Letters

Dear all,

I have just submitted my objection to the Lluest y Gwynt Wind Farm project, Reference: DNS/3246727 - https://planningcasework.service.gov.wales/case/CAS-01278-X9Q8S0

My objection includes references to the Waun Hesgog and Esgair Galed Energy projects.

Best wishes,

Wyck

————————————————————————

There were still very few wind farms of any size in September of 2008 when a consultant of Dulas Ltd knocked on our door to ask permission to put sound monitoring equipment in our garden to assess the potential noise impact of a number of large wind turbines planned on the ridge opposite us against the natural sounds around our house, Bronwion, which was located in the forest above Cwm Einion. The planned turbines were a small, but for us very intrusive, part of the Nant-y-moch wind farm project. It was the very first we heard of it. Until that day we had always been in favour of using the power of the wind to generate electricity and could not think of any reason why anyone would object to this. We were aware of the inappropriate peat disturbance during the construction of the only fairly large wind farm we knew of, Cefn Croes, but believed this was the exception and that future wind farms would in general be located near industrial areas, close to where the generated power was most needed. When we first came to Wales, in 1974, all the streams were still teeming with trout. It was in that same year that we read an article in the Cambrian News warning of the acidification of such streams due to the massive coniferous plantations carried out by the Forestry Commission. This warning was totally ignored and it is now rare to see any trout in Welsh streams and rivers. Who would have thought that some of the most beautiful and for hydro-geological reasons environmentally most important wild areas of Wales, which had not been devastated by these inappropriate plantations, might some day get covered with giant turbines!

Many years before Dulas knocked on our door I had followed a course at the Centre for Alternative Technology, organised by Dulas Ltd, on how to install solar panels and had indeed, with their guidance, put a panel on our roof. So I had great trust in Dulas Ltd, who were clearly opposed to erecting wind turbines in this sensitive area in their Tan 8 consultation response in 2004. At the time I honestly believed that anything Dulas was involved in would not just be good for the environment, but also fair to anyone whose property might be adversely affected by situations such as close proximity to wind turbines and reasonable compensation would be offered for loss of property value. My wife and I had bought our house, situated in a very remote location and at close to 300 metres altitude, in 1977. We had renovated it ourselves while still young, but had now reached an age where we needed seriously to consider moving to a more appropriate location, somewhere where we would not get snowed up, often for well over a week, during most winters.

We were totally astonished when Dulas' consultant informed us that the industry never paid compensation since close proximity of turbines had no adverse impact on property values or saleability. Quite the contrary, he assured us: since many people loved the sight of turbines, close proximity might actually increase the value of a property! So despite not having anywhere to move to, we put our house on the market with Sanderson Estate Agent. Right from the start we had a large number of viewers, most of them, we felt, would have been keen to buy our house if it had not been for the wind farm project.

Obviously we were obliged to inform them of the project. Sanderson was in the habit of contacting every viewer and kept a record of why potential buyers had backed off and the reason was always the same: none wanted to live in close proximity to the planned turbines. When we put this to SSE's project manager she suggested that we advise any potential buyer to contact her, so she could explain that the turbines would have no adverse impact on the value of the property! How on earth we were expected to persuade viewers, who had already made up their minds that they did not want to live in close proximity to these giant turbines, to contact her, was quite beyond us.

So there could be absolutely no doubt that our whole future would be wrecked should this project get the go ahead. There was no way that we would ever be able to move to a more suitable location in old age. We were left with no choice other than to spend the next four years of our life engaged in a grossly unfair and unequal fight against this large wind farm developer. What we detested especially was the fact that by their stubbornly unreasonable stance the industry drove us into the arms of some nasty, Trump-like climate change deniers who we were therefore forced to collaborate with; people we would, under normal circumstances, want nothing at all to do with! 

One thing in our favour was that there was a lot of opposition to erecting wind turbines in the often stunningly beautiful places where new wind farms were being planned. The Nant-y-moch area, which should have been given the National Park status in 1974, was a prime example. So despite the high community benefits promised to the surrounding villages should the project get the go-ahead, we had a great deal of support from the residents of these villages, for which we were very grateful. They might have resented missing out on the community benefits, which, by the way, they would NOT have been allowed to share with us, or with other victims of the project, as this would have been an admission that close proximity has an adverse impact on house prices or their saleability.

