Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Grid Link involves over 250km of high voltage lines held up by 750 massive
pylons, running through Cork, Limerick, Waterford, Wexford, Tipperary,
Kilkenny, Laois, Carlow, Wicklow, Kildare and Dublin.
Grid West would have 100km of line and 300 pylons running through Mayo,
Galway, Roscommon, Sligo and Leitrim. The Meath-Tyrone line would have
140km of line and 410 pylons linking Meath, Cavan, Monaghan, Armagh and
Tyrone, while the Laois-Kilkenny line would run for 26km and include 80
pylons.
1. Introduction
2. The Publics Right to Participate in Decision-Making
3. The National Renewable Energy Action Programme (NREAP) and Strategic
Environmental Assessment
4. The Strategic Environmental Assessment Process for Grid25
4.1 General
4.2 Failure to inform the public in an adequate, timely and effective manner
4.3 Failure to taking due account of the outcome of the public participation in
the decision-making
4.4 Failure to provide for early public participation, when all options are open
and effective public participation can take place
5. Current Legal Proceedings in Relation to the Renewable Energy
Programme
6. Conclusion
1. Introduction
Eirgrid is proceeding with its Grid Link Programme in the South and East of
Ireland as part of the massive expansion of the high voltage grid system in
Ireland to facilitate a programme of 40% of electricity to be sourced from
renewables, predominately wind energy, by 2020. It is currently in a public
consultation process in relation to this Grid Link programme and this
Submission has been submitted on behalf of the European Platform Against
Windfarms. The European Platform Against Windfarms (EPAW) was founded
on October 4th 2008 by a small number of federations, associations and other
groups from four EU countries. It now has 621 member organisations, from 24
countries. It is based in Ireland. The Irish Member Groups are listed on the
EPAW website[1]. The aim of EPAW is to defend the interests of its members
which are either:
opposing one or more wind farm proposals;
or questioning the effectiveness of wind farms as a tool for solving the
problems of man and the planet;
or defending the flora, fauna and landscapes from damage caused by wind
farms, directly or through environmental degradation such as erosion, water
contamination and bush fires;
or generally fighting against the damaging effects of wind farms on tourism,
the economy, peoples quality of life, the value of their properties and,
increasingly often, their health;
or a combination of the above.
The Grid Link Programme, with all its unacceptable environmental
impacts, not least the industrialisation of the Irish landscape, is solely to
facilitate the implementation of Irelands renewable energy programme,
which in turn is almost exclusively focused on electricity generation
from windfarms . There is no economic, technical or legal requirement
for this wind energy programme. Indeed, until wind speeds of the order
of double the regions average wind speed are reached, this new
investment in wind turbines and associated grid infrastructure, will not
generate any useful electricity. The existing generation system and its
grid infrastructure will therefore be continued to be required for the
situation, where the wind speed is less than double the average, which
naturally is the majority of the situation. The benefits of this renewable
programme and its 7,145 MW of wind energy, some three thousand wind
turbines, and a doubling of the existing high voltage grid by some 5,000
km of high voltage lines are negligible and complete disproportionate to
its unacceptable impacts, both financial and environmental.
The core issues in this Submission are:
The European Community wishes to express its great satisfaction with the
present Convention as an essential step forward in further encouraging and
supporting public awareness in the field of environment and better
implementation of environmental legislation in the UN/ECE region, in
accordance with the principle of sustainable development.
Finally, the Community reiterates its declaration made upon signing the
Convention that the Community institutions will apply the Convention within
the framework of their existing and future rules on access to documents and
other relevant rules of Community law in the field covered by the Convention.
While Ireland only ratified the Convention in June 2012, it applied here since
2005 based on the primacy of Community Law, as Ireland is a Member State
of the European Union.
If we look at the preamble of the Convention, see below, what one sees is
only what is common sense, that decision-making should be based on sound
Recognizing also that every person has the right to live in an environment
adequate to his or her health and well-being, and the duty, both individually
and in association with others, to protect and improve the environment for the
benefit of present and future generations;
Considering that, to be able to assert this right and observe this duty, citizens
must have access to information, be entitled to participate in decision-making
and have access to justice in environmental matters, and acknowledging in
this regard that citizens may need assistance in order to exercise their rights;
The starting point, the renewable energy potential and the energy mix of each
Member State vary. It is therefore necessary to translate the Community 20 %
target into individual targets for each Member State, with due regard to a fair
and adequate allocation taking account of Member States different starting
points and potentials, including the existing level of energy from renewable
sources and the energy mix. It is appropriate to do this by sharing the
required total increase in the use of energy from renewable sources between
Member States on the basis of an equal increase in each Member States
share weighted by their GDP, modulated to reflect their starting points, and by
accounting in terms of gross final consumption of energy, with account being
taken of Member States past efforts with regard to the use of energy from
renewable sources.
In other words, the 20% renewable energy target was dished out to the
Member States based on what level of renewable energy resources they
already had, some like Sweden having considerable existing hydro sources,
and a fudge factor based on GDP. Neither were the proper public
participation procedures followed in the development of this Directive, as not
only was there an absence of environmental information on what was to be
built, why it was to be built and where it was to be built, but also the public
concerned were not contacted and provided with an opportunity to participate
in this decision-making.
This dysfunctional and legally non-compliant process continued throughout its
implementation. Member States were given little more than a year to adopt a
National Renewable Energy Action Plan (NREAP) defining how their allocated
National Target would be met. However, EU legislation which implements
Article 7 of the Aarhus Convention[5] requires that such plans or programmes
related to Energy, which lead to future development consent of projects
regulated by the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive, must undergo a
Strategic Environmental Assessment before adoption. Note: Wind energy and
high voltage transmissions lines are regulated by the Directive on
Environmental Impact Assessment (87/337/EEC as amended). Therefore, full
compliance with the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive
(2001/42/EC) should have been ensured before the NREAPs were adopted.
This did not happen, not only in Ireland, but also in the other Member States.
The NREAPs were adopted by by-passing the Strategic Environmental
Assessment and associated public participation. Indeed, if one considers the
NREAP template produced by the EU[6], then the only Section which can be
considered related to environmental issues and assessment was Section 5.3:
Nineteen of the Member States left this completely blank failing to fill out the
table in above. The others essentially provided little or limited information,
such as the UK, where the Renewable Energy Strategy predating the NREAP
contained no environmental considerations of the impact of the programme. In
Irelands case the NREAP went from Section 5.2 to Section 5.4. It had no
Section 5.3.
EPAW has repeatedly brought this matter to the attention of both the EU
Commission and the Member State administrations. The EU Commissions
response following a meeting between EPAW members and officials of DG
Environment and DG Energy on the 3rd December 2010 in Brussels was that:
60. The term framework must reflect the objective of taking into account the
environmental effects of any decision laying down requirements for the future
development consent of projects even as that decision is being taken.
62. During the legislative procedure the Netherlands and Austria proposed
that it should be made clear that the framework must determine the location,
nature or size of projects requiring environmental assessment. In other words,
very specific, conclusive requirements would have been needed to trigger an
environmental assessment. As this proposal was not accepted, the concept of
framework is not restricted to the determination of those factors.
64. Plans and programmes may, however, influence the development consent
of individual projects in very different ways and, in so doing, prevent
appropriate account from being taken of environmental effects. Consequently,
65. This becomes particularly clear in a criterion taken into account by the
Member States when they appraise the likely significance of the
environmental effects of plans or programmes in accordance with Article 3(5):
they are to take account of the degree to which the plan or programme sets a
framework for projects and other activities, either with regard to the location,
nature, size and operating conditions or by allocating resources (first indent of
point 1 of Annex II). The term framework must therefore be construed
flexibly. It does not require any conclusive determinations, but also covers
forms of influence that leave room for some discretion.
66. The wording [of point 1 of Annex II] implies that the various
characteristics may be concerned in varying intensity and, therefore, possibly
not at all. This alone is consistent with the objective of making all preliminary
decisions for the development consent of projects subject to an environmental
assessment if they are likely to have significant effects on the environment.
Where a national court has before it, on the basis of its national law, an action
for annulment of a national measure constituting a plan or programme
within the meaning of Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of the effects of certain
plans and programmes on the environment and it finds that the plan or
programme was adopted in breach of the obligation laid down by that
directive to carry out a prior environmental assessment, that court is obliged
to take all the general or particular measures provided for by its national law
in order to remedy the failure to carry out such an assessment, including the
possible suspension or annulment of the contested plan or programme.
Therefore, the National Renewable Energy Action Plan was adopted in a
manner which was not lawful, having by-passed the Strategic Environmental
Assessment and associated public participation, which was required by EU
and National law. Neither is it lawful to continue with this national renewable
energy programme, in particular as at no stage were environmental
considerations taken into the decision-making. Indeed, the Energy Policy
Framework of 2007, which predated the NREAP and lead to its development,
provided zero information on the environmental impacts and costs of the
renewable programme. As Section 3.10.3 clarified:
We are setting very ambitious targets for expanding the role of renewable
energy notably the target of 33% of electricity consumption to come from
renewable resources by 2020. There are considerable challenges inherent in
realising these ambitious targets. The growth of emerging technologies
remains constrained by their relative cost. (Offshore wind which is capital
intensive and technologically challenging is a case in point). High fossil fuel
prices have contributed to making renewables more cost competitive but
investment costs do remain a key challenge. The Government considers
that the balance of social costs and benefits must be recognised as
positive and that is our starting point.
It is also worth pointing out, that both the Irish Administration and the EU were
well aware in period 2009 to 2010 during the development of the NREAPs,
that a Strategic Environmental Assessment was required. Not only is there
written evidence of this[9], but additionally after the NREAPs had been
submitted to the EU Commission on the 30th June 2010, a formal clarification
was sent jointly by the Unit Heads of DG Energy and DG Environment in the
EU Commission on the 7th July 2010 clarifying that a Strategic Environmental
Assessment on the NREAP was not necessarily obliged at this stage of the
process. Their position being that if a Member State had decided not to
include in its NREAP specific mandatory measures to comply with, then a
Strategic Environmental Assessment was not required at this stage.
Approximately 828 km of new circuits will be required between now and 2025
to meet the needs of consumers and generators. This represents an increase
of about 14% on the total length of the existing network. Of this, 568 km will
need to be at 400 kV, 92 km will need to be at 220 kV or higher; the remaining
150 km will be at 110 kV. In addition to these circuits, others will be needed to
connect many of the new generators to the Grid
Member States shall identify the public for the purposes of paragraph 2,
including the public affected or likely to be affected by, or having an
interest in, the decision-making subject to this Directive, including
relevant non-governmental organisations, such as those promoting
environmental protection and other organisations concerned.
The Commission sent its reasoned opinion on 3 November 2009 and Ireland
replied on 5 February 2010. The new legislation adopted by Ireland on 3 May
2011, the Planning and Development (Strategic Environmental Assessment)
Each Party shall ensure that in the decision due account is taken of the
outcome of the public participation.
Page 158 of the Aarhus Convention: An Implementation Guide [16] further
defines that
The type and extent of future renewable energy projects is unknown and
therefore it is not realistic to quantify impacts upon greenhouse gas
emissions.
From a logical perspective, one can only conclude that the environmental
effects of doubling the network of high voltage lines to accommodate wind
energy should be analysed cumulatively with the effects of the windfarms per
se. For without the NREAP, there would be no need for Grid 25. It is a whole,
and its combined negative effects must be balanced against its benefits as a
whole. Indeed, one can also conclude that apart from a target pulled out of a
hat, which will likely be increased later on by another target also pulled out of
a hat, we dont know how many windfarms we really want to have in the end,
and by way of consequence, we havent got a clue of their effects on the
environment, positive or negative. This is the way we conduct our energy
policy, facilitated by the likes of Eirgrid, who flatly refuse to provide any
environmental information to quantify the objectives of programmes of
enormous scale, financial cost and environmental impact.
However, from a legal perspective, with regards to comments on other
policies, plans, programmes or projects not being within the scope of their
Grid25 report, this is simply ludicrous given that the very same NREAP in
Section 2.5.5 of the Grid25 Environmental Report was part of the Context for
the Implementation Programme and in Section 5.5.3 was part of the
Strategic Environmental Objectives. Indeed, as previously mentioned, the
NREAP repeatedly referenced Grid25 and its implementation.
