In a comment on Saving the Planet by Trashing it I drew attention to an article in the Guardian, about the plans of Spanish-owned Scottish Power to dismantle Hagshaw Hill wind farm in the previously rural (but soon to be ever more heavily industrialised) South Lanarkshire. The plans don’t extend simply to dismantling the 28 year old wind turbines, but the intention is also to replace them with monster new turbines towering over the landscape.
Of course, in respect of such matters, where the Guardian leads the BBC follows (and vice versa) and the story now enjoys an extensive write-up on the BBC website too.
There is so much about this story to annoy anyone who has even a mildly sceptical outlook. First of all, there’s the fact that when many wind farms obtained planning permission (often against the wishes of local residents) an element of reassurance existed in the fact that the planning permission applicable to them was for a limited life – usually 25 years – with the prospect of the site being (even if only partially) restored when the planning permission expired. In respect of the abomination currently desecrating wild Shetland (Viking Energy’s wind farm), for instance, such assurances were given (even though the decommissioning bond in respect of this, a precondition of planning being granted, is still not in place). Here’s the Shetland News from 2018, reporting on Viking Energy’s expert witness, Tim Kirkwood:
The roads leading to the massive turbines would prove an asset to crofters once the turbines are removed, he said, but there was less certainty on the extent of reinstatement of the site, though he believed the concrete bases would ultimately be reduced and buried.
This is certainly true of Hagshaw Hill. Scottish Power have produced a glossy leaflet in respect of their plans for a new wind farm to replace the old, and in it they candidly admit that:
The planning permission for the Existing Development requires that the site is decommissioned and restored within six months of ceasing to generate electricity.
With the infrastructure now in place, however, it’s just too tempting to continue to blight both the landscape and the lives of local residents (human and animal), for there’s lots more money to be made. And so, with grim inevitability:
...the Proposed Development site partly comprises an operational wind farm nearing the end of its operational life. It is therefore considered to be a suitable site for wind energy development (repowering), making use of existing site infrastructure and recognising the accepted principle of wind energy generation at the site.
What a great euphemism – repowering. In reality it means replacing modestly intrusive wind turbines, where the nacelle was 35 meters (114 feet) above the ground, with a smaller number of massively more visible turbines with nacelles 140 metres (460 feet) above the ground – four times higher, in other words – with the tips of the blades being as high as 200 metres (650 feet).
Welcome to the future. Wherever wind farms already exist, the plan will be to extend their lives, with ever higher turbines, in perpetuity. Decommissioning, in so far as it takes place at all, will be partial (“it is not about demolition but reversing the process of construction” according to Ryan Walker, project manager for crane and transport specialist Forsyth of Denny), and will see massively more visual intrusion in the future. As the BBC puts it:
Re-powering will gather pace across Scotland as other turbines reach the end of an expected working life of 25 years, extending for some of them up to 30 years.
And as Scottish Power’s Charlie Jordan says:
Although Hagshaw is our oldest site, there were a number of windfarms built in the late 1990s which are coming to the end of their operational lives. We have a dozen more to repower over the next three or four years.
What is to happen to the concrete bases? They are to be removed (where to? What will be done with the concrete?), but new, significantly bigger, sets of concrete foundations will be required, along with a lot of other intrusive development:
A number of ancillary development components are also proposed, including a construction compound and concrete batching area; turbine laydown area; hardstandings adjacent to the wind turbines for construction, maintenance and decommissioning cranes; access tracks; underground cables between turbines; an onsite substation and maintenance building with welfare facility; an energy storage facility of around 20 MW; an underground export cable(s) alongside the access track to J11 of the M74; and two new permanent meteorological monitoring masts.
Some of the materials used in the old turbines can be recycled, most obviously the steel, but the old blades continue to be a problem. The Guardian article, naturally, doesn’t discuss this at all, but the BBC article, written by Douglas Fraser, probes – as is his excellent journalistic wont – a little deeper:
There are more than 11,000 wind turbines installed in Britain, with many more planned for offshore. And while most of a turbine can be recycled, including the steel towers and components in the gearing and generator, more than 33,000 blades present a challenge.
Many replaced blades have so far been sent to landfill. In some cases, they can be incinerated.
He does try to put a positive spin (pardon the pun) on this, by mentioning Re-Blade, a new Scottish company formed to recycle old turbine blades. Even here, though, there is yet another irony:
The skills involved in cutting extremely durable composite glass fibre are not available in Scotland, so it has gone to a boat-building firm near Colchester.