A massive number of opponents to the project turned up when we organised a protest walk up Bryniau Rhyddion led by author Jim Perrin and an exhibition in Aberystwyth, organised by the Cambrian Mountains Society, showing the impact of the turbines on the Pumlumon/Nant-y-moch area, was extremely well attended.

It was brought to our attention that in countries such as Denmark there was far less opposition to wind farms than here. The reason was that it was standard procedure to pay fair compensation to any adversely affected residents who were therefore not put in a position where they had no choice but to fight such projects. Clearly by denying the problem the wind industry in this country were, and still are, creating their own opposition. I remember that, at some stage, Renewable UK brought out a survey, especially designed to prove that there was no adverse impact on the value or saleability of properties within five kilometres of turbines. But properties within two kilometres of wind turbines were excluded. The reason given, was that not enough properties within two kilometres had been sold to be included in such a survey. The end conclusion remained the same, namely that there was NO adverse impact on the value or saleability of any property within five kilometres of a wind turbine! It would be hard to find a clearer example of what could only be regarded as corrupted evidence in the extreme!!!

I mentioned above that Dulas Ltd, the consultants of that project as well as of the Lluest y Gwynt project, had been vehemently against building a wind farm in this area in their TAN8 Consultation Response, dated 5th November 2004. Of course this was well before they had a financial interest, but they could hardly have been clearer in their view that the area is not suitable for large scale wind farm development. Their Consultation document reads follows:

‘The Nant y Moch SSA is a curious inclusion. Other paragraphs within the guidance highlight the need for nature conservation. Nant y Moch and Plynlymon are nationally important catchment areas for the Severn and Wye rivers. Development here may considerably alter hydrological patterns and affect the wider ecology. Further consideration should be given to this SSA. Moreover, road access into this area is seriously restricted and it is considered that only very large Section 36 scale projects would be able to commit the funds to upgrading the roads in this area to allow suitable access for turbine components and funding the necessary grid infrastructure. In addition, this SSA lies very close to the Plynlymon range of mountains which are nationally acclaimed. For these two reasons, we are not convinced that Nant Y Moch SSA will deliver the required capacity.’ 

The British Wind Energy Association (now Renewable UK) could not have been clearer in their opposition to erecting large scale wind turbines in this area either. Their Consultation Response read:

‘The 7 identified SA’s have their own constraints which will hinder large scale development. Extensive forestry, site access and slope gradient appear to render Nant y Mhor (their spelling) impractical for large scale wind farm development. Industry considers that the strategic assessment of the opportunities for major wind power capacity had used some inappropriate criteria. In contrast, the assessments failed to include some key technical criteria which significantly impacts on the viability of the resulting designated areas. In particular, gradients over 12 (unsuitable for wind farm installation), large scale forestry which cause impact upon power output, and site access difficulties all apply to the Nant-y-Moch strategic area.

It is difficult to understand how this area has been chosen as an SA,’ was their verdict! In June 2012 SSE held a final exhibition in Penrhyn-coch where we were told that the application for the wind farm would definitely be submitted at short notice. Now at the time of the exhibition it rained... and it rained as it may never have rained in Wales before, more especially not in June! It caused severe flooding in Talybont, Dol-y-Bont, Capel Bangor and Parc Y Llyn, where shops, supermarkets and the Ystwyth Medical Group Surgery suffered 3-5ft of flood water and rescue teams needed to be called in!

Shortly after that my wife was diagnosed with colon cancer, so we were forced to take our house off the market. Just then Dulas' head consultant drove past our house to show his girlfriend where the wind farm was to be located. He stopped below our gate and told my

wife that the application would be submitted very soon. 'I don't know what you have against wind turbines,' said his girlfriend, 'I think they are beautiful'. My wife answered that she had other problems now, that she needed urgent surgery followed by chemotherapy. 'That is what comes with old age,' remarked the consultant, 'my mother has Parkinson.'