So Eirgrid trivialised the public participation and failed to take due account of
the outcome of this public participation in its final decision in adopting Grid25.
In January 2008 the Energy Minister Eamon Ryan and his Northern
counterpart Nigel Dodds, published the All-Island Grid Study, the most
advanced and comprehensive of its kind in the world. The study examines: a
range of generation portfolios for Ireland; the ability of the power system to
handle various amounts of electricity from renewable sources; the investment
levels required, and the positive externalities that would accrue with regard to
climate change and security of supply[19].
Following the publishing of this study, through the mechanisms of the 2008
carbon budget:
The Minister said: One of the most effective ways of reducing our national
greenhouse gas emissions is to generate as much electricity as possible from
renewable sources rather than from fossil fuels. The previous Government
I say and believe Mr Swords is mistaken in his contention that the NREAP
decided policy on wind energy. I say that new renewable projects cannot be
built without a grid connection and the process for ensuring sufficient grid
connection to meet the 2020 target and the type of renewable technology
concerned was decided well in advance of and before the submission of
Irelands NREAP in July 2010.
As the draft Grid25 Implementation Programme Strategic Environmental
Assessment documents, it was dated March 2011. In other words it was a fait
acompli, no options were open, the type of renewable technology, i.e. almost
predominately wind energy, was decided well in advance, as was process for
ensuring sufficient grid connections.
Grid25 in terms of its legal obligations of effective public participation when all
options were open was a complete farce. Indeed, any competent engineer will
point out how highly inefficient intermittent wind energy is, not least in the
extensive grid connections required. There were a multiple of other
approaches which could have been taken, not least using the other ten
different sources of renewable energy identified in Directive 2009/28/EC and
its 20% renewable energy target, which would have required far less in terms
of grid infrastructure development.
If we refer back to Section 4.2 of this Submission and Article 6 of Directive
2001/42/EC, which in relation to Consultations states:
relevant legal custom under international law, specifying the broad provisions
of the Aarhus Convention. Ireland has already been made aware of the
position of mixed agreements and their position in Community legal order at
the European Court in Case C-13/00 for failing to comply with the Berne
Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (Paris Act of 24
July 1971)[23].
Mixed agreements concluded by the Community, its Member States and nonmember countries have the same status in the Community legal order as
purely Community agreements, as these are provisions coming within the
scope of Community competence. It follows that, in ensuring respect for
commitments arising from an agreement concluded by the Community
institutions, the Member States fulfil, within the Community system, an
obligation in relation to the Community, which has assumed responsibility for
the due performance of the agreement. The Berne Convention creates rights
and obligations in areas covered by Community law, with the result that there
is a Community interest in ensuring that all Contracting Parties to the
Agreement on the European Economic Area adhere to that Convention.
As Article 15 of the Aarhus Convention document, arrangements have been
established for reviewing compliance with the provisions of this Convention.
As the EU and the Irish State has demonstrated complete contempt for these
arrangements and those of the Directive on Strategic Environmental
Assessment, these matters are now the subject of legal proceedings by the
Author against the State in the High Court. It is interesting to observe what
can only be described as the petulance of the State, who already in evidence
presented by their Senior Counsel in the hearing on the preliminary issues on
Swords v Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources in
April 2012 in front of the President of the High Court Justice Kearns, stated
that the matters raised and the findings of the Compliance Committee were all
nonsense. Indeed with regard to these findings [24], in particular Points 80 to
85:
83. Nevertheless, with respect to the consultation with the public conducted
by Ireland the Committee finds that it was conducted within a very short time
frame, namely two weeks. Public participation under article 7 of the
Convention must meet the standards of the Convention, including article 6,
paragraph 3, of the Convention, which requires reasonable time frames. A two
week period is not a reasonable time frame for the public to prepare and
participate effectively, taking into account the complexity of the plan or
programme (see findings on communication ACCC/C/2006/16 (Lithuania),
ECE/MP.PP/2008/5/Add.6, para. 69). The manner in which the public was
informed of the fact that public consultation was going to take place remains
unclear; neither the Party concerned nor the communicant provided clarity on
the matter. The Committee furthermore points out that a targeted consultation
involving selected stakeholders, including NGOs, can usefully complement
but not substitute for proper public participation, as required by the
Convention.
The State is now in its legal proceedings denying these findings and that the
A declaration that (a) the National Renewable Energy Action Plan (NREAP)
submitted by Ireland purportedly pursuant to Article 4 of Directive 2009/28/EC
to the Commission of the European Union and (b) the Renewable Energy
Feed In Tariff (REFIT) scheme; and or (c) the Energy Policy Framework 2007
2020 (collectively the plans or programmes) were adopted in
contravention of the Convention on Access To Information, Public
Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental
Matters done at Aarhus, Denmark, on 25 June 1998 (the Aarhus
Convention) and in contravention of the law of the European Union and of
the law of the State. In addition and consequently a Declaration that the plans
and programmes at (a) to (c) above are null and void and of no legal effect.
1
In the alternative and in the event that it is held that the above matters are not
justiciable or that this Honourable Court may make no order(s) in respect
thereof, a declaration that the law, rules and procedures in the State
concerning the complaints made by the Plaintiff have, contrary to Article 9 of
the Aarhus Convention and/or contrary to Article 47 of the Charter of
Fundamental Rights of the European Union (in respect of a matter within the
scope of the law of the European Union and concerning the rights enshrined
by Articles 37, 41 and 42 of the Charter) failed to provide the Plaintiff with an
effective remedy.
An order prohibiting the Defendants from relying upon the plans and
programmes set out at paragraph 3 hereof insofar as the said plans and
programmes may inform any decisions made concerning the Defendants or
third parties until such time as the same plans and programmes (or any new
iterations thereof) conform to the requirements of the Aarhus Convention and
the law of the European Union.
An order providing the Plaintiff with an Order for Costs of the within
proceedings and in respect of proceedings between the parties under record
number 2012 No.920 JR.
6. Conclusion
This Submission clearly documents the utter ignorance that Eirgrid has shown
for the legal framework on public participation in decision-making, not least by
failing to adequately inform the public concerned, failing to ensure effective
public participation when all options are open and failing to take due account
of the public participation in their final decision-making. In addition to the legal
ignorance in relation to the rights of the citizen, one can only marvel at the
brazenness of Eirgrid which clearly believes that Irish citizens are going to
tolerate some 5,000 km of unnecessary high voltage lines, at a cost of more
than 4 billion added to their bills.
There are legal mechanisms; Article 7 of the Aarhus Convention on public
participation on plans and programmes related to the environment is both
clear in the necessary obligations on public authorities and in that it is not time
limited.
[1] http://www.epaw.org/organisation.php?lang=en&country=Ireland
[2] http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?
documentid=78&articleid=1163
[3] http://www.unece.org/env/pp/introduction.html
[4] http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?
src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-13&chapter=27&lang=en
[5] See Section on Article 7 in EU Implementation Report to UNECE:
http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/documents/2008/pp/mop3/ece_mp_
pp_ir_2008_EC_e.pdf
[6]
http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/doc/nreap__adoptedversion__30_june
_en.pdf
[7] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?
uri=CELEX:62009CC0105:EN:NOT
[8] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?
uri=CELEX:62011CJ0041:EN:NOT
[9] http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/compliance/C201054/Correspondence%20with
%20communicant/Response_08.01.2012/frCommC54LetterIrishAd2ECreNRE
AP.pdf
[10] http://www.ocei.gov.ie/en/Decisions/Decisions-of-the-Commissioner/MrPat-Swords-Department-of-Communications,-Energy-and-NaturalResources.html
[11] http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2004/en/si/0435.html
[12] http://www.eirgrid.com/media/Environmental%20Main
%20Report.pdf
[13] http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/compliance/C201054/Correspondence%20with%20Party%20concerned/Response
%2028%20June%202011/frComRESPONSE.pdf
[14] http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2011/en/si/0200.html
[15]http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?
text=&docid=72488&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&di
r=&occ=first&part=1&cid=172902
[16] Second Edition of Aarhus Convention: An Implementation Guide:
http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/ppdm/Aarhus_Implementation_G
uide_second_edition_-_text_only.pdf
[21]http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/documents/2008/pp/mop3/ece_
mp_pp_2008_5_add_10_e.pdf
[23] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?
uri=CELEX:62000CJ0013:EN:HTML
[24] http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/compliance/C201054/Findings/ece_mp.pp_c.1_2012_12_eng.pdf
[25]http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/mop3/ODS/ece_mp_pp_200
8_2_add_12_e_Lith.pdf
.entry-meta
.
It is also worth noting that roughly thirty years ago
the Supreme Court in its judgment of Dillon v. Irish
Cement Ltd. (unreported, 26 November 1986)
described planning exemption as a privilege and
that the legal burden rests with the respondent to
demonstrate grounds for exemption:
I am not satisfied that this case comes within Class
34 as an exemption. I am satisfied that in construing
the provisions of the Exemption regulations the
appropriate approach for a Court is to look upon
them as being Regulations which put certain users
or proposed development of land into a special and
in a sense privileged category. They permit the
person who has that in mind to do so without being
in the same position as everyone else who seeks to
develop land, namely, subject to the opposition or
views or interests of adjoining owners or persons
concerned with the amenity and general
development of the countryside. To that extent I am
satisfied that these Regulations should by a court
be strictly construed in the sense that for a
developer to put himself within them he must be
clearly and unambiguously within them in regard to
what he proposes to do.
.
Today, the use of these exemptions can be used to
Ireland currently imports 85% of its energy, 35% above the European
average, just behind Malta, Cyprus and Luxembourg.
A recent national survey carried out by IPSOS/MRBI showed 70% of
people across Ireland supporting wind energy in Ireland, and this
interest in Irish wind energy was further highlighted in June with over
1,500 people visiting wind farms across Ireland and Northern Ireland
throughout the month of June.
2017 will mark 25 years since the first Irish wind farm started generating
electricity in Co. Mayo, and today there are over 200 wind farms
operating in Ireland, with the wind energy sector employing over 3,400
people nationwide, a figure which is projected to grow to over 8,000 by
2020.
End
For more information:
Robert Brown, ReputationInc
Tel: 01 412 0514
Email: rbrown@reputation-inc.com
About IWEA
Established in 1993, the Irish Wind Energy Association (IWEA) is the
national body representing the wind energy sector in Ireland. IWEA is
committed to promoting the use of wind energy in Ireland and beyond
as an economically viable and environmentally sound alternative to
conventional generation and promotes awareness and understanding of
wind power as the primary renewable energy resource. IWEA is also
dedicated to education and awareness building, and to building the
skills base of the renewable energy sector in Ireland. IWEA also
supports the development of other renewable technology, particularly
marine energy. IWEA has more than 200 members who incorporate all
leading industry voices in Ireland. IWEA acts as a central point for
information for its membership as well as a voice to promote wind
energy to government. IWEA is entirely self-funded and relies on the
support of its members.
For more information, please visit www.iwea.com
For more information about Irish wind energy visit www.windenergy.ie
Hamburg, 20 July 2016. The Nordex Group has landed another order in
Northern Ireland. The manufacturer will be installing 19 N90/2500
turbines for the "Brockaghboy" wind farm in Country Londonderry,
Northern Ireland in spring 2017. This 47.5 MW project, developed by TCI
Renewables, is owned by the Italian power plant operator ERG Renew one of the major European players, with an installed capacity of 1.7 GW in
seven countries.
"We are pleased to have ERG as a customer in this project. This highlights
the fact that Nordex is once again the first choice among large power
plant operators and energy suppliers," said CSO Patxi Landa. For years
now ERG has been operating N90/2500s in Italy and plans to use this
turbine on an 80-metre tubular steel tower at this very high-yield site with
average wind speeds in excess of 9m/s. The turbines certified for IEC 1a
will be operated and maintained under a 10-year Premium (Full Service)
contract from the Nordex service point in Omagh.
