity will submit another application at a later date, - either for fewer turbines or to try to take advantage of the new draconian planning rules due to come into force later in the year.
The reasons given by North Dorset District Council for rejection of planning application for 6 wind turbines at Silton can be summed up as follows:
- Proximity of inhabited dwellings
- Noise
- Landscape
- Effect on tourism
The full, official wording is in the full article, here »
Massive CO2 Saving Falsehoods Admitted
added 23 ⁄01⁄ 09
Windfarm lobby bows to A.S.A. and cuts Co2 saving
figures by HALF!
Twice as many wind turbines as previously calculated will be needed to provide the same degree of reduction in Britain's carbon emissions
Promoters overstated the environmental benefit of wind farms: The wind farm industry has been forced to admit that the environmental benefit of wind power in reducing carbon emissions is only half as big as it had previously claimed.
Read in full »
SUNDAY TELEGRAPH: 21ST DECEMBER 2008
Promoters overstated the environmental benefit of wind farms: The wind farm industry has been forced to admit that the environmental benefit of wind power in reducing carbon emissions is only half as big as it had previously claimed.
Read in full »
Please download Adobe Flash Player to view this content:
Artist's Concept from Rushton Lane
added 05 ⁄12⁄ 08
The Middlefield Cottages are much closer than the turbines
but are still dwarfed by the massive spinning blades -
higher than Salisbury Cathedral Spire!
Our Information & Our Objections Stand
added 29 ⁄10⁄ 08
A response to Infinergy's claims in their recent booklet
NB: This is our initial response, outlining the grossest misinformation in Infinergy's booklet. However, we will be presenting a more detailed rebuttal soon.
Background: Despite huge numbers of objections from local residents, organisations such as Natural England and the Campaign to Protect Rural England, Infinergy and landowner Will Bond are determined to press ahead with an unpopular planning application for 4 massive industrial wind turbines in the heart of the stunningly beautiful and wildlife rich Purbeck countryside.
Infinergy have produced a booklet which claims to provide answers to objections - this is our intital response:
Infinergy makes a number of accusations about information provided by DART. However in contrast to Infinergy who stand to profit from the wind turbines, DART - who do not - provide links to their sources of information on the website. One source is the Radio 4 programme ‘Costing the Earth’ (click to listen) which clearly contradicts Infinergy’s claims about the efficiency of land based wind power.
Read in full »
Background: Despite huge numbers of objections from local residents, organisations such as Natural England and the Campaign to Protect Rural England, Infinergy and landowner Will Bond are determined to press ahead with an unpopular planning application for 4 massive industrial wind turbines in the heart of the stunningly beautiful and wildlife rich Purbeck countryside.
Infinergy have produced a booklet which claims to provide answers to objections - this is our intital response:
Infinergy makes a number of accusations about information provided by DART. However in contrast to Infinergy who stand to profit from the wind turbines, DART - who do not - provide links to their sources of information on the website. One source is the Radio 4 programme ‘Costing the Earth’ (click to listen) which clearly contradicts Infinergy’s claims about the efficiency of land based wind power.
Read in full »
Private Eye Uncover the Truth
added 12 ⁄ 08 ⁄ 08
The money fuelling the farce and who's getting it...
Down on the Farm
Among those celebrating when Gordon Brown recently announced his "100bn green energy" package, including plans to build 3,000 more wind turbines across Britain's countryside, were hundreds of farmers whose eyes lit up at the thought of sharing in the bonanza. Click here to read the article »
Among those celebrating when Gordon Brown recently announced his "100bn green energy" package, including plans to build 3,000 more wind turbines across Britain's countryside, were hundreds of farmers whose eyes lit up at the thought of sharing in the bonanza. Click here to read the article »
Dorset Life supports Dorset Landscape!
added 19 ⁄ 06 ⁄ 08
Article on wind farm proposals in Dorset Life magazine...
A 3 page article in the June 2008 edition of Dorset Life magazine examines the Governments questionable renewable energy policy and the threat to our landscape (wildlife, tourism and peace of mind we might add) posed by the wind farm plans at East Stoke.
Click here to read the article »
Click here to read the article »
Say 'Hello Sunshine!' with Radio 4
added 19 ⁄ 06 ⁄ 08
People power and solar power - working together...