There is one final insult to people living near old wind farms earmarked by greedy foreign companies for financially lucrative “re-powering”. Not content with side-stepping the age limits on old planning consents, and with ensuring that the sites in question are blighted in total for more than half a century, they also expect their new planning applications to be fast tracked. Quite why this should be is a mystery to me, since the term of the original consents are well known to the energy companies, and they have plenty of time in which to draw up and submit their plans for new replacement wind farms, long before the old permissions expire. It seems, however, that this level of organisation is too much to ask. Perhaps, as technology continually develops, they want to leave each application until the last moment, in order to utilise the latest and most profitable technology. The price of this is presumably that local objectors will be given less time than ever to marshall their objections, in a planning process which, in Scotland at least, is already heavily stacked against them.
As if that isn’t insulting enough, the Guardian rubs salt in the wounds of distressed local residents:
ScottishPower is calling on the government to streamline the planning process for existing windfarms to take into account the lower risks of developing in an area that is well understood by developers and supported by local communities.
It is possible that some portions of local communities are won over by the “community benefits” (aka bribes) on offer, as part of this process. However, to pretend that all local communities are supportive, and that shortening an already one-sided planning process is therefore justified is – dare I say it – misinformation. The simple fact remains that although “repowering” does involve existing wind farm sites, the new proposals are on an environmentally much more damaging scale than the old ones, and local residents should be given every opportunity to have their say, rather than having the planning rug pulled from under their feet.
Note, the photograph accompanying this article was taken by me earlier this year and shows a damaged turbine (I believe it was struck by lightning some years ago) north of Hesket Newmarket in Cumbria.
Climate Scepticism 
Ah, the BBC and Guardian…
https://www.gatesfoundation.org/about/committed-grants?q=bbc
https://www.gatesfoundation.org/about/committed-grants?q=guardian
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m afraid you are missing a major point… the Scottish Government has changed the planning rules. A site designated as suitable for wind turbines is now to be considered as suitable for turbines “in perpetuity” whatever period the planning consent grants. Furthermore for some of us, the hope is that “re-powering” may be a way to argue against yet more undeveloped sites being granted consent. In this area we have long given up on the hope that sites might be restored after 25 years.
If any of you have the strength, read the arguments for and against granting planning in recent schemes such as Faw Side and Sanquhar 2. Look out for submissions by Chris Ford for objectors who summarises brilliantly why new schemes should be refused. But he does count re-powering as one of the reasons why… supping with long spoons comes to mind for some of us
LikeLiked by 2 people
from the BBC link –
“ReBlade is one company, based in Glasgow and Dumfriesshire, with plans to build a re-purposing factory. Run by Fiona and Steven Lindsay, former Scottish Power employees, its demonstration projects include park benches and furniture.
It is announcing today a contract with SSE to use former blades as shelters in Dundee for electric vehicle charging points.
The skills involved in cutting extremely durable composite glass fibre are not available in Scotland, so it has gone to a boat-building firm near Colchester.
Fiona Lindsay says wind farm operators want to find ways to avoid sending blades to landfill, and will pay to have them re-purposed.”
sounds like a nice little venture for ReBlade, wonder how much they get for every blade re-purposed & then sell on?
can’t get my head round – “skills involved in cutting extremely durable composite glass fibre are not available in Scotland” bit tho, am I missing something!!!
LikeLike
John Williams,
Thank you, I was not aware of that. Do you, by any chance, have a link?
I understand the dilemma regarding re-use of existing sites, in an attempt to avoid the devastation of currently pristine areas, and I feel your pain. Sadly, given the nature of the SNP/Green coalition government in Scotland, I fear you will get the worst of both worlds – massive new turbines replacing smaller ones on old sites, and lots of new sites too.
LikeLike
We received a notification for a new/addition to the Burnfoot and Rhodders wind farms in the Ochils (where you were walking Mark) adding a further 15 new turbines. We were still in Spain when they held the local exhibitions and propaganda talks, this is the physical blurb . 15 turbines blade tip 150m , ~5mw total installed 72mw serving 75,000 homes and saving 114,480 t of CO2. Looks like Wind 2 will eventually fill every viable bit of hill in the Ochils.
LikeLike
Hi Mark,
You are almost certainly right that we will get the worst of both worlds of course. In Perpetuity was first introduced a while ago, but you can see the reference in NPF4 Section 11 Energy at para f). “Areas identified for wind farms are, however, expected to be suitable for use in perpetuity.” It’s just slid in like that, a single line of text.