The Group has installed wind power capacity of more than 18 GW in over
25 markets. In 2015, Nordex and Acciona Windpower recorded combined
sales of EUR 3.4 billion. The Company currently has over 4,800
employees. The production network comprises plants in Germany, Spain,
Brazil, the United States and soon also India. The product range primarily
concentrates on onshore turbines in the 1.5 - 3MW class addressing the
requirements of developed as well as emerging markets.
http://www.nordex-online.com/index.php?
id=53&L=2&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=2813&tx_ttnews[backPid]=45&cHash=cbae94
fd9b
http://www.nordex-online.com/index.php?
id=53&L=2&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=2803&tx_ttnews[backPid]=45&cHash=19153
51234
Ministerial Responsibility
and Liability
Posted on October 3, 2016
close group
close group
close row
The ongoing scandal concerning the deliberate
downgrading of what used to be Waterford Regional
Hospital in favour of Cork raises interesting legal
questions, particularly regarding the liability of a
Minister for the actions of his own department, and
in this instance, the omissions of the Minister
himself.
.
For those of you who have not followed the story, it
was revealed last week that a senior HSE official
downgraded the risk rating of the out-of-hours
cardio service at the Waterford hospital shortly
before those figures were sent to an independent
.
Alas, unfortunately not. Because of something
called the Separation of Powers, the courts are not
allowed to tell the Minister how to spend his budget
that is within the Ministers discretion, which we
gave to the Minister when we voted him in as a TD.
So if a Minister decides to build a new cardio unit for
his own constituents in Cork, thereby neglecting to
build one for the citizens in Waterford, there can be
no legal liability attached. All we can do in Waterford
is try and vote the Minister out at the next election,
unless he does the honourable thing and resigns.
Moreover, when we do manage to vote some eejit
out of his ministry, he is replaced by an ever bigger
eejit.
.
Aaah, the challenges of democracy.
close group
close group
Government Ministers are constantly bewailing the
lack of research, or claiming to be abreast of the
latest research, into the damage caused to humans
by wind turbine noise.
Grid Link involves over 250km of high voltage lines held up by 750 massive
pylons, running through Cork, Limerick, Waterford, Wexford, Tipperary,
Kilkenny, Laois, Carlow, Wicklow, Kildare and Dublin.
Grid West would have 100km of line and 300 pylons running through Mayo,
Galway, Roscommon, Sligo and Leitrim. The Meath-Tyrone line would have
140km of line and 410 pylons linking Meath, Cavan, Monaghan, Armagh and
Tyrone, while the Laois-Kilkenny line would run for 26km and include 80
pylons.
Contents
1. Introduction
2. The Publics Right to Participate in Decision-Making
3. The National Renewable Energy Action Programme (NREAP) and Strategic
Environmental Assessment
4. The Strategic Environmental Assessment Process for Grid25
4.1 General
4.2 Failure to inform the public in an adequate, timely and effective manner
4.3 Failure to taking due account of the outcome of the public participation in
the decision-making
4.4 Failure to provide for early public participation, when all options are open
and effective public participation can take place
5. Current Legal Proceedings in Relation to the Renewable Energy
Programme
6. Conclusion
1. Introduction
Eirgrid is proceeding with its Grid Link Programme in the South and East of
Ireland as part of the massive expansion of the high voltage grid system in
Ireland to facilitate a programme of 40% of electricity to be sourced from
renewables, predominately wind energy, by 2020. It is currently in a public
consultation process in relation to this Grid Link programme and this
Submission has been submitted on behalf of the European Platform Against
Windfarms. The European Platform Against Windfarms (EPAW) was founded
on October 4th 2008 by a small number of federations, associations and other
groups from four EU countries. It now has 621 member organisations, from 24
countries. It is based in Ireland. The Irish Member Groups are listed on the
EPAW website[1]. The aim of EPAW is to defend the interests of its members
which are either:
opposing one or more wind farm proposals;
or questioning the effectiveness of wind farms as a tool for solving the
problems of man and the planet;
or defending the flora, fauna and landscapes from damage caused by wind
farms, directly or through environmental degradation such as erosion, water
contamination and bush fires;
or generally fighting against the damaging effects of wind farms on tourism,
the economy, peoples quality of life, the value of their properties and,
increasingly often, their health;
or a combination of the above.
The Grid Link Programme, with all its unacceptable environmental
impacts, not least the industrialisation of the Irish landscape, is solely to
facilitate the implementation of Irelands renewable energy programme,
which in turn is almost exclusively focused on electricity generation
from windfarms . There is no economic, technical or legal requirement
for this wind energy programme. Indeed, until wind speeds of the order
of double the regions average wind speed are reached, this new
investment in wind turbines and associated grid infrastructure, will not
generate any useful electricity. The existing generation system and its
grid infrastructure will therefore be continued to be required for the
situation, where the wind speed is less than double the average, which
naturally is the majority of the situation. The benefits of this renewable
programme and its 7,145 MW of wind energy, some three thousand wind
turbines, and a doubling of the existing high voltage grid by some 5,000
km of high voltage lines are negligible and complete disproportionate to
its unacceptable impacts, both financial and environmental.
to Justice in Environmental Matters. Indeed this is what formed the title of the
United Nations Economic Commission for Europes Aarhus Convention, which
drafted Principle 10 into a formal legal structure and applied it to the UNECE
region of Europe and Central Asia, as the UNECE website states [3]:
The Convention:
The European Community wishes to express its great satisfaction with the
present Convention as an essential step forward in further encouraging and
supporting public awareness in the field of environment and better
implementation of environmental legislation in the UN/ECE region, in
accordance with the principle of sustainable development.
Finally, the Community reiterates its declaration made upon signing the
Convention that the Community institutions will apply the Convention within
the framework of their existing and future rules on access to documents and
other relevant rules of Community law in the field covered by the Convention.
While Ireland only ratified the Convention in June 2012, it applied here since
2005 based on the primacy of Community Law, as Ireland is a Member State
of the European Union.
If we look at the preamble of the Convention, see below, what one sees is
only what is common sense, that decision-making should be based on sound
logic based on proper consideration of environmental factors:
Recognizing also that every person has the right to live in an environment
adequate to his or her health and well-being, and the duty, both individually
and in association with others, to protect and improve the environment for the
benefit of present and future generations;
Considering that, to be able to assert this right and observe this duty, citizens
must have access to information, be entitled to participate in decision-making
and have access to justice in environmental matters, and acknowledging in
this regard that citizens may need assistance in order to exercise their rights;
The starting point, the renewable energy potential and the energy mix of each
Member State vary. It is therefore necessary to translate the Community 20 %
target into individual targets for each Member State, with due regard to a fair
and adequate allocation taking account of Member States different starting
points and potentials, including the existing level of energy from renewable
sources and the energy mix. It is appropriate to do this by sharing the
required total increase in the use of energy from renewable sources between
Member States on the basis of an equal increase in each Member States
share weighted by their GDP, modulated to reflect their starting points, and by
accounting in terms of gross final consumption of energy, with account being
taken of Member States past efforts with regard to the use of energy from
renewable sources.
In other words, the 20% renewable energy target was dished out to the
Member States based on what level of renewable energy resources they
already had, some like Sweden having considerable existing hydro sources,
and a fudge factor based on GDP. Neither were the proper public
participation procedures followed in the development of this Directive, as not
only was there an absence of environmental information on what was to be
built, why it was to be built and where it was to be built, but also the public
concerned were not contacted and provided with an opportunity to participate
in this decision-making.
This dysfunctional and legally non-compliant process continued throughout its
implementation. Member States were given little more than a year to adopt a
National Renewable Energy Action Plan (NREAP) defining how their allocated
National Target would be met. However, EU legislation which implements
Article 7 of the Aarhus Convention[5] requires that such plans or programmes
related to Energy, which lead to future development consent of projects
regulated by the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive, must undergo a
Strategic Environmental Assessment before adoption. Note: Wind energy and
high voltage transmissions lines are regulated by the Directive on
Environmental Impact Assessment (87/337/EEC as amended). Therefore, full
compliance with the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive
(2001/42/EC) should have been ensured before the NREAPs were adopted.
This did not happen, not only in Ireland, but also in the other Member States.
The NREAPs were adopted by by-passing the Strategic Environmental
Assessment and associated public participation. Indeed, if one considers the
NREAP template produced by the EU[6], then the only Section which can be
considered related to environmental issues and assessment was Section 5.3:
Nineteen of the Member States left this completely blank failing to fill out the
table in above. The others essentially provided little or limited information,
such as the UK, where the Renewable Energy Strategy predating the NREAP
contained no environmental considerations of the impact of the programme. In
Irelands case the NREAP went from Section 5.2 to Section 5.4. It had no
Section 5.3.
EPAW has repeatedly brought this matter to the attention of both the EU
Commission and the Member State administrations. The EU Commissions
response following a meeting between EPAW members and officials of DG
Environment and DG Energy on the 3rd December 2010 in Brussels was that:
60. The term framework must reflect the objective of taking into account the
environmental effects of any decision laying down requirements for the future
development consent of projects even as that decision is being taken.
62. During the legislative procedure the Netherlands and Austria proposed
that it should be made clear that the framework must determine the location,
nature or size of projects requiring environmental assessment. In other words,
very specific, conclusive requirements would have been needed to trigger an
environmental assessment. As this proposal was not accepted, the concept of
framework is not restricted to the determination of those factors.
64. Plans and programmes may, however, influence the development consent
of individual projects in very different ways and, in so doing, prevent
appropriate account from being taken of environmental effects. Consequently,
the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive is based on a very broad
concept of framework.
65. This becomes particularly clear in a criterion taken into account by the
Member States when they appraise the likely significance of the
environmental effects of plans or programmes in accordance with Article 3(5):
they are to take account of the degree to which the plan or programme sets a
framework for projects and other activities, either with regard to the location,
nature, size and operating conditions or by allocating resources (first indent of
point 1 of Annex II). The term framework must therefore be construed
flexibly. It does not require any conclusive determinations, but also covers
forms of influence that leave room for some discretion.
66. The wording [of point 1 of Annex II] implies that the various
characteristics may be concerned in varying intensity and, therefore, possibly
not at all. This alone is consistent with the objective of making all preliminary
decisions for the development consent of projects subject to an environmental
assessment if they are likely to have significant effects on the environment.
Where a national court has before it, on the basis of its national law, an action
for annulment of a national measure constituting a plan or programme
within the meaning of Directive 2001/42/EC of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 27 June 2001 on the assessment of the effects of certain
plans and programmes on the environment and it finds that the plan or
programme was adopted in breach of the obligation laid down by that
directive to carry out a prior environmental assessment, that court is obliged
to take all the general or particular measures provided for by its national law
in order to remedy the failure to carry out such an assessment, including the
possible suspension or annulment of the contested plan or programme.
Therefore, the National Renewable Energy Action Plan was adopted in a
manner which was not lawful, having by-passed the Strategic Environmental
We are setting very ambitious targets for expanding the role of renewable
energy notably the target of 33% of electricity consumption to come from
renewable resources by 2020. There are considerable challenges inherent in
realising these ambitious targets. The growth of emerging technologies
remains constrained by their relative cost. (Offshore wind which is capital
intensive and technologically challenging is a case in point). High fossil fuel
prices have contributed to making renewables more cost competitive but
investment costs do remain a key challenge. The Government considers
that the balance of social costs and benefits must be recognised as
positive and that is our starting point.
It is also worth pointing out, that both the Irish Administration and the EU were
well aware in period 2009 to 2010 during the development of the NREAPs,
that a Strategic Environmental Assessment was required. Not only is there
written evidence of this[9], but additionally after the NREAPs had been
submitted to the EU Commission on the 30th June 2010, a formal clarification
was sent jointly by the Unit Heads of DG Energy and DG Environment in the
EU Commission on the 7th July 2010 clarifying that a Strategic Environmental
Assessment on the NREAP was not necessarily obliged at this stage of the
process. Their position being that if a Member State had decided not to
include in its NREAP specific mandatory measures to comply with, then a
Strategic Environmental Assessment was not required at this stage.