"Peter Day discovers the secret of German success. He travels to Leipzig in former East Germany where they are building the world’s biggest solar power station and visits Conergy’s state of the art manufacturing plant producing solar panels in Frankfurt-an-der-Oder."
Listen to the programme »
This item is significant in that Germany has a system of so called “feed in” tariffs. The highest rate is paid for solar energy produced by householders (not the power companies). Read in full »
Listen to the programme »
This item is significant in that Germany has a system of so called “feed in” tariffs. The highest rate is paid for solar energy produced by householders (not the power companies). Read in full »
Some sense from The Sun!
added 19 ⁄ 06 ⁄ 08
Sun features article: 'Wind turbine smashed... by wind'
'A GIANT wind turbine sparked major safety fears yesterday when it was smashed by . . . the WIND.
A huge propeller broke off the 190ft turbine close to a busy motorway link road. The 30ft blade cracked when the turbine was hit by strong gusts just two months after it began operating. Engineers were called in but could only let the propeller drop to the ground.' Read in full »
Read article on The Sun's website »
Read article on The Sun's website »
3 Down,.. 3 to go!!
added 16 ⁄ 06 ⁄ 08
Proposed turbines reduced again - Council not told!
Council officials were left in the dark as Infinergy/Alaska further reduced the number of proposed wind turbines at East Stoke, this time from 4 to 3.
The Daily Echo report of 31st May stated that the council had received a letter informing them of this decision. However, a member of the public who actually attended the planning meeting confirmed that no written correspondence whatsoever regarding the proposed alteration to the planning application had been received and that it would be inappropriate to discuss the matter until they were in receipt of this notification.
This is not the first time that the local press has misrepresented the facts:
Dorset Echo Thursday 28th June 2008:
"The 'Alaska' site at East Stoke, for which developers are still seeking planning permission, could generate a further 18 megawatts from three turbines."
3 x 2.3mw comes to 6.9 NOT 18!!!! Please go back to school Dorset Echo!
Dorset Echo Thursday 6th December 2007:
"I have been to see all the residents neighbouring the land and after answering their questions they think the idea is great."
The facts of the matter are that most of the properties visited by Mr Bond were those of which he was landlord (hence not owned by residents). None of the 30 or so houses in Middlefield Cottages (right next to the site) had been approached nor were any of the businesses in the area. The local scout camp at Buddens Farm has never been approached, despite the fact that they host over 10,000 visitors throughout each year who would be sleeping in tents, some of which would be less than 200 metres away from the nearest turbine. Read in full »
The Daily Echo report of 31st May stated that the council had received a letter informing them of this decision. However, a member of the public who actually attended the planning meeting confirmed that no written correspondence whatsoever regarding the proposed alteration to the planning application had been received and that it would be inappropriate to discuss the matter until they were in receipt of this notification.
This is not the first time that the local press has misrepresented the facts:
Other Howlers from the Daily Echo and Dorset Echo:
Dorset Echo Thursday 28th June 2008:
"The 'Alaska' site at East Stoke, for which developers are still seeking planning permission, could generate a further 18 megawatts from three turbines."
3 x 2.3mw comes to 6.9 NOT 18!!!! Please go back to school Dorset Echo!
Dorset Echo Thursday 6th December 2007:
"I have been to see all the residents neighbouring the land and after answering their questions they think the idea is great."
The facts of the matter are that most of the properties visited by Mr Bond were those of which he was landlord (hence not owned by residents). None of the 30 or so houses in Middlefield Cottages (right next to the site) had been approached nor were any of the businesses in the area. The local scout camp at Buddens Farm has never been approached, despite the fact that they host over 10,000 visitors throughout each year who would be sleeping in tents, some of which would be less than 200 metres away from the nearest turbine. Read in full »
Naturally, Common Sense!
added 17 ⁄ 05 ⁄ 08
Natural England Raise Serious Concerns about Wind Farm
Natural England have sent a letter to Purbeck District Council voicing some serious concerns about the planned turbines at East Stoke. As they quite rightly point out, the proposed site lies in the immediate vicinity of a Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and a Special Protection Area (SPA) and also lies extremely close to the boundary of the Dorset Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AoNB) - and, we should say, dominating the landscape for many miles within that area. Natural England say in the letter:
"...we believe that in it's current form, an appropriate assessment would have no alternative but to conclude that the proposed development would adversely affect the integrity of the Dorset Heathlands SPA [Special Protection Area]... Without significant ammendments to the proposal therefore, Natural England would have no alternative but to object to the application."
