Sir, – Wind industry representatives seem to have a problem figuring out whether we can “handle the facts” about wind turbines (Home News, March 29th). While Caitríona Diviney of the Irish Wind Energy Association claims wind energy opponents “say whatever they like even if it isn’t factual,” Brendan McGrath, chief executive of Gaelectric, says confronting wind opponents with facts was a “mistake” and that the public “ignore facts.”
Let’s ignore for a second the underwhelming condescension in these contradictory views: not only can we handle the facts, but we’re also entitled to them.
Fact 1: as of last year, when we implemented the UN Aarhus Convention, every local community is entitled to two things: consultation and participation before planning permission is granted. Our current wind energy planning guidelines “recommend” public consultation, but it’s not mandatory; and they say nothing about participation in the process, which includes being told about the facts so that participation is informed.
Fact 2: 14 years ago, the UN World Health Organisation (in its 1999 guidelines on community noise) stated that night noise levels of 40 dB and over were observed to disrupt the sleep of: children, older people and those with chronic illnesses, which could lead to ill-health. But our current wind energy planning guidelines allow more than twice this night time noise level.
Fact 3: the current wind farm planning guidelines also allow background noise in quiet rural areas to be increased by 10-15dB (that’s a 100-fold increase, or 1,000 per cent increase), despite clear evidence that this magnitude of noise impact will provoke an adverse community response.
Fact 4: we also know that some wind energy developments (not all) involve additional problems of amplitude modulation and low frequency noise, but there is no requirement to assess or measure these under the current wind farm planning guidelines.
Fact 5: we have ratified the 2000 Council of Europe Landscape Convention, which states, “landscape is a key element of individual and social well-being” and its “protection, management and planning entail rights and responsibilities for everyone”.
Was Brendan McGrath aware of this when he suggested, “Visual impact should not be a consideration in granting planning permission for wind turbines” and that it would be a “cop-out” to include visual impact in the planning guidelines?
The protection, management and planning of our landscape is hardly a “cop-out”, just another environmental impact and fact that the wind industry is either unaware of or would rather ignore. – Yours, etc,
LORNA MOORHEAD,
Bunclody,
Co Wexford.
Sir, – An article by Ronan McGreevy (Home News, March 29th) raised two interesting points.
The study, which found that 80 per cent of the population supported wind power, should be welcome. The question is not whether people support wind power, the question is where the wind turbines should be located.
In my own county of Laois, the current planning guidelines would allow 210-metre turbines to be erected within 250 metres of houses. The current absence of any statutory guidelines to protect householders from wind farm developments is one of the root causes of the growing resistance to wind farms, particularly in the Midlands.
Suggestions by Brendan McGrath of Gaelectric in the same article that “visual impact of turbines should not be a consideration in granting planning permission” further damages the credibility of the wind industry. Such ludicrous statements do nothing to engender trust or community acceptance of wind energy. – Yours, etc,
HENRY FINGLETON,
Cullenagh,
Portlaoise, Co Laois.