Approximately 828 km of new circuits will be required between now and 2025
to meet the needs of consumers and generators. This represents an increase
of about 14% on the total length of the existing network. Of this, 568 km will
need to be at 400 kV, 92 km will need to be at 220 kV or higher; the remaining
150 km will be at 110 kV. In addition to these circuits, others will be needed to
connect many of the new generators to the Grid
Member States shall identify the public for the purposes of paragraph 2,
including the public affected or likely to be affected by, or having an
interest in, the decision-making subject to this Directive, including
relevant non-governmental organisations, such as those promoting
environmental protection and other organisations concerned.
does not cover them correctly; (ii) Article 6 in as much as the Irish
legislation fails to provide for consultation of all relevant environmental
authorities and the provisions for consulting the public are too limited;
and (iii) Article 5 as there is inadequate provisions for consulting
environmental authorities on the content of environmental reports.
The Commission sent its reasoned opinion on 3 November 2009 and Ireland
replied on 5 February 2010. The new legislation adopted by Ireland on 3 May
2011, the Planning and Development (Strategic Environmental Assessment)
(Amendment) Regulations 2011 (SI 201 of 2011) has yet to be evaluated by
the Commission and indeed Ireland has not even notified it officially to the
Commission.
Indeed, if one considers S.I. No. 200 of 2011[14], as it states itself it has the
aim of making plans, reports and decisions more accessible for public
inspection, including on the website of the competent authority. However, it
does not cure the chronic deficiency of the current legislation, in that it does
not in any way ensure that the public concerned is informed in an adequate,
timely and effective manner. Furthermore, the European Court has already
made it clear in Commission v Ireland in case C-427/07 in relation to access
to justice[15],
only finding out for the first time what is planned for their area. Naturally, there
is complete outrage, which not only Eirgrid is now aware of, but will also be
self-evident from the content of other Submissions. However, from a legal
perspective, what is clear is that Eirgrid failed to comply with its obligations to
informed the public concerned in an adequate, timely and effective manner.
It is not that the public concerned did not want to participate on the Grid25
decision-making, they were just not aware of what it was and what it was
about.
Each Party shall ensure that in the decision due account is taken of the
outcome of the public participation.
Page 158 of the Aarhus Convention: An Implementation Guide [16] further
defines that
The type and extent of future renewable energy projects is unknown and
therefore it is not realistic to quantify impacts upon greenhouse gas
emissions.
From a logical perspective, one can only conclude that the environmental
effects of doubling the network of high voltage lines to accommodate wind
energy should be analysed cumulatively with the effects of the windfarms per
se. For without the NREAP, there would be no need for Grid 25. It is a whole,
and its combined negative effects must be balanced against its benefits as a
whole. Indeed, one can also conclude that apart from a target pulled out of a
hat, which will likely be increased later on by another target also pulled out of
a hat, we dont know how many windfarms we really want to have in the end,
and by way of consequence, we havent got a clue of their effects on the
environment, positive or negative. This is the way we conduct our energy
policy, facilitated by the likes of Eirgrid, who flatly refuse to provide any
environmental information to quantify the objectives of programmes of
enormous scale, financial cost and environmental impact.
However, from a legal perspective, with regards to comments on other
policies, plans, programmes or projects not being within the scope of their
Grid25 report, this is simply ludicrous given that the very same NREAP in
Section 2.5.5 of the Grid25 Environmental Report was part of the Context for
the Implementation Programme and in Section 5.5.3 was part of the
Strategic Environmental Objectives. Indeed, as previously mentioned, the
NREAP repeatedly referenced Grid25 and its implementation.
So Eirgrid trivialised the public participation and failed to take due account of
the outcome of this public participation in its final decision in adopting Grid25.
In January 2008 the Energy Minister Eamon Ryan and his Northern
counterpart Nigel Dodds, published the All-Island Grid Study, the most
advanced and comprehensive of its kind in the world. The study examines: a
range of generation portfolios for Ireland; the ability of the power system to
handle various amounts of electricity from renewable sources; the investment
levels required, and the positive externalities that would accrue with regard to
climate change and security of supply[19].
Following the publishing of this study, through the mechanisms of the 2008
carbon budget:
The Minister said: One of the most effective ways of reducing our national
greenhouse gas emissions is to generate as much electricity as possible from
renewable sources rather than from fossil fuels. The previous Government
adopted a target that 33% of electricity consumed would be from renewable
sources by 2020. Today I can confirm that the Government has now agreed,
on the recommendation of my colleague, the Minister for Communications,
Energy and Natural Resources, Eamon Ryan, T.D. to increase this target to
40%. The target is underpinned by analysis conducted in the recent All Island
Grid Study which found that a 40% penetration is technically feasible, subject
to upgrading our electricity grid and ensuring the development of flexible
generating plant on the electricity system.
No public participation occurred on this increase in the renewable target, let
alone compliance with Article 7 of the Convention or the Directive on Strategic
Environmental Assessment.
In the case of the NREAP, which according to the requirement of Article 4 of
Directive 2009/28/EC, was notified to the EU Commission on the 30 th June
2010, the limited and totally inadequate public consultation occurred on the
11th to 25th June 2010. As Una Dioxin of the Department of Communications,
Energy and Natural Resources stated in her affidavit of the 7 th March 2013 in
Swords v Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources
2012 No. 920/JR:
I say and believe Mr Swords is mistaken in his contention that the NREAP
decided policy on wind energy. I say that new renewable projects cannot be
built without a grid connection and the process for ensuring sufficient grid
connection to meet the 2020 target and the type of renewable technology
concerned was decided well in advance of and before the submission of
Irelands NREAP in July 2010.
As the draft Grid25 Implementation Programme Strategic Environmental
Assessment documents, it was dated March 2011. In other words it was a fait
acompli, no options were open, the type of renewable technology, i.e. almost
predominately wind energy, was decided well in advance, as was process for
ensuring sufficient grid connections.
Grid25 in terms of its legal obligations of effective public participation when all
options were open was a complete farce. Indeed, any competent engineer will
point out how highly inefficient intermittent wind energy is, not least in the
extensive grid connections required. There were a multiple of other
approaches which could have been taken, not least using the other ten
different sources of renewable energy identified in Directive 2009/28/EC and
its 20% renewable energy target, which would have required far less in terms
Mixed agreements concluded by the Community, its Member States and nonmember countries have the same status in the Community legal order as
purely Community agreements, as these are provisions coming within the
scope of Community competence. It follows that, in ensuring respect for
commitments arising from an agreement concluded by the Community
institutions, the Member States fulfil, within the Community system, an
obligation in relation to the Community, which has assumed responsibility for
the due performance of the agreement. The Berne Convention creates rights
and obligations in areas covered by Community law, with the result that there
is a Community interest in ensuring that all Contracting Parties to the
Agreement on the European Economic Area adhere to that Convention.
As Article 15 of the Aarhus Convention document, arrangements have been
established for reviewing compliance with the provisions of this Convention.
As the EU and the Irish State has demonstrated complete contempt for these
arrangements and those of the Directive on Strategic Environmental
Assessment, these matters are now the subject of legal proceedings by the
Author against the State in the High Court. It is interesting to observe what
can only be described as the petulance of the State, who already in evidence
presented by their Senior Counsel in the hearing on the preliminary issues on
Swords v Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources in
April 2012 in front of the President of the High Court Justice Kearns, stated
that the matters raised and the findings of the Compliance Committee were all
nonsense. Indeed with regard to these findings [24], in particular Points 80 to
85:
83. Nevertheless, with respect to the consultation with the public conducted
by Ireland the Committee finds that it was conducted within a very short time
frame, namely two weeks. Public participation under article 7 of the
Convention must meet the standards of the Convention, including article 6,
paragraph 3, of the Convention, which requires reasonable time frames. A two
week period is not a reasonable time frame for the public to prepare and
participate effectively, taking into account the complexity of the plan or
A declaration that (a) the National Renewable Energy Action Plan (NREAP)
submitted by Ireland purportedly pursuant to Article 4 of Directive 2009/28/EC
to the Commission of the European Union and (b) the Renewable Energy
Feed In Tariff (REFIT) scheme; and or (c) the Energy Policy Framework 2007
2020 (collectively the plans or programmes) were adopted in
contravention of the Convention on Access To Information, Public
Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental
Matters done at Aarhus, Denmark, on 25 June 1998 (the Aarhus
Convention) and in contravention of the law of the European Union and of
the law of the State. In addition and consequently a Declaration that the plans
and programmes at (a) to (c) above are null and void and of no legal effect.
In the alternative and in the event that it is held that the above matters are not
justiciable or that this Honourable Court may make no order(s) in respect
thereof, a declaration that the law, rules and procedures in the State
concerning the complaints made by the Plaintiff have, contrary to Article 9 of
the Aarhus Convention and/or contrary to Article 47 of the Charter of
Fundamental Rights of the European Union (in respect of a matter within the
scope of the law of the European Union and concerning the rights enshrined
by Articles 37, 41 and 42 of the Charter) failed to provide the Plaintiff with an
effective remedy.
An order prohibiting the Defendants from relying upon the plans and
programmes set out at paragraph 3 hereof insofar as the said plans and
programmes may inform any decisions made concerning the Defendants or
third parties until such time as the same plans and programmes (or any new
iterations thereof) conform to the requirements of the Aarhus Convention and
the law of the European Union.
An order providing the Plaintiff with an Order for Costs of the within
proceedings and in respect of proceedings between the parties under record
number 2012 No.920 JR.
Essentially the above relates to an injunction on the national renewable
energy programme until such time as the Directive on Strategic Environmental
Assessment and Article 7 of the Aarhus Convention have been complied with.
The use of the mechanisms of Plenary Summons was based on the
conclusions of President of the High Court in April 2013 that the Convention
did apply in Ireland since its ratification by the EU in 2005, despite a previous
ruling by Justice Hedigan in Klohn -v- An Bord Pleanla [2011] IEHC 196 that
it did not, and that as Article 7 of the Convention was not time limited, it would
not be appropriate to continue with the implementation of the national
renewable energy programme up to 2020, if indeed it was determined that the
relevant procedures related to public participation in Community legal order
had not been complied with. These Plenary Summons proceedings are
currently on-going and expected to be brought before the High Court again
early in the New Year
6. Conclusion
This Submission clearly documents the utter ignorance that Eirgrid has shown
for the legal framework on public participation in decision-making, not least by
failing to adequately inform the public concerned, failing to ensure effective
public participation when all options are open and failing to take due account
of the public participation in their final decision-making. In addition to the legal
ignorance in relation to the rights of the citizen, one can only marvel at the
brazenness of Eirgrid which clearly believes that Irish citizens are going to
tolerate some 5,000 km of unnecessary high voltage lines, at a cost of more
than 4 billion added to their bills.
There are legal mechanisms; Article 7 of the Aarhus Convention on public
participation on plans and programmes related to the environment is both
clear in the necessary obligations on public authorities and in that it is not time
limited.
[1] http://www.epaw.org/organisation.php?lang=en&country=Ireland
[2] http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?
documentid=78&articleid=1163
[3] http://www.unece.org/env/pp/introduction.html
[4] http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?
src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXVII-13&chapter=27&lang=en
[5] See Section on Article 7 in EU Implementation Report to UNECE:
http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/documents/2008/pp/mop3/ece_mp_
pp_ir_2008_EC_e.pdf
[6]
http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/doc/nreap__adoptedversion__30_june
_en.pdf
[7] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?
uri=CELEX:62009CC0105:EN:NOT
[8] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?
uri=CELEX:62011CJ0041:EN:NOT
[9] http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/compliance/C201054/Correspondence%20with
%20communicant/Response_08.01.2012/frCommC54LetterIrishAd2ECreNRE
AP.pdf
[10] http://www.ocei.gov.ie/en/Decisions/Decisions-of-the-Commissioner/MrPat-Swords-Department-of-Communications,-Energy-and-NaturalResources.html
[11] http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2004/en/si/0435.html
[12] http://www.eirgrid.com/media/Environmental%20Main
%20Report.pdf
[13] http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/compliance/C201054/Correspondence%20with%20Party%20concerned/Response
%2028%20June%202011/frComRESPONSE.pdf
[14] http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2011/en/si/0200.html
[15]http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?
text=&docid=72488&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&di
r=&occ=first&part=1&cid=172902
[16] Second Edition of Aarhus Convention: An Implementation Guide:
http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/ppdm/Aarhus_Implementation_G
uide_second_edition_-_text_only.pdf
[19] In fact the last sentence is highly inaccurate, the positive external costs,
such as avoided environmental degradation, were never assessed or
quantified. Neither was a proper study completed of grid stability, i.e. security
of supply.
