Big one here - this is a summary of the presentation made by the wind energy working group to parish councillors recently.
Grounds for opposing the proposed
FCC Industrial Wind Turbine Installation near
Cranfield
Background
There is a proposal from FCC (the landfill site operators) to build 8
industrial wind turbines on the edge of Cranfield. They intend to submit a
formal planning application at the end of February. The development is called
the ‘Brogborough Wind Energy Project’, but is in fact much closer to Cranfield.
It will dominate the Marston vale public amenity and will be between 500m and 900m from houses in Wood End,
Court Road and Rectory Lane. It is also likely to affect many more households
as well as those people who use the Marston Vale amenity. We are not against
renewable energy, but this is clearly the wrong location.
Marston Vale Public Amenity
Marston Vale has
seen many recent initiatives and much investment finally bring tranquillity and
enjoyment to local residents. They have
increasingly been walking, cycling, horse-riding and enjoying the peace,
wildlife and views from the many paths, bridleways and recreational spots. The
benefits of the Marston Thrift SSI, the Forest of Marston Vale and Woodland
Trust planting schemes, Bunyan, Greensand and Clay Way footpaths, and the Route
51 Sustrans all transform the landscape to attract visitors. This will all be
threatened by the overwhelming dominating impact of the proposed wind
turbines. Rights of way have been lost,
diverted when the landfill site was running and these turbines threaten again
the rights of way around the Brogborough site and dramatically reduce the
amenity value of the routes around turbines.
Landscape
Visually the
proposed wind turbines will divert the eye from the natural features of the
Vale at precisely the point where locals enjoy great views across the restored
Vale from and to the Greensand and the Holcot ridge. The turbines are dispersed
in close clusters, which exaggerate their visual impact and unlike usual
turbine installations are perversely proposed in a Valley and not near the top
of a hill. Many homes in the area will, because of the geography, be in direct
sight of the top and centre of the blades or looking down on them and from very
close which draws the eye, breaks the horizon sightlines from many locations
and has a cumulative negative impact when combined with the soon to be
constructed Covanta incinerator, landfill site, and the recently approved
turbine at the Forest Centre as well as the noisy Brogborough generators.
At 90m high, the
blades will be up to 50m taller than houses along the High Street, Court Road,
Marston Hill for example and thus are dramatically out of scale and break the
natural horizon of the Clay ridge on which the village is built. This partial
view of the rotors is considered more disturbing.
Wildlife
Holcot Wood and
Marston Thrift, as ancient woodlands, have well established Pipistrelle bats,
owls, newts, butterflies, badgers, foxes and birds that are attracted to the
area because of the rich biodiversity. Our concern is for the survival of these
animals as their feeding habitat is in the same lower lying land where turbines
are proposed and great effort has been made to create a healthy green corridor
between the woods to attract all visitors, human and animal. These ancient
woods and their wildlife are the jewels of the area and this proposal will
threaten their value.
Noise intrusion
Noise is unwanted sound and therefore whilst music at 70 db may be
perfectly acceptable to the ear, a chain saw creating the same sound level,
would be considered unpleasant. However, existing background noise plays an
important factor too. A fly beating its wings against the inside of a bedroom
window at night is actually presenting very little noise, but in an otherwise
quiet environment, its effect is so severe that the occupant has to get out of
bed and remove it before sleep is possible.
Sound meters measure sound. Humans beings perceive some sound as noise.
The majority of noise from modern turbines is generated by the blades,
rather than the gearbox mounted at the top of the tower. The blades produce a cocktail of sounds
mainly through a process known as wind shear.
If a steady laminar flow of air could pass evenly over the turbine
blades, very little noise would result.
However, even on a predominately flat terrain, there will be a wind
gradient, whereby the wind speed falls away as it nears ground level. A wind speed of 10m per second at the top of
a 60m diameter rotor, may only be 7m per second at the bottom. The result is
that the turbine is being driven by fast winds at the top and slow winds at the
bottom. The result is air spill and cavitation which causes noise.
In the real world other factors come into play too and these will also
affect the wind gradient. The site at Cranfield presents some major challenges
in this respect because, far from being a flat terrain, the position of the
turbines will effectively be at the bottom of a basin with wooded areas both
upwind and downwind with Cranfield village forming the rim of the basin. A change of wind direction of only a few
degrees will open up a completely new topography to the wind and to the
possibilities of wind shear noise. The
wooded areas will change seasonally too and it would be impossible to predict
the resulting effects on the wind gradient, or the type of noise eventually
generated.