Not long after the consultant's visit the project was put on hold. Obviously we could not put the house back on the market until my wife had had her surgery and had recovered from 6 months of chemotherapy, but by that time it was clear that the application was not going to be submitted. We were told that it was the opposition that had persuaded SSE not to go ahead. Though this seemed a huge compliment on our address, we never believed it. In the four years of opposition SSE and Dulas emphatically denied all problems. I am in absolutely no doubt that the one and only reason why the project was abandoned was that SSE were now fully aware, as Dulas had pointed out as far back as 2004, that this area is vital for soaking up excessive rainwater to try and prevent the sort of flooding that took place in June 2012 and that erecting turbines precisely there – pumping substantial amounts of concrete into the hillsides for the foundations of the turbines and constructing the necessary road infra structure to be able to service each and every turbine – was thoroughly irresponsible.

When we put our house, which had been unsaleable for over four years, on the market again a sale was agreed within the fortnight and we moved to Cwmtydu, so the only reason for objecting to this plan is for environmental reason, the increased flood risk and, as Dulas pointed out in 2004, the fact that the Pumlumon range of mountains are nationally acclaimed and too magnificent to spoil! This project, if carried out, will only increase the flooding risk caused by Afon Rheidol, but it is indeed the Rheidol that caused the flooding at Capel Bangor and Parc Y Llyn. The concern raised by Dulas Ltd in 2004 may have been about the hydrological impact on the Wye and the Severn, but you need not be a hydrologist to understand that interfering with the catchment areas of a short river such as Afon Rheidol has a far greater impact than interfering with the catchment areas of long rivers such as the Severn and the Wye since far more of the flow of a short river is derived from its catchment area.

But what is even more worrying is that two even far larger wind farms, Waun Hesgog and Esgair Galed Energy Park are planned in the very same area. Approval for all three projects would not just be an ecological devastation, it would create a massive increase of the flooding risk, not just of Capel Bangor and Parc Y Llyn, but also of Tal-y-bont and Dôl-y- bont and even Borth. To evaluate the Lluest y Gwynt wind farm project without taking account of the Waun Hesgog and Esgair Galed Energy Park projects alongside it, would be a grave mistake. To take account of the true impact of these projects they ought to be assessed as one.

Obviously no one can predict if or when such flooding as took place in June 2012 will take place again. And, obviously, even for a hydrologist it is quite impossible to calculate the precise extent of the increased risk should these projects be given the go ahead. But the plain fact that the risk will increase cannot possibly denied and clearly such risk is wholly unacceptable. The Aldi application on a site far less likely to suffer flooding than Pac Y Llyn, was rejected purely because of this flooding risk, so it would make absolutely no sense whatsoever to ignore it and allow this application to be approved! The proposed location is a prime example of a site that should never, ever have been considered for wind farm development precisely because of the likely increased risk of flooding due to Climate Change, which is surely what wind farms are meant to prevent.

Your plans—and those of the many other companies involved in ‘development’— threaten environmentally sensitive landscapes which provide a small, diminishing refuge for endangered wildlife and flora. Surely you are aware that there are very few undeveloped spaces left in heavily overcrowded Britain, spaces where the activities and anxieties of modern man do not dominate? These spaces need to be protected and preserved because their loss would result in a hellish, claustrophobic nightmare, ruled by complex infrastructure and a virtual, digital reality. Lives and jobs would be limited to maintaining this massive energy consuming network, dedicated to serving the production of more unhappy, frantic people to swell the numbers in already disgracefully overcrowded Britain.

Surely there has got to be some stage when the absurdity of this mad ‘development’ idea gets through to the essential suppressed wisdom that lies beneath the commercial preoccupation with gain and self-importance? Incidentally, ‘develop’ means to ‘open up,’ so it is not quite the right word for projects concerned with closing down natural habitats and filling them in with industrial wastelands.

Consider: if the giant wind factories with pylons and wide access roads were to materialise in the uplands and valleys of Wales, the land and landscape would be ruined forever. A brief look at the human record shows that clearing up after industrialisation gets postponed indefinitely—regardless of promises and obligations. The steel, concrete, discarded machinery and  pollution would be a permanent blight. 

Why continue to argue for a totally unrealistic fantasy about a clean, green technological future when wind is demonstrably unreliable? The fantasy is now under critical review. In the Spring, elections are due in Wales and a change of government is extremely likely and hoped for by most in Wales. In all probability, giant wind turbine developments will not be favoured. Would it not, therefore, be a sensible move to back off and find a more modest, less divisive way of making a living and providing employment?

BACK OFF, BUTE!

SALLY and JASMINE GEORGE

For Wild Wales Trust