[21]http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/documents/2008/pp/mop3/ece_
mp_pp_2008_5_add_10_e.pdf
[22] C-240/09 (Lesoochranrske zoskupenie VLK) para 44:
http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf;jsessionid=9ea7d2dc30db
035be8a7137b463ab230af24e9cba277.e34KaxiLc3qMb40Rch0SaxuMaN10?
text=&docid=80235&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&pa
rt=1&cid=83250
1.pdf
wind turbin and grid complaints Communication
Latest datasheet on the status of the communication
http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/compliance/C201054/Communication/CommunicationACCC.pdf
THE COURT,
composed of: G.C. Rodrguez Iglesias, President, P. Jann, F.
Macken, N. Colneric and S. von Bahr (Presidents of
Chambers), C. Gulmann, D.A.O. Edward, J.-P. Puissochet
(Rapporteur), M. Wathelet, R. Schintgen, V. Skouris, J.N.
Cunha Rodrigues and C.W.A. Timmermans, Judges,
Advocate General: J. Mischo,
Registrar: R. Grass,
having regard to the report of the Judge-Rapporteur,
after hearing the Opinion of the Advocate General at the
sitting on 27 November 2001,
gives the following
Judgment
Grounds
1 By application lodged at the Court Registry on 14
January 2000, the Commission of the European
Communities brought an action under Article 226 EC for a
declaration that, by failing to obtain its adherence before 1
January 1995 to the Berne Convention for the Protection of
Literary and Artistic Works (Paris Act of 24 July 1971) (the
Berne Convention), Ireland had failed to fulfil its
obligations under Article 228(7) of the EC Treaty (now,
after amendment, Article 300(7) EC) in conjunction with
Article 5 of Protocol 28 to the Agreement on the European
Economic Area of 2 May 1992 (OJ 1994 L 1, p. 3) (the EEA
Agreement).
2 By a statement in intervention in support of the form of
order sought by Ireland, the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland argues that the mixed
character of the EEA Agreement means that the Court has
jurisdiction to rule on it only in relation to matters which
have been the subject of harmonisation measures at
On those grounds,
THE COURT
hereby:
1. Dismisses the submissions of the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland as intervener;
2. Declares that, by failing to obtain its adherence before 1
January 1995 to the Berne Convention for the Protection of
Literary and Artistic Works (Paris Act of 24 July 1971),
Ireland has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article
228(7) of the EC Treaty (now, after amendment, Article
300(7) EC) in conjunction with Article 5 of Protocol 28 to
the Agreement on the European Economic Area of 2 May
1992;
3. Orders Ireland to pay the costs;
4. Orders the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland to bear its own costs.
The end
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?
uri=CELEX:62000CJ0013:EN:HTML
Findings and recommendations with regard to communication
ACCC/C/2010/54 concerning compliance by the European Union
ECE/MP.PP/C.1/2012/12 Distr.- General 2 October 2012
Prepared by the Compliance Committee and adopted on 29 June 2012
http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/compliance/C201054/Findings/ece_mp.pp_c.1_2012_12_eng.pdf
http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/pp/mop3/ODS/ec
e_mp_pp_2008_2_add_12_e_Lith.pdf
Energyunits
Aprimerontheunitsonetendstoencounterinresearching
energyissues
Thewatt(W)isameasureofelectricpower.(Poweristherate
ofdoingworkorproducingorexpendingenergy.)Onewattis
equalto1joule(J)persecond.Amegawatt(MW)isone
millionwatts.
Thejouleisameasureofenergy,ortheabilityorcapacitytodo
work.Othermeasuresofenergyare
kilowatthour(kWh),athousandwattsofpowerproducedor
usedforonehour,equivalentto3.6millionjoules(MJ).
Onequadrillionjoules(PJ)=278millionkWh.
Whena1MW[maximumrateofenergygeneration]wind
turbineproducesat25%ofthatcapacityasaveragedovera
year,itsannualoutputis
1MW0.25365days24hours=2,190MWh.
Britishthermalunit(Btu),equivalentto1,055Jor0.293Wh.
Million(MM)Btu=1,055MJ=293kWh.
QuadrillionBtu=1,055PJ=293billionkWh=293TWh.
Intheproductionofelectricityfromthermalsources,however,
onlyathirdmayconvertedtoelectricalenergy,theresttoheat.
Therefore,1quadBtumayalsobeexpressedasequivalentto
only98billionkWh,averagingtheefficiencyofvarious
generators.
milliontonneoilequivalent(mtoe),equivalentto41,868MJ
or11,630GWh.
Themetricsystemprefixes:
K(ork)meanskilo,athousand,or10
Mmeansmega,amillion,or10
3
Gmeansgiga,abillion,or10
Tmeanstera,atrillion,or10
Pmeanspeta,aquadrillion,or10
Emeansexa,athousandtimesmorethanpeta,or10
9
12
15
18
Otherfiguresandconversions
Windspeedisoftenexpressedinmeters/second(m/s)orknots.
1m/s=2.237miles/hour(mph)
1knot=1nauticalmile[1longitude=1,852meters]/hour=
1.151mph
Thesweepareaoftherotorbladesisusuallygiveninsquare
meters(m ).
2
1,000m =0.247acre
2
ThesweepareaAcanbecalculatedbymultiplyingthesquareof
thebladelengthr(ormoreaccurately,halfoftherotor
diameter)bypi(,3.1416):A=r
2
1,000squarefeet(ft )=0.023acre
2
Thespeedatthebladetipinmphis:rotordiameter(inmeters)
rpm26.82
Theareaofafacilitymaybeexpressedinacres,square
kilometers(km ),orsquaremiles(mi ).
2
1mi =640acres
1km =247acres
2
Noiselevelisexpressedindecibels(dB),usingalogarithmic
scale.Adifferenceof3dBisthesmallestthatcanbedetected
bythehumanear,whileanoisethatis10dBlouderthan
anotherisperceivedtobetwiceasloud,althoughitisphysically
10timeshigherinpressure.Anincreaseinnoiselevelof6dBor
morecauseswidespreadannoyanceanddisruption.Theusual
measurementisindB(A),whichemphasizestherangeofsounds
easilyheard(consciously)byhumans.Aquietruralnightmay
haveanambientsoundlevelof2030dB(A).Fifteenhundred
feetfromanindustrialwindturbine,thesoundlevelmaybe45
70dB(A),atleastfourtosixteentimesasloud.Another
measurementisdB(C),whichincludeslowerfrequenciesthat
arenotsomuchheardasfeltandhaveadversemedicaland
psychologicaleffects.Lowerfrequencysoundsmoreeasily
penetratewallsandwindowsandareasignificantcomponentof
windturbinenoise.YetanothermeasurementisdB(G),which
includesverylowfrequencyinfrasound,whichrecentresearch
showstheinnereartobesensitiveto.
NoisemeasurementsmaybeexpressedasL ,thelevel
exceeded10%ofthetime(generallytakenasthelevelwhich
willbefoundannoying),L ,thelevelexceeded90%ofthetime
(generallytakenasthebackgroundambientlevel),andL ,the
averagelevelovertime.TheL ,ordaynightaverageover24
hours,with10dBaddedtothenighttimelevels,isusedto
comparenoiselevelsbeforeandafteranewsourceisaddedto
theenvironment.FollowingANSIstandards,5dBshouldbe
addedtorecordedlevelsofunfamiliarsoundsand10dBshould
beaddedinruralareaswherethereisanexpectationofpeace
andquiet.Studiesofwindturbinenoisefindthat"high
annoyance"occursatlevels2030dBlowerthanothernoises.
Furthermore,inpredictingnoiselevelsmultiplesourcesmustbe
considered(notjustthenearestturbine),and"linesource"
decay,whichishalftherateof"pointsource"decay,mustbe
usedforfacilitiesinaline,asonamountainridge.
10
90
eq
dn
Notethattheswishingorthumpingsoundofwindturbinesin
timewiththeirrotationfrequency,whichisassociatedwith
higherannoyance,isnotusuallyreflectedintheabove
measures,becauseoftherelativebrevityofthepeaks.This
characteristicnoiseiscalled"bladeswish"or"bladethump"and
sometimesreferredtowiththenonspecificterm"amplitude
modulation".Itislikelycausedprimarilybydifferentair
densitiesand/orwindspeedsbetweenthetopandbottomofthe
sweepareaoftheblades.IntherulingsallowingtheDenBrook
WindFarminEnglandtoproceed,conditionsincluded
considerationofexcessamplitudemodulationuponcomplaint
asanychange,outsidethedwelling,inLA of>3dBinany2
secondperiod5timesinanyminutewithLA 28dBand
suchexcessoccurringin6minutesinanyhour.
eq,125ms
eq,1min
Emissionsmaybeexpressedinshorttons(U.S.),metrictons
(tonnes),orlongtons(U.K.).
1shortton=2,000pounds
1metricton(tonne)=1,000kilograms=2,204.6pounds1.1
shorttons
1longton=2,240pounds
Insuchfiguresforcarbon,itshouldbecleariftheyarefor
carbondioxide(CO )orjustcarbon(whichmayalsobeemitted
withothercompounds,suchasmethane).Theweightofa
moleculeofcarbonis12/44(0.27)thatofthecompoundCO .
2
In2002,accordingtotheU.N.,theU.S.anditsterritories
emitted5.9billion,theE.U.3.7billion,andChina3.3billion
metrictonsofCO .Theworldwidetotalwas23.8billionmetric
tons.
2
Thegreenhouseeffectsofmethane(CH )andnitrousoxide
(NOx)areoftenexpressedas"CO equivalence"or"global
warmingpotential"(GWP).Thus,theeffectofatonofmethane
istypicallyconsideredtobeequivalenttothatof25tonsofCO ,
4
andatonofNOxto300tonsofCO .Thisequivalencemay
vary,inparttoreflecttheestimatedpersistenceofthedifferent
gasesintheatmosphere:~10yearsformethane,morethan100
yearsforNOx,and1000'sofyearsforCO .
2
Capacityfactorissimplytheactualenergyoutputfroma
generatingplantoveraperiodoftime,usuallyayear,asa
fractionorpercentageoftheplant'scapacity.For"conventional"
plants,thecapacityfactorgenerallyreflectshowmuchtheplant
isusedandnotshutdownformaintenanceormalfunction.For
windturbines,thecapacityfactorismostlyamatterofhow
muchthewindblows,sincetheturbineoutputvarieswithwind
speed.InNorthAmerica,thecapacityfactorforwindisusually
2030%.
Forexample,ifa1MWwindturbinehadacapacityfactorof
25%forthepreviousyear,thatmeansthatitsoutputthatyear
was
1MW365days24hours0.25=2,190MWh.
Note:Itisincorrecttoequatecapacityfactorwith"efficiency"
or"uptime".Windturbinesareinfactreasonablyefficient(upto
~50%attheaveragewindspeedsforwhichtheyaredesigned)
inconvertingtheenergyfromthewindandaretypically
"available"over90%ofthetime.It'stheirfuelsource(wind)
thatisfickle.
Capacityvalue,capacitycredit,oreffectivecapacityishow
muchofageneratingplant'scapacityislikelytobeavailableat
timesofpeakdemand.Forwind,itisvirtuallyzero,because
windturbinesrespondtothewindinsteadofdemand.Wind's
lowcapacityvaluemeansthatothersourcesarestillrequiredto
maintaincapacityandprovidereliablepower.
Windfarmsprovidenousefulelectricity
RichardSCourtney
ThispaperistheexplanationprovidedbyRichardSCourtneyof
whyitisnotpossibleforelectricityfromwindfarmstobeuseful
totheUKelectricitygrid.Theexplanationwaspresentedatthe
2004Conferenceof"GroupsOpposedtoWindfarmsinthe
UK."Itincludesexplanationofwhyuseofwindfarmsis
expensiveandincreasespollutionfromelectricitygeneration.