NPF4 is worth reading. The Energy section is very depressing, but the Environment Section gives all sorts of reasons why wind farms on virgin sites should be opposed. Even NatureScot has submitted scathing comments on a couple of projects, quoting this policy. And NPF4 will be fought over in every single wind farm appeal in coming months. Starkly different views from the wind industry and those who object.
LikeLike
John Williams,
Thank you for that useful information. Sneaked through, just like that, eh?
Neither alternative is particularly palatable – re-powering existing sites means massively increasing the visual intrusion and environmental damage; new sites means fresh environmental damage and visual intrusion in previously unspoilt areas.
And James S – thanks for that update too. I can’t believe that people are happy to spoil the Ochils like that. I’m glad that I’ve already been walking there, but that’s no consolation for local residents nor for other walkers (nor for the wildlife).
LikeLike
“Caithness wind farm set to run for 50 years if Highland Council approves application”
https://www.johnogroat-journal.co.uk/news/caithness-wind-farm-set-to-run-for-50-years-if-highland-coun-322511/
LikeLike
According to a report on Twitter, flagged up by the Daily Sceptic, a Scottish windfarm was “forced” to provide power to its turbines during a cold spell.
Strange how they were able to get 6 large gensets in place and running so quickly. Or were they already there?
This link is huge; apologies if it doesn’t work:
LikeLiked by 1 person
Profuse apologies Mike – you were in Spam for some reason known only to WordPress algorithms. I’ve set you free now.
LikeLike
Mikehig – I thought it was well known that offshore windfarms had diesel generators at each turbine for this problem.
but your link seems to say this also applies to onshore windfarms, makes the “no more fossil fuel” cry even more stupid.
LikeLike
Mark; no worries. Obviously I have offended WordPress somehow!!
dfh; yes, the images and mention of diesel spills do suggest this was an onshore windfarm, un-named unfortunately.
Maybe they have standby gensets too?
Cynical old me suspects that there is a large can of worms yet to be opened wrt the power consumption of idle turbines as well as this sort of thing.
LikeLike
“Controversial Perthshire wind farm wins 15-year extension
A local councillor said wind turbines were now ‘part of the scenery’ at Bridge of Cally”
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/perth-kinross/5125556/green-burn-wind-farm-40-years/
A Perthshire wind farm has had its operating lifespan extended to 40 years.
The controversial Green Burn development was originally given a 25-year permit.
But councillors have now agreed to a request from Ascot-based HM GB Wind Ltd to stretch its life by a further 15 years.
It comes after Perth and Kinross Council initially rejected the Green Burn wind farm altogether.
More than 150 residents and groups objected to the scheme when the plans were first put forward.
Critics said the 11 turbines would be taller than Big Ben and would deter tourists from visiting Perthshire….
LikeLike
“Councillors asked to oppose Skye wind farm revamp”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy48gkrz9vdo
Highland councillors have been asked to oppose a planned modernisation of a wind farm on Skye.
Developer Renantis has proposed removing 12 turbines at Ben Aketil Wind Farm , externaland replacing them with nine new ones. It also intends to build a battery storage scheme.
The new turbines could have a maximum blade tip height of 200m (656ft) – twice the height of the existing machines.
Highland Council planning officers said “re-powering” the 18-year-old wind farm near Dunvegan would have adverse environmental and visual impacts….
…They said the development could affect peatland habitats and spoil views along an area of “dynamic coastline” in north west Skye.
The officers also raised concerns about a “detrimental impact” on the setting of historic Dunvegan Castle’s gardens….
LikeLiked by 1 person
Never mind the birds, what about the view!
LikeLike
“One of Scotland’s oldest wind farms gets new life”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5ypd19zjzmo
Plans have been approved to repower one of Scotland’s oldest wind farms.
The first phase of Windy Standard in Dumfries and Galloway became operational in 1996.
Now approval has been granted by the Scottish government to remove its 36 turbines and replace them with eight taller and more modern ones.
Fred Olsen Renewables said this would allow the wind farm to double the amount of energy it can produce….
It’s easy to see where the BBC stands on this:
The old turbines will be replaced and potentially put to new uses [my emphasis]. And
…The company is looking at ways to explore the repurposing of the decommissioned turbine materials – including their potential use in playgrounds.…[my emphasis]. In other words, there is absolutely no commitment there. These things are not clean and they are not green.
LikeLike
Mark – 2nd link, that’s from 2 October 2021 & shows various proposed solutions as described in the article. Wonder how many are planned & the cost?
LikeLike
“Scotland’s first wind farm ‘supercharged’ after upgrade”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyn22z24ndo
…The application to repower Hagshaw Hill wind farm was first made in December 2018, and was then approved in February 2020.
LikeLike