Please read the full letter here »
"...we believe that in it's current form, an appropriate assessment would have no alternative but to conclude that the proposed development would adversely affect the integrity of the Dorset Heathlands SPA [Special Protection Area]... Without significant ammendments to the proposal therefore, Natural England would have no alternative but to object to the application."
Please read the full letter here »
East Stoke developer's plans in disarray
added 13 ⁄ 05 ⁄ 08
Generating capacity of proposed Windfarm reduced again
Windfarm developer, Infinergy's plans to build an industrial generating plant at East Stoke were in disarray yesterday as it announced that it would be reducing the original number of planned wind turbines from 6 to 4. Under the revised plans one of the remaining turbines will be moved closer to Puddletown Road.
No further details have yet been given. The developer and landowner Will Bond will now be required to re-submit the revised plans to Purbeck District Council.
This change reduces once again the maximum claimed electrical generating capacity of the proposed Windfarm at East Stoke.
Originally Infinergy and Bond claimed 18Mw maximum generating capacity. This was later downgraded to 13.5Mw. With the latest reduction in the number of wind turbines, this figure drops yet again, to a maximum of 9.2Mw. The developer's justification for placing these huge industrial turbines in full view of an AONB (Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty) is beginning to look more and more unconvincing. Of course, the financial benefits for the landowner and Infinergy as a result of payments from Renewable Obligation Certificates (ROCs) and tax breaks through the Climate Change Levy will remain, together with the threat to East Stoke village and the rest of Purbeck. Read in full »
No further details have yet been given. The developer and landowner Will Bond will now be required to re-submit the revised plans to Purbeck District Council.
This change reduces once again the maximum claimed electrical generating capacity of the proposed Windfarm at East Stoke.
Originally Infinergy and Bond claimed 18Mw maximum generating capacity. This was later downgraded to 13.5Mw. With the latest reduction in the number of wind turbines, this figure drops yet again, to a maximum of 9.2Mw. The developer's justification for placing these huge industrial turbines in full view of an AONB (Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty) is beginning to look more and more unconvincing. Of course, the financial benefits for the landowner and Infinergy as a result of payments from Renewable Obligation Certificates (ROCs) and tax breaks through the Climate Change Levy will remain, together with the threat to East Stoke village and the rest of Purbeck. Read in full »
What a Bright Idea!
added 13 ⁄ 05 ⁄ 08
British Gas to send out 52 million energy saving light bulbs
The energy company says the initiative will be the largest of its kind ever seen in the UK and will slash carbon emissions by nine million tonnes. This is a guaranteed (not speculative) saving, 450 times more than Infinergy's most optimistic estimate of up to 20,000 tonnes. In other words, you would need to build 450 wind farms to achieve the same carbon saving! Of course, the cost would be massively higher, financially and environmentally (each turbine costs roughly £1000,000). Read in full »
Visit to Burton Wold Windfarm
added 13 ⁄ 05 ⁄ 08
From a Resident living close to proposed East Stoke site:
I have recently visited a windfarm at Burton Wold in Northamptonshire and could not believe how intrusive it was.
The turbines are about 2 thirds of the size of those proposed at Masters Pit, East Stoke but could be clearly seen from many miles away, in fact they completely dominated the whole area! I also noticed that the only building in the immediate vicinity of the turbines was the house owned by the farmer on whose land they were built.
As I entered the site and came to within half a mile of the turbines I was able to appreciate just how massive they were compared to something like electricity pylons for example.
Standing almost underneath one, the noise it made as it revolved reminded me of a cement mixer in full flow.
When I left the site, the thought of 6 of these machines, 410 feet high, dominating Wareham and the surrounding Purbeck countryside filled me with horror. Purbeck would be ruined for the foreseeable future.
The turbines are about 2 thirds of the size of those proposed at Masters Pit, East Stoke but could be clearly seen from many miles away, in fact they completely dominated the whole area! I also noticed that the only building in the immediate vicinity of the turbines was the house owned by the farmer on whose land they were built.
As I entered the site and came to within half a mile of the turbines I was able to appreciate just how massive they were compared to something like electricity pylons for example.
Standing almost underneath one, the noise it made as it revolved reminded me of a cement mixer in full flow.