Acompanionpresentationexplainedthatwindfarms(i.e.,local
assembliesofwindturbines)destroytheenvironmentby
coveringitinconcrete.Andtheyareveryefficientatswatting
birds.Thesesevereenvironmentalcostsmaybeworthsuffering
ifwindfarmsweretoprovidecheap,clean,usefulelectricity.
Thispresentationexplainsthat
windfarmsaddalarge,unnecessarycosttoprovisionof
electricityintheUK,
windfarmscannotprovideanyusefulelectricitytotheUKgrid
atanytime,and
theuseofwindfarmsincreasesemissionsfromconventional
powersystems.*
Thermalpowerstations
Conventionalpowerstationsfissionamaterialorburnafuelto
obtainheatthatisusedtoboilwaterandsuperheattheresulting
steamwhichisfedtothesteamturbines(somepowerstations
alsousegasturbinesincombinationwithsteamturbines).The
turbinesdriveturbogeneratorsthatmakeelectricity.
Apowerstationtakesdaystostartproducingelectricityfroma
coldstart.Timeisneededtoboilthewater,tosuperheatthe
steam,towarmallthecomponentsofthepowerstation,andto
spintheturbogeneratorsuptooperatingspeed.
Eachpowerstationisdesignedtoprovideanoutputof
electricity.Itcanonlyprovideverylittlemoreorverylittleless
thanthisoutput(i.e.,apowerstationhasa"lowturndown
ratio").
Electricitydemandmatching
Electricityiswantedallthetimebutthedemandforelectricity
variesfromhourtohour,daytoday,andmonthtomonth.The
electricitygridhastomatchthesupplyofelectricitytothe
demandforitatalltimes.Thisisdifficultbecausepower
stationscannotbeswitchedonandoffasdemandvaries.
Theproblemofmatchingelectricitysupplytovaryingdemand
isovercomebyoperatingpowerstationsinthreemodescalled
"baseload,""generation,"and"spinningstandby."
Somepowerstationsoperateallthetimeprovidingelectricityto
thegrid,andtheyaresaidtoprovide"baseload."
Otherpowerstationsalsooperateallthetimebutdonotprovide
electricityallthetime.Theyburn(orfission)theirfueltoboil
waterandsuperheattheresultingsteamwhichisfedtothe
steamturbinesthatarethuskepthotandspinningallthetime.
Ofcourse,theyemitalltheemissionsfromuseoftheirfuelall
thetime.Butsomeofthistimetheydumpheatfromtheir
coolingtowersinsteadofgeneratingelectricity,andtheyare
thensaidtobeoperating"spinningstandby."
Oneormorepowerstationscanbeinstantlyswitchedfrom
spinningstandbytoprovideelectricitytomatchanincreaseto
demandforelectricity.Itissaidtobeoperating"generation"
whenitisprovidingelectricity.Powerstationsareswitched
betweenspinningstandbyandgenerationasdemandfor
electricitychanges.
Thusthegridoperatormanagesthesystemtomatchsupplywith
demandforelectricitybyswitchingpowerstationsbetween
"generation"and"spinningstandby."
Windfarminputtoelectricity
Windfarmsonlyprovideelectricitywhenthewindisstrong
enoughandnottoostrong.So,theysuddenlyprovideelectricity
whenthewindchanges.Thegridoperatormustmatchthis
changedsupplyofelectricitytotheexistingdemandfor
electricity.Ofcourse,thegridoperatorachievesthematchby
switchingapowerstationtospinningstandbymode.Thatpower
stationcontinuestooperateinthismodesoitcanprovide
electricitywhenthewindfarmstopssupplyingelectricity
becausethewindhaschangedagain.
Windfarmsonlyforcepowerstationstooperatemorespinning
standby.Theyprovidenousefulelectricityandmakeno
reductiontoemissionsfrompowergeneration.Indeed,the
windfarmisthetruesourceofemissionsfromapowerstation
operatingspinningstandbyinsupportofthewindfarm.
Windfarmshavecapital,maintenanceandoperatingcoststhat
addtothecostofelectricity.Thesecostsaretheironly
contributiontoelectricitysupply.
Powersurges
Asudden,largeadditiontoelectricityinpartofthegridiscalled
a"powersurge."Itcanoverloadacomponentofthegridwith
resultingwidespreaddamagetothegrid.Forexample,during
thepresentyearpowersurgeshavedamagedcomponentswith
resultinglossofpowertotheLondonUndergroundsystem,the
cityofTurin,andmostofNorthAmerica.
Windturbinesprovidepowerwhenthewindisstrongenough
andnottoostrong.Itisverydifficulttopredicttheprecise
momentwhenawindfarmwillstarttoprovideelectricitytothe
grid.Andthewindcanchangeoveralargearea.Hence,the
presenceofmanywindfarmsinalocalitycausespowersurges.
Denmarkhasmanywindfarmsandsoissubjectedtopower
surgesfromthem.TheDanishgridmanagesthisproblemby
dumpingtheelectricityacrossitsbordersasafreegiftto
Denmark'sneighbours.Butsomecountriescannotdothat.For
thisreasoninDecember2003theIrishgridoperatorannounced
thathewouldacceptnomoreelectricityfromwindfarmsonto
theIrishgrid.Additionalwindpowerwouldbesounmanageable
thatgridfailureswouldbeinevitable.
TheUKhasasimilarproblem.TheinterconnectorwithFrance
couldnothandlethedumpingofapowersurge.Hence,large
useofwindpowerintheUKwouldcausedamageto
componentsoftheUKgridandfrequentpowercutsthroughout
theUK.
Managingsupplyrisk
Asearlierexplained,powerstationsoperatespinningstandbyto
matchelectricitydemandtosupply.Inadditiontothis,other
powerstationsoperatespinningstandbytomanageriskof
supplyfailures.Thereisariskoffailureofabaseloadpower
stationorthetransmissionsystemfromit.Suchfailureswould
causepowercutsintheabsenceoftheadditionalspinning
standby.
Windfarmsonlyprovidepowerwhenthewindisstrongenough
andnottoostrong.Hence,windfarmsincreasetheriskofsupply
failures.Indeed,theygivethecertaintyofsupplyfailureswhen
thewindistoostrongornotstrongenough.Theincreasedrisk
ofsupplyfailuresfromwindfarmsisinsignificantwhenthereis
smallcontributionofelectricitytothegridfromwindfarms.All
theoutputfromthewindfarmsforcesthermalpowerstationsto
operatespinningstandbythatcancopewiththerisk.
Buttheproblemofmanagingtheriskincreasesastherisk
increases.Electricityisnotwantedinthesameamounts
everywhere,andelectricityislostwhenitistransmittedover
longdistances.Theadditionalmanagementdifficultiesrequire
additionalspinningstandbywhentheriskofsupplyfailuresis
verylarge.Otherwiseitwouldbeimpossibletomatchsupply
withdemandthroughoutthegridwhenalargesupplyfailure
occurred.
Additionalpowerstationsmustbebuiltandoperatedon
spinningstandby(usingtheiradditionalfuelandprovidingtheir
additionalemissions)tomanagetheincreasedriskofpowercuts
fromsupplyfailureswhenwindpowercontributes20%ormore
ofthepotentialelectricitysupply.
Theconstructionofwindfarmsinsteadofpowerstationshas
causedtheseproblemsinCaliforniawherescheduledvoltage
reductionsarecontinuouslyprovidedaroundtheStateasan
alternativemethodtomanagetheriskofpowercutsfromsupply
failures.
Summary
Windfarmsareexpensive,polluting,environmentallydamaging
birdswattersthatproducenousefulelectricitybutthreaten
electricitycuts.
*"Whenplantisdeloadedtobalancethesystem,itresultsinasignificant
proportionofdeloadedplantwhichoperatesrelativelyinefficiently....Coal
plantwillbepartloadedsuchthatthelossofageneratingunitcanswiftlybe
replacedbybringingotherunitsontofullload.Inadditiontoincreasedcostsof
holdingreserveinthismanner,ithasbeenestimatedthattheentirebenefitof
reducedemissionsfromtherenewablesprogrammehasbeennegatedbythe
increasedemissionsfrompartloadedplantunderNETA."DavidTolley
(HeadofNetworksandAncillaryServices,Innogy(subsidiaryofGerman
energyconsortiumRWE)),keynoteaddress,January15,2003,"NETAThe
Consequence,"InstitutionofMechanicalEngineers.[NETAstandsforNew
ElectricityTradingArrangements,theUK'sderegulatedpowermarket.]ED.
AProblemWithWindPower
[www.aweo.org/windbackup.html]
byEricRosenbloom
Outputfiguresfromwinddevelopersaretypicallyannual
averagesexpressedinthevaguefigureof"numberofhomes
providedfor."Homes,however,accountforonlyathirdofall
electricityuse,andelectricityrepresentsonlyathirdofall
energyconsumption(onlyafifthinVermont).Further,home
useofelectricityvarieswidelythroughtheday,week,andyear,
butwindplantsgenerateelectricitybythewhimsofthewind
ratherthantheactualneedsofthegrid.
Asaverages,thefiguresignorethefactthathourtohour,dayto
day,seasontoseason,eventhemostwindysitesexperience
periodsofcalmwhentheturbinesareproducingnoelectricityat
allandcyclesofslowerwindwhentheyareproducingfarless
thantheirmaximumcapacity.Whenthewindistoofast,the
turbinesmustshutdowntoavoiddamage.
Thisvariability,theysay,isbalancedbywiringupamultitude
ofsites,oneofwhichatanytimemustsurelybeproducing
significantpower.Insteadofa"freeandclean"sourceof
energy,then,thenecessaryproposalisanexpensivenetworkof
redundantinstallationsthatmustfillmostofourlandand
seascapestomakeanymeaningfulcontribution.
Despitelocalvariabilities,however,theoverallriseandfallof
thewindisgenerallythesameoverthelargerregion.Thegrid
mustplanforthelikelylowpoint,i.e.,theleastpoweritmay
seefromalloftheattachedwindplants.Largepowerplants
cannotrespondquicklytothehourlyvariationsofthewind,so
theymustbealreadygoingwhenthepowerfromthewind
plantsdropsoff.
Therearesolutionstothisonasmallscale,butformostgrid
systems,anypowerproducedbywindplantsisthereforein
practicesuperfluous.Thebackupgenerationisalready
providingit.
Ontopofthisuselessness,theturbinesuseagreatdealof
electricitythemselves.Mostofthemcannotevenrunwithout
inputfromthegrid.Althoughtheyproduceelectricity
intermittently,theyconsumeitcontinuously.IneveryreportI've
seen,inputfromthegridisnotaccountedforinthefiguresof
netoutput.Specificationsfromturbinemanufacturersdonot
includetheamountofelectricitytheyrequire.
Itmaybethatlargewindturbinesuseasmuchelectricityasthey
produce.Whetherthewindisblowinginthedesiredrangeor
not,theyneedpowertokeepthegeneratormagnetized,tokeep
thebladeandgeneratorassembly(92tonsona1.5MWGE)
facingthewind,toperiodicallyspinthatassemblytounwindthe
cablesinthetower,toheatthebladesinicyconditions,tostart
thebladesturningwhenthewindisjustgettingfastenoughto
keepthemgoing,tokeepthebladespitchedtospinataregular
rate,andtorunthelightsandinternalcontroland
communicationsystems.
Itisclearthatindustrialwindgenerationisnotabletocontribute
anythingagainsttheproblemsofglobalwarming,pollution,
nuclearwaste,ordependenceonimports.InDenmark,withthe
mostpercapitawindturbinesintheworld,theoutputfrom
windfacilitiesequals15%20%oftheirelectricityconsumption.
TheCopenhagennewspaperPolitikenreported,however,that
windprovidedonly1.7%oftheelectricityactuallyusedin
1999.ThegridmanagerforwesternDenmarkreportedthatin
200284%oftheirwindgeneratedelectricityhadtobeexported,
i.e.,dumpedatextremediscount.Theturbinesareoftenshut
down,becauseitissorarethatgoodwindcoincideswith
peakingdemand.AdirectorofthewesternDenmarkutilityhas
statedthatwindturbinesdonotreduceCO emissions,the
primarymarkeroffossilfueluse.