Low Frequency Noise nuisance
The noise standards which are contained within PPS22 deal only in sound
levels as measured by a sound level meter and will discount sound frequencies
below the human hearing range as irrelevant. However, in recent years very low
frequencies and even Infrasound have been found around wind turbines and they
have been shown to be the most likely cause of what has become known as 'Wind
Turbine Syndrome'. Dr Alec Salt of Washington University Medical School
believes he can explain the biology, having discovered that in low background
sound conditions, the Outer Hair Cells of the ear are twice as sensitive to low
frequency sounds as the Inner Hair cells are to audio frequency sound at the
same sound level. This should mean that residents living in rural environments
are more susceptible to low frequency sounds than those living in a more noisy
environment - and this does seem to be the case. The perception of these low frequency sounds
by the human body gives rise to anxiety, stress, panic attacks, increased heart
rate and elevated blood pressure. Some
residents near turbines have even abandoned their homes as they find it is
impossible to live there. These people
are not cranks, for to leave ones home must surely be a move of last resort.
The 60m tower height and 60m blade diameter will mean that Cranfield
village will take the full impact of any unwanted wind shear noise. Low frequency sounds, if generated, can
travel a very long way and are not attenuated by buildings which they pass straight
through. Separation of the turbines is
the only known solution and a 1.5km exclusion zone should be the minimum
requirement. Many countries are pressing
for greater distances.
Scale of the turbine structures
These structures are huge! They will stand over 5
times the height of the church tower. The 60m span of the rotors is similar to
that of a Boeing 747 Jumbo jet and the tips of the blades are designed to be
moving at up to 200 mph! These 8 turbines will completely dominate the vale and
be seen from miles around.
Proximity to habitation – Cranfield!
FCC have conveniently trimmed Cranfield off the top of
all maps issued. The closest house will be only 440m away, and houses in Wood End, Court Road and Rectory Lane will
be between 500m and 900m - but the
turbines are likely to affect many more households as well as those people who
use the Marston Vale Forest amenity.
The ‘World
Health Organisation’ recommend a minimum separation of 2km from residential properties. Scotland
already have a guideline of 2km for planning applications. For England, there
is a bill currently in the ‘House of Lords’ sponsored by Lord Reay ‘Wind Turbines (Minimum Distance from
Residential Premises) Bill [HL] 2012-13’. It recommends that Wind Turbines of 50m to 100m should have a
minimum separation from residential properties of 1500m. Even this lower limit would exclude all 8 of the proposed
turbines. Note that about 75% of the
houses in Cranfield (about 4000 people)
as well as both schools will be within 1500m
of the turbines. Our research to date has not been able to find another wind
turbine installation in the UK with so many people living in such close
proximity.
In the House of Lords, Lord Reay stated:
“ Wind farm noise differs from other continuous forms of
noise, .... It has a rhythmic, pulsing quality, with at times a vibrating
effect which many have found too invasive and disturbing to live with. It can
quite obviously seriously damage people's health.”
Milton Keynes Council are currently challenging a wind
farm developer through the courts on the basis that there should be a 2km
separation from housing.
It is a sensible and well structured document. It focuses on wind power
and is fully up to date, recognising the 7 turbine development at Petsoe, the
newly approved 10 turbine development at Langford (Biggleswade), the single
turbine approved in the Marston Vale Country Park, Coventa with its tall
chimney, and this latest 8 turbine proposal on the edge of Cranfield. Marston
Vale Forest is specifically identified along with the Chilterns as ‘areas
subject to national landscape designations’ It states that ‘a wind
energy development is most likely to be seen as a positive feature if it is
positioned beyond the 2km zone from communities to avoid extreme dominance of
the structures in the view’. Note that every one of the approx 2500 homes in
Cranfield is within 2km of the proposed turbines.
The Consultation Document describes the likelihood of approval for a
7-11 turbine development as ‘Not Suitable’ on several counts.
Even for a 3-6 turbine development, the likelihood of approval is described as ‘Low
potential’, ‘Unacceptable
impact’, ‘Out of scale with the settlements’ and ‘would bring
significant visual intrusion and an unacceptable cumulative impact’.
The conclusion is that development should only be permitted on a ‘Minor
scale’ and that with the Existing approved developments in regard to renewable energy,
the ‘CBC
proportion (is) met’. This policy document needs to be ratified and implemented
before any future wind farm development is considered.
Compensation
By way of compensation, FCC are offering an annual payment of £7200 to
be dispersed across all local parishes!
Conclusion
Opposing this development does not mean that we do not support renewable
energy. The issue is that these huge turbines should not be constructed in an
area designated as an SSSI and public amenity for woodland and wildlife
restoration. Also it should not be constructed so close to so many homes
principally in Cranfield. Just because you may not see the turbines, does not
mean that you won’t be affected by them.
This is clearly an unsuitable location to build an industrial wind
turbine installation. The site has not been chosen for its suitability - it has
been chosen because FCC already own it.
We therefore implore the Parish Council to agree to oppose in principle
the FCC planning application soon to be submitted.
No comments:
Post a Comment