When I left the site, the thought of 6 of these machines, 410 feet high, dominating Wareham and the surrounding Purbeck countryside filled me with horror. Purbeck would be ruined for the foreseeable future.
Send Your Objections Now!
added 18 ⁄ 04 ⁄ 08
Consultation continues...
Purbeck District Council are currently considering the plans to build 4 (formerly 6!) huge wind turbines at East Stoke. Now is the time to send your objections to this large industrial development in the heart of our community. Please read the information on this site, detailing the truth behind onshore wind 'farms' and send your objections as soon as possible to:
If you haven't the time to write a letter and post it, please use our ONLINE FORM to send your message to Purbeck District Council.
Despite the size and impact this planning application, the level of consultation and information supplied by Infinergy has so far been woefully inadequate.
Read in full »
The Planning Officer
Purbeck District Council
Westport House, Worgret Road
Wareham, Dorset
BH20 4PP
Purbeck District Council
Westport House, Worgret Road
Wareham, Dorset
BH20 4PP
If you haven't the time to write a letter and post it, please use our ONLINE FORM to send your message to Purbeck District Council.
Despite the size and impact this planning application, the level of consultation and information supplied by Infinergy has so far been woefully inadequate.
Read in full »
What the Environmentalists Say...
added 18 ⁄ 04 ⁄ 08
Greenpeace:
Introduction on the cover of their DVD 'The Convenient Solution'
"Becoming more efficient in the way we use energy is the most effective single step we can take to tackling climate change. Potential reductions in CO2 emissions through energy efficiency could be enormous. It should be our top priority... "
"Becoming more efficient in the way we use energy is the most effective single step we can take to tackling climate change. Potential reductions in CO2 emissions through energy efficiency could be enormous. It should be our top priority... "
Yes 2 Wind:
Guidance to campaigners on their website:
"Every wind farm proposal should be judged on its own merits. We encourage users to read the environmental impact assessment of the plan they wish to support before giving it their approval... Read in full »
"Every wind farm proposal should be judged on its own merits. We encourage users to read the environmental impact assessment of the plan they wish to support before giving it their approval... Read in full »
George Monbiot:
author many books including 'Heat', Guardian columnist and environmental campaigner makes the following observations about wind generated energy in the publication, New Left Review May /June 2007
"If either too much or too little (energy) is generated, the voltage and frequency fluctuations will crash the country's computers. If supply falls below a certain level, the whole system collapses. Not only must it be made when we want it, it must also be made in precisely the quantities we ask for. ...." Read in full »
Farmer's Claims:
added 07 ⁄ 05 ⁄ 08
A Wind farm could be a reality in Dorset by 2009, according to the landowner of the proposed Alaska Wind Farm near Wool. Read Article »
Abandoned home because of wind farm:
This is a response to a letter from Jeff Rice, printed on April 18 in the Sheffield Telegraph:
As I am Jane Davis, I hope you will allow me the time honoured right to reply to this gentleman's statements.
Noise pollution from the Wind Farm 930 metres from our home has indeed caused us to abandon our home and rent a house 5 miles away. Not an easy decision to make when your home is on your farm.
Noise monitoring equipment had been installed at our home and found breaches of the planning condition on 50% of the time. A second more recent set of monitoring carried out by the Local Council in October 2007 found three breaches of the planning condition (in a 27 hour period) but no statutory noise nuisance was proven at the time.
Subsequently (and AFTER the BWEA had sent a statement out saying we had no noise issues) it transpired that October 2007 recorded the lowest wind speed across the whole of the UK thus "our" wind farm was only operating at 11% across the whole month of its installed capacity. (These facts would have been known by the Wind Farm Developers but they chose not to inform the Council at the time..........)
The Local Government Ombudsman has only yesterday decided that our situation needs proper investigation, with all facts available to all parties and this is to happen in the near future. She is however concerned that the planning condition for noise "put in place to protect local residents" and based on the industry standard ETSU-R-97, is "Vague, open to interpretation, immeasurable and thus unenforceable".
Her judgement obviously has significant ramifications for every wind farm application (and operating wind farm) in the country, and her comments will be taken very seriously by DEFRA, BERR, CLG and the Parliamentary Ombudsman. After all there isn't a lot of point in having a planning condition in place if you cant measure it and cant enforce it is there? We already know that the Noise Working Group at the then DTI announced last year that "Aerodynamic Modulation (AM) from wind turbines is very limited in terms of the number of people affected. BUT it also concluded that the causes of AM are not fully understood and that AM cannot be predicted using current state of the art."