2
Butindustrialwindfacilitiesarenotjustuseless.Theydestroy
theland,birdsandbats,andthelivesoftheirneighbors.Off
shore,theyendangershipsandboatsandtheirlowfrequency
noiseislikelyharmfultoseamammals.Theyrequiresubsidies
andregulatoryfavorstomakeinvestmentviable.Theydonot
moveustowardsmoresustainableenergysourcesandstand
insteadasmonumentsofdelusion.
http://www.aweo.org/windbackup.html
The Potential Health Impact of Wind Turbines Chief Medical Officer of Health
(CMOH) Report May 2010
http://www.health.gov.on.ca/en/common/ministry/publications/reports/wind_tur
bine/wind_turbine.pdf
A 328-foot tall wind turbine worth more than 2 million has buckled
and collapsed on a mountainside in Northern Ireland.
Unconfirmed reports suggested the blades of the turbine had spun
out of control - despite only light wind speeds - before the structure
came crashing to the ground on Friday.
Locals claimed the sound of the turbine hitting the mountain could
be heard up to seven miles away from the Screggagh wind farm,
near Fintona in County Tyrone.
Some people compared it to an explosion while others claimed to
have heard the sound of metal grinding throughout the day.
No-one was injured in the incident, which left debris scattered
across the wind farm site.
Wind turbine collapses in high wind 30 Jan 2013
The turbine was one of eight at the site, which opened in 2011 at a
total cost of 26 million, implying a project cost of more than 3
million per turbine.
The actual turbine equipment itself cost just over 2m, Screggagh
wind farm's owners said. Each has a nominal power-generating
capacity of 2.5 megawatts.
Each turbine's tower is almost 200 feet tall, with the rotor blades
spanning a diameter of more than 260 feet, giving a total height
from base to tip of 328 feet, Screggagh wind farm's owners said.
The remaining seven turbines have been shut down while
manufacturers investigate what went wrong. Wind speeds were
"medium" or 10 to 12 metres per second, they added.
Buckled metal was left strewn on the mountainside (pic: Niall Carson/PA).
"A further statement will be made once the investigation has been
completed and the reasons for the failure confirmed," she added.
German manufacturer Nordex is currently delivering a new, even
bigger turbine design for other sites in the UK.
By Nick Collins
11:41AM GMT 01 Feb 2013
Irish Times
06/05/2016
emerging as major public health concern, particularly affecting
children and older people
Health studies into the effect of wind turbines on those living in
their vicinity must be explored to prevent potential health
problems, a conference on public health heard yesterday.
Alun Evans, Professor Emeritus of Epidemiology in Queens
University, Belfast was speaking at the 2014 Summer
Scientific Meeting at the Royal College of Physicians the
second day of which was held in Dublin yesterday.
http://rethinkpylons.org/conference-warns-health-effects-of-wind-turbinesshould-be-taken-seriously-the-irish-times/
14/06/2016
Decisions of public bodies must be clear enough for people to
decide if there is legal basis to challenge them, court hears.
A woman has won a High Court order overturning a grant of
permission for a development of four wind turbines near her
home in Co Clare.
In a judgment strongly critical of absence of clarity and
specificity in An Bord Pleanlas grant of permission, Mr
Justice Max Barrett said decisions of public bodies must be
clear enough for people to decide if there is a legal basis to
challenge them.
Proper planning was never intended to be, nor can it be
allowed to become, a perk reserved for the few who can afford
expert lawyers, with something less than best being the lot of
the many who cannot.
farms
17/05/2016
Sue Dean, at Mount Egerton, west of Melbourne, says she will not
sign an agreement with WestWind because it is like stealing your
property.
Picture: Aaron Francis
http://en.friends-againstwind.org/doc/Participation_Agreement_Basic_Terms.pdf
28 October 2015
Government and An Bord Pleanla intervention demanded by NEPPC.
The arguments surrounding the North-South Interconnector Project (NSIP)
are well known and well rehearsed in affected communities across the NorthEast, given that the project has been in the public domain for the last 8 years.
The public will happily accept underground cable technology along public
roads, but will not accept the unjustified and unnecessary imposition of
massive pylons and extra high voltage electricity lines across our landscape,
with all of the attendant health risks and degradation of community assets.
EirGrid has been given this message loudly and clearly for many years, but
refuse to budge and so have submitted to An Bord Pleanla (ABP), for a
second time in 6 years, an application involving the erection of over 400
pylons. The planning application in June of this year was greeted with over
2,000 submissions of objection to ABP from the public and from community
groups and business enterprises from all walks of life. ABP proceeded to
forward all of the public submissions to EirGrid. The public await a decision
from ABP as to when an Oral Hearing will be held, which will facilitate airing
many of the arguments and concerns outlined.
In the meantime, EirGrids latest brainwave, in its determination to force
through the North-South Interconnector Project (NSIP), is to hire a bunch of
consultants make contact with many of those people and groups who lodged
The irony of EirGrids manipulation of and lack of respect for the planning
process is not lost on local communities. EirGrid has steadfastly refused to
appear at any public meeting to present its case. It has refused to debate its
application on the airwaves with any of the public in the last 8 years. It refuses
to discuss its application with elected representatives because the application
is in the planning process. Yet it conducts a strategy of trying to pressurise
individuals and or individual groups with the objective of dividing and
conquering communities. This is a road to nowhere.
Open statements by the EirGrid consultants and by EirGrid itself that the
application is a foregone conclusion and will be passed is an unacceptable
abuse of the ABP planning process.
NEPPC calls on the Government and ABP to make written public requests to
EirGrid, demanding that they desist from targeting those who made public
submissions in good faith to ABP.
http://www.nepp.ie/wordpress/?p=1367
Interconnector issue
November 21, 2015 at 10:28pm <em class="author">admin</em>
http://www.nepp.ie/wordpress/?p=1363
of the Planning Act 2000, go beyond otherwise valid decisions of the planning
authorities those works were exempt development, he held.
http://www.nepp.ie/wordpress/?p=1483
Filed under- EirGrid Planning Application Resubmission 2014-2015 Eirgrid
Planning Application Material
http://www.eirgridnorthsouthinterconnector.ie/media/Volume%201A
%20Planning%20Application%20Form.pdf
North-South 400 kV Interconnection Development Application Form for
Approval Schedule 1 Drawings Register and OSI Licence Details
http://www.eirgridnorthsouthinterconnector.ie/media/Volume%201A
%20Schedule%201%20-%20Drawings%20Register%20and%20OSI
%20Licences.pdf
North-South 400 kV Interconnection Development Application Form for
Approval Schedule 6 Prescribed Authorities Notified of the Making of the
Application and Copies of Notification Letters
http://www.eirgridnorthsouthinterconnector.ie/media/Volume%201A
%20Schedule%206%20-%20Prescribed%20Authorities%20Notified%20and
%20Letters.pdf
North-South 400kV
Interconnection
Development
http://www.eirgridnorthsouthinterconnector.ie/media/Volume%203A%20Non
%20Technical%20Summary.pdf
eirgrids-draft-application-file-for-the-north-south-interconnector-was-aninternal-mistake/
North-South Interconnector
corridor.
EirGrid says that it recognises that some individuals are
genuinely concerned about issues regarding electric and
magnetic fields and health but says worldwide research
has shown no conclusive evidence that exposure is
harmful to public health.
The traditional lattice steel tower will still offer the lowest
cost, the report notes. Alternative designs with reduced
EMF [Electro Magnetic Fields] and/or less visual impact
will offer somewhat higher costs.
The authors say they did not examine any possible health
implications, the potential impact on nearby property
value or land devaluation caused by the potential
construction of overhead cables.
The Commission is not recommending any solution as
such, the report also says.
Last Monday 23rd March was the final day for ABO Wind to lodge
an Appeal against Wicklow County Councils refusal to grant
permission for the Ballymanus Wind Farm plan to erect twelve 150
metre high Industrial Wind Turbines.
SWWAG is delighted to announce that An Bord Pleanala reports
that NO APPEAL had been received by the close of business last
Monday, thus ensuring that Ballymanus Wind farm has been
BLOWN AWAY! Once again we say THANK YOU to everyone for
a magnificent effort in coming on board this campaign and staying
with it.
YOU HAVE PROVED THAT AMAZING RESULTS DO HAPPEN
WHEN ENOUGH PEOPLE DO ORDINARY THINGS
EXTRAORDINARILY WELL.
Our Committee will meet shortly to determine how best to tidy up a
few financial loose ends and to set out future short- and mediumterm strategy. Once this is agreed we will arrange an Information
Event to advise everyone and seek their support for it.
As regards strategy, until we know otherwise. there is nothing to
prevent ABO Wind making a new application for a similar -but
different project in the same locality. That possibility, and other
possible applications in the wider locality including applications
for approval of Grid connection routes for BALLYCUMBER and
RAHEENLEA (Croghan)- are reasons why SWWAGs work is far
from done and we therefore remain on full alert.
One thing is certain, folding our tent and going away is NOT
an option!
http://www.wicklownews.net/2015/03/ballymanus-wind-farmblown-away%E2%80%8F/
1
Irish electricity prices are almost twice the international average
https://soundcloud.com/lwig2012/amulcr
one-271015
This is an almost 59th minute of 23rd hour APPEAL to as many of
you as possible to respond to the Wexford branch of PAA's appeal to
allow them to add your name and address to their submission to An
Bord Pleanla arising from the recent north east pylon project
application. They must have their submission with ABP before close
of business Monday 24th so TIME IS CRITICAL!
If people would respond with their names and addresses (only) and
add any friends or family who would also be willing.
Please Email Mary at wexfordenergyactiongroup@gmail.com
confirming your name and address and requesting them to add it to
their submission in respect of this very critical part of the wholly
unnecessary GRID 25 project.
Turbines whipping up a
storm as TDs begin to feel
force of 'rural power'
Lise Hand Twitter
EMAIL
PUBLISHED
28/10/2015
1
Wind farms
1
Photo: Bloomberg
1
200pc - Size of the increase in the average rates paid by Wind
Farms in the Limerick area
http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irishnews/i-wont-dream-life-unspoilt5965651?
utm_content=buffere2538&utm_mediu
m=social&utm_source=facebook.com
&utm_campaign=buffer
17 June 2015
EXCELLENT NEWS!!!!!
Decision finally here from An Bord Pleanla here!!!
WE HAVE WON
President Franois
Hollande and An
Taoiseach Enda Kenny
Launch Next Stage of
Ireland-France Electricity
Interconnector
On the occasion of Franois Hollandes visit to
Ireland on 21st July 2016, the French President and
An Taoiseach Enda Kenny have launched the next
stage of the Celtic Interconnector, a proposed 1bn
sub-sea electricity cable linking Ireland and France.
The capacity of the Celtic Interconnector is
estimated at approximately 700 megawatts (MW),
enough to power 450,000 households, and is being
studied by EirGrid and its French counterpart
Rseau de Transport dlectricit (RTE).
It would improve security of electricity supply in
Ireland and France by providing a reliable high-
http://www.eirgridgroup.com/newsroom
/celtic-interconnector/index.xml
President Franois Hollande and An Taoiseach Enda Kenny Launch
Next Stage of Ireland-France Electricity Interconnector
http://www.rtefrance.com/sites/default/files/2016072
1_rte_pr_celtic_interconnector.pdf
http://www.mccarthykos.ie/db/Attachments/News/May_2013/Ei
rGrid%20Planning%201bn%20Interconnector%20to
%20France/EirGridAnnualReport2012.pdf
Grid Link involves over 250km of high voltage lines held up by 750 massive
pylons, running through Cork, Limerick, Waterford, Wexford, Tipperary,
Kilkenny, Laois, Carlow, Wicklow, Kildare and Dublin.
