Chamber and committees

Aileen Jackson submission of 3 August 2021

PE1864/QQQQ - Increase the ability of communities to influence planning decisions for onshore windfarms

It is my view that RenewableUK, the voice of the wind and solar power industry, and the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS) are keen to demonstrate that there is overwhelming public support for the development of onshore and offshore windfarms, despite increasingly vocal protests from host communities and from environmentalists concerned for the damage caused to peat lands, birds and other wildlife.

So how can RenewableUK justify announcements like this, from a press release in May: ‘Support for building onshore wind farms remains overwhelmingly high at 70 per cent – with levels of support exactly the same among people who live within five miles of a windfarm as those living elsewhere’?

I am concerned that the answer may be in the use of statistics and framing the questions to give the pollsters the answers they want, or by asking the opinions of only a select group of the public. This approach means that there is a real risk that the views of those forced to accept industrial wind turbines as their near neighbours are being obscured.

Since 2013, when most turbines were under 150m, the Scottish Government has recognised that there are adverse environmental impacts of windfarms on communities, and recommends a minimum separation distance of 2km. If the adverse impacts of wind turbines are recognised to affect rural host communities rather than urban communities, it would seem sensible to weight the respondents in a poll of opinions regarding onshore windfarms in favour of rural residents. And if the majority of turbines in the UK are in Scotland, (where there are more turbines than in the three other countries in the UK added together) https://www.renewableuk.com/page/UKWEDSearch wouldn’t it be logical that the majority of respondents to a poll on wind turbines should be from Scotland?

The latest RenewableUK poll conducted by YouGov claimed to show ‘overwhelming support’ for onshore windfarms, but the questions did not define either turbine heights or how many turbines comprise a windfarm. There would obviously be a big difference in the acceptability of a 20m turbine and a 260m turbine at the bottom of your garden. Of the 1,700 respondents to the poll, only 7 per cent (119) were from Scotland. That is 0.002 per cent of the Scottish population. Of those 119, only 38 (32 per cent) replied that they lived within five miles of a windfarm. That is 0.0007 per cent of the Scottish population. Choosing so few respondents from the UK area with the most onshore turbines in a poll seeking to determine public opinion on the issue makes the results inherently unreliable.

In contrast, there were 192 respondents from London. Why ask Londoners their opinion of living within five miles of an onshore turbine when there are none anywhere near? They can have no idea of the adverse impacts of noise, disruption to water supplies, overwhelming visual intrusion and impacts on property prices caused by living near a large windfarm.

Even the paltry 38 Scottish rural respondents were not within 2 km, but 8 km (5 miles) of a windfarm. This distance is likely to include many rural residents who receive ‘community benefit’ from the windfarm developer, but are too far away to suffer any direct adverse impact. The survey should have focused on rural residents within 2 to 3 km of a windfarm likely to suffer adverse impact.

I reiterate my concern that RenewableUK has interpreted results from a statistically skewed section of the UK public to show their interpretation of ‘overwhelming’ support for onshore windfarms. As the mouthpiece of the renewable industry, it might be expected that any poll would be biased in favour of commercial concerns. It is more worrying that results from this and similarly unreliable and biased polls are widely quoted by mainstream media such as the BBC and used by the Government to underpin policy, justifying the push for further expansion of windfarms in the name of reducing carbon emissions, regardless of impacts on hapless rural residents and environmental damage.

The most recent BEIS poll of public attitudes in March 2021 is equally concerning. Of the 267 respondents from Scotland (6.6 per cent of the sample) only 47 were rural respondents - more likely to know what it is like to live next to a windfarm of industrial proportions. BEIS poll results suggested that 83 per cent of the Scottish populace are in support of renewables providing our electricity, but even the BEIS acknowledged that the numbers were too small to be statistically significant. (Personal communication with Scotland Against Spin).

It’s high time that we had a proper survey of public opinion in Scotland, where the majority of all UK on shore turbines are located and where planning permission is granted by Scottish Ministers against the will of local people for some of the tallest onshore turbines in the world. It’s time that the people of rural Scotland are not just regarded as collateral damage by both the Scottish and UK Governments.