Therefore no developer can guarantee that no noise will emanate from their turbines, and as we have already seen, no planning condition can be put in place, using the current preferred standard, that can be enforced.
Yes I do tour the country, and indeed tonight (April 19th) we are in Cumbria, and yes I do tell (and let people hear) what has happened to us. The recording we use is of the noise from the turbines heard at our house (which we are often accused by such as Mr Rice as manufacturing). But this is freely available on CD to anyone who wishes to do a Freedom of Environment Information Request to South Holland District Council.
We know we are not the only family to suffer in this way, and we certainly don't want others to!
I can categorically state that we are only paid for our travel. Sometimes people give us a donation, but this is and has never ever been requested. We declare our expenses received against mileage and train tickets etc.
No one pays us. We do not belong to any groups. Currently our estimated financial loss to date (given that our home is deemed unmarketable by local agents) is around £250,000 and climbing.
Finally we are not funded by any mysterious "backer". And we are prepared to swear this on oath.
I hope that this clarifies the situation for your readers and maybe they would like to question why Mr Rice has found the need to invent such scurrilous accusations about people he has never met.
Jane Davis, Spalding, Lincs
Sheffield Telegraph
25 April 2008
Original Letter here »
As I am Jane Davis, I hope you will allow me the time honoured right to reply to this gentleman's statements.
Noise pollution from the Wind Farm 930 metres from our home has indeed caused us to abandon our home and rent a house 5 miles away. Not an easy decision to make when your home is on your farm.
Noise monitoring equipment had been installed at our home and found breaches of the planning condition on 50% of the time. A second more recent set of monitoring carried out by the Local Council in October 2007 found three breaches of the planning condition (in a 27 hour period) but no statutory noise nuisance was proven at the time.
Subsequently (and AFTER the BWEA had sent a statement out saying we had no noise issues) it transpired that October 2007 recorded the lowest wind speed across the whole of the UK thus "our" wind farm was only operating at 11% across the whole month of its installed capacity. (These facts would have been known by the Wind Farm Developers but they chose not to inform the Council at the time..........)
The Local Government Ombudsman has only yesterday decided that our situation needs proper investigation, with all facts available to all parties and this is to happen in the near future. She is however concerned that the planning condition for noise "put in place to protect local residents" and based on the industry standard ETSU-R-97, is "Vague, open to interpretation, immeasurable and thus unenforceable".
Her judgement obviously has significant ramifications for every wind farm application (and operating wind farm) in the country, and her comments will be taken very seriously by DEFRA, BERR, CLG and the Parliamentary Ombudsman. After all there isn't a lot of point in having a planning condition in place if you cant measure it and cant enforce it is there? We already know that the Noise Working Group at the then DTI announced last year that "Aerodynamic Modulation (AM) from wind turbines is very limited in terms of the number of people affected. BUT it also concluded that the causes of AM are not fully understood and that AM cannot be predicted using current state of the art."
Therefore no developer can guarantee that no noise will emanate from their turbines, and as we have already seen, no planning condition can be put in place, using the current preferred standard, that can be enforced.
Yes I do tour the country, and indeed tonight (April 19th) we are in Cumbria, and yes I do tell (and let people hear) what has happened to us. The recording we use is of the noise from the turbines heard at our house (which we are often accused by such as Mr Rice as manufacturing). But this is freely available on CD to anyone who wishes to do a Freedom of Environment Information Request to South Holland District Council.
We know we are not the only family to suffer in this way, and we certainly don't want others to!
I can categorically state that we are only paid for our travel. Sometimes people give us a donation, but this is and has never ever been requested. We declare our expenses received against mileage and train tickets etc.
No one pays us. We do not belong to any groups. Currently our estimated financial loss to date (given that our home is deemed unmarketable by local agents) is around £250,000 and climbing.
Finally we are not funded by any mysterious "backer". And we are prepared to swear this on oath.
I hope that this clarifies the situation for your readers and maybe they would like to question why Mr Rice has found the need to invent such scurrilous accusations about people he has never met.
Jane Davis, Spalding, Lincs
Sheffield Telegraph
25 April 2008
Original Letter here »
website designed and built by Blooming Digital 