Grid West would have 100km of line and 300 pylons running through Mayo,
Galway, Roscommon, Sligo and Leitrim. The Meath-Tyrone line would have
140km of line and 410 pylons linking Meath, Cavan, Monaghan, Armagh and
Tyrone, while the Laois-Kilkenny line would run for 26km and include 80
pylons.
An Bord Pleanala
March 3, 2016 #200groups, An Bord Pleanala, Communities say
no, Waterford County Council, Wind #200groups
.
Thank you for coming to this webpage to help us
prevent the erection of 12 wind turbines at
Knockamona, Drumhills, Dungarvan that will link
with the x8 wind turbines already up at
Woodhouse, Keereen.
As you know the ones at Woodhouse have already
indelibly scarred the pristine landscape of the
DrumHills.
This is an area of outstanding natural beauty and
the Drumhills is a protected ridge-line in the
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT (EIS):
The application is invalid from the outset as the
Planning authority as the competent authority
has already decided that the original EIS
submitted by the developer in June 2015 is
inadequate. This is a fundamental issue of
principle. The Planning authority must perform
its role to protect the landscape and the
communities that live in it. It should not have
accepted a revised EIS from the developer in
September 2015.
The implications of the OGrianna Judgement are
that the Environmental Impact Assessment must
consider the totality of the overall project but that
cannot happen in the light of a fragmented
planning application which does not include the
Haul route and the Grid connection therein. If the
grid connection is an integral part of the
development that is the understanding from the
OGrianna judgement then it must form part of
the same application in order to facilitate the EIA
as the two processes are aligned. The EIA must
take place within the operational framework of
the planning process and within this framework
the planning application and the development
proposal considered in the EIS must be
synonymous.
We respectfully submit that the applicants
submission of a revised EIS raises significant legal
UK Wholesale
Power Fall
By Paul Homewood
http://www.powerengineeringint.com/articles/2
015/01/bad-news-for-coal-as-wholesale-powerprices-boost-uk-gas-generation.html
PEI report:
UK wholesale power prices dropped to a twoyear low on Monday 5th January, representing
good news for gas generators. The ICIS
Power Index (IPI) is now just 46.316/MWh,
the cheapest since July 2012 and while that is
good news for the gas sector, its not so good
for coal power generation. For generators, the
falling power price is influenced by lower fuel
prices but gas prices have fallen more than
power over the last year, so gas-fired power
generation is more profitable.
ls to 46/MWh
EIRGRID AND FRENCH GRID
OPERATOR TAKE 1BN
CABLE PROJECT TO NEXT
PHASE
Written by Robert McHugh, on 21st Jul 2016. Posted in General
News-post
The project has been at the planning stage for several years
but on Thursday moved to an initial design an pre-consultation
phase launched by Ireland's prime minister Enda Kenny and
French President Franois Hollande during his visit to Ireland.
Eirgrid said this phase would take around two years and
include an economic, technical and environmental
assessment of the project.
If a decision was taken to move forward with the project it
could be carrying electricity between the two countries by
2025, Eirgrid said. (Reuters)
Source: www.businessworld.ie
http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.d
o?
uri=OJ:L:2012:026:0001:0021:EN:PDF
REPORTOFTHEUNITEDNATIONSCONFERENCEON
ENVIRONMENTANDDEVELOPMENT*
(RiodeJaneiro,314June1992)
AnnexI
RIODECLARATIONONENVIRONMENTAND
DEVELOPMENT
TheUnitedNationsConferenceonEnvironmentand
Development,
HavingmetatRiodeJaneirofrom3to14June
1992,
ReaffirmingtheDeclarationoftheUnitedNations
ConferenceontheHuman
Environment,adoptedatStockholmon16June1972,a/
andseekingtobuildupon
it,
Withthegoalofestablishinganewandequitable
globalpartnership
throughthecreationofnewlevelsofcooperation
amongStates,keysectorsof
societiesandpeople,
Workingtowardsinternationalagreementswhich
respecttheinterestsof
allandprotecttheintegrityoftheglobal
environmentalanddevelopmental
system,
Recognizingtheintegralandinterdependent
natureoftheEarth,our
home,
Proclaimsthat:
Principle1
Humanbeingsareatthecentreofconcernsfor
sustainabledevelopment.
Theyareentitledtoahealthyandproductivelifein
harmonywithnature.
Principle2
Stateshave,inaccordancewiththeCharterof
theUnitedNationsandthe
principlesofinternationallaw,thesovereignright
toexploittheirown
resourcespursuanttotheirownenvironmentaland
developmentalpolicies,and
theresponsibilitytoensurethatactivitieswithin
theirjurisdictionor
controldonotcausedamagetotheenvironmentof
otherStatesorofareas
beyondthelimitsofnationaljurisdiction.
Principle3
Therighttodevelopmentmustbefulfilledsoas
toequitablymeet
developmentalandenvironmentalneedsofpresentand
futuregenerations.
Principle4
Inordertoachievesustainabledevelopment,
environmentalprotection
shallconstituteanintegralpartofthedevelopment
processandcannotbe
consideredinisolationfromit.
Principle5
AllStatesandallpeopleshallcooperateinthe
essentialtaskof
eradicatingpovertyasanindispensablerequirement
forsustainable
development,inordertodecreasethedisparitiesin
standardsoflivingand
bettermeettheneedsofthemajorityofthepeople
oftheworld.
Principle6
Thespecialsituationandneedsofdeveloping
countries,particularlythe
leastdevelopedandthosemostenvironmentally
vulnerable,shallbegiven
specialpriority.Internationalactionsinthefield
ofenvironmentand
developmentshouldalsoaddresstheinterestsand
needsofallcountries.
Principle7
Statesshallcooperateinaspiritofglobal
partnershiptoconserve,
protectandrestorethehealthandintegrityofthe
Earth'secosystem.Inview
ofthedifferentcontributionstoglobal
environmentaldegradation,Stateshave
commonbutdifferentiatedresponsibilities.The
developedcountries
acknowledgetheresponsibilitythattheybearinthe
internationalpursuitof
sustainabledevelopmentinviewofthepressures
theirsocietiesplaceonthe
globalenvironmentandofthetechnologiesand
financialresourcesthey
command.
Principle8
Toachievesustainabledevelopmentandahigher
qualityoflifeforall
people,Statesshouldreduceandeliminate
unsustainablepatternsofproduction
andconsumptionandpromoteappropriatedemographic
policies.
Principle9
Statesshouldcooperatetostrengthenendogenous
capacitybuildingfor
sustainabledevelopmentbyimprovingscientific
understandingthroughexchanges
ofscientificandtechnologicalknowledge,andby
enhancingthedevelopment,
adaptation,diffusionandtransferoftechnologies,
includingnewand
innovativetechnologies.
Principle10
Environmentalissuesarebesthandledwiththe
participationofall
concernedcitizens,attherelevantlevel.Atthe
nationallevel,each
individualshallhaveappropriateaccessto
informationconcerningthe
environmentthatisheldbypublicauthorities,
includinginformationon
hazardousmaterialsandactivitiesintheir
communities,andtheopportunity
toparticipateindecisionmakingprocesses.States
shallfacilitateand
encouragepublicawarenessandparticipationby
makinginformationwidely
available.Effectiveaccesstojudicialand
administrativeproceedings,
includingredressandremedy,shallbeprovided.
Principle11
Statesshallenacteffectiveenvironmental
legislation.Environmental
standards,managementobjectivesandpriorities
shouldreflectthe
environmentalanddevelopmentalcontexttowhichthey
apply.Standardsapplied
bysomecountriesmaybeinappropriateandof
unwarrantedeconomicandsocial
costtoothercountries,inparticulardeveloping
countries.
Principle12
Statesshouldcooperatetopromoteasupportive
andopeninternational
economicsystemthatwouldleadtoeconomicgrowth
andsustainabledevelopment
inallcountries,tobetteraddresstheproblemsof
environmentaldegradation.
Tradepolicymeasuresforenvironmentalpurposes
shouldnotconstituteameans
ofarbitraryorunjustifiablediscriminationora
disguisedrestrictionon
internationaltrade.Unilateralactionstodealwith
environmentalchallenges
outsidethejurisdictionoftheimportingcountry
shouldbeavoided.
Environmentalmeasuresaddressingtransboundaryor
globalenvironmental
problemsshould,asfaraspossible,bebasedonan
internationalconsensus.
Principle13
Statesshalldevelopnationallawregarding
liabilityandcompensation
forthevictimsofpollutionandotherenvironmental
damage.Statesshallalso
cooperateinanexpeditiousandmoredetermined
mannertodevelopfurther
internationallawregardingliabilityand
compensationforadverseeffectsof
environmentaldamagecausedbyactivitieswithin
theirjurisdictionorcontrol
toareasbeyondtheirjurisdiction.
Principle14
Statesshouldeffectivelycooperatetodiscourage
orpreventthe
relocationandtransfertootherStatesofany
activitiesandsubstancesthat
causesevereenvironmentaldegradationorarefound
tobeharmfultohuman
health.
Principle15
Inordertoprotecttheenvironment,the
precautionaryapproachshallbe
widelyappliedbyStatesaccordingtotheir
capabilities.Wherethereare
threatsofseriousorirreversibledamage,lackof
fullscientificcertainty
shallnotbeusedasareasonforpostponingcost
effectivemeasurestoprevent
environmentaldegradation.
Principle16
Nationalauthoritiesshouldendeavourtopromote
theinternalizationof
environmentalcostsandtheuseofeconomic
instruments,takingintoaccount
theapproachthatthepollutershould,inprinciple,
bearthecostof
pollution,withdueregardtothepublicinterestand
withoutdistorting
internationaltradeandinvestment.
Principle17
Environmentalimpactassessment,asanational
instrument,shallbe
undertakenforproposedactivitiesthatarelikelyto
haveasignificant
adverseimpactontheenvironmentandaresubjectto
adecisionofacompetent
nationalauthority.
Principle18
StatesshallimmediatelynotifyotherStatesof
anynaturaldisastersor
otheremergenciesthatarelikelytoproducesudden
harmfuleffectsonthe
environmentofthoseStates.Everyeffortshallbe
madebytheinternational
communitytohelpStatessoafflicted.
Principle19
Statesshallprovidepriorandtimely
notificationandrelevant
informationtopotentiallyaffectedStateson
activitiesthatmayhavea
significantadversetransboundaryenvironmental
effectandshallconsultwith
thoseStatesatanearlystageandingoodfaith.
Principle20
Womenhaveavitalroleinenvironmental
managementanddevelopment.
Theirfullparticipationisthereforeessentialto
achievesustainable
development.
Principle21
Thecreativity,idealsandcourageoftheyouth
oftheworldshouldbe
mobilizedtoforgeaglobalpartnershipinorderto
achievesustainable
developmentandensureabetterfutureforall.
Principle22
Indigenouspeopleandtheircommunitiesandother
localcommunitieshave
avitalroleinenvironmentalmanagementand
developmentbecauseoftheir
knowledgeandtraditionalpractices.Statesshould
recognizeanddulysupport
theiridentity,cultureandinterestsandenable
theireffectiveparticipation
intheachievementofsustainabledevelopment.
Principle23
Theenvironmentandnaturalresourcesofpeople
underoppression,
dominationandoccupationshallbeprotected.
Principle24
Warfareisinherentlydestructiveofsustainable
development.States
shallthereforerespectinternationallawproviding
protectionforthe
environmentintimesofarmedconflictandcooperate
initsfurther
development,asnecessary.
Principle25
Peace,developmentandenvironmentalprotection
areinterdependentand
indivisible.
Principle26
Statesshallresolvealltheirenvironmental
disputespeacefullyandby
appropriatemeansinaccordancewiththeCharterof
theUnitedNations.
Principle27
Statesandpeopleshallcooperateingoodfaith
andinaspiritof
partnershipinthefulfilmentoftheprinciples
embodiedinthisDeclaration
andinthefurtherdevelopmentofinternationallaw
inthefieldofsustainable
development.
*****
a/ReportoftheUnitedNationsConferenceon
theHumanEnvironment,
Stockholm,516June1972(UnitedNations
publication,SalesNo.E.73.II.A.14
andcorrigendum),chap.I.
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/conf1
51/aconf15126-1annex1.htm