SUMMARY
The electricity generating company EDF is seeking permission to erect 30 wind turbines, producing up to 100MW of energy to the Grid, off the coast of Coatham Sands at Redcar, the nearest within a mile of the beach. Each turbine would be mounted on a tower up to 100m high, and the rotor blades could extend up to 57.5m beyond that.
EDF (formed in a merger of London Electricity and Seeboard group of companies) put in the application in February 2002 when they bought Northern Electric's wind power portfolio. After consideration by the local council, all the information will be submitted to Energy minister Stephen Timms for a decision. The environmental impact assessment has been submitted to Redcar and Cleveland Borough Council, and a copy can be inspected at Redcar Library. It is very comprehensive, and indispensable for anyone making a serious study of the project.
The application has had a mixed reception from local residents, and local MP Vera Baird is one of four Teesside MPs lining up with local opponents, claiming this is not an appropriate location.
This fact sheet provides information for residents who maybe affected.
BACKGROUND
In May 2002 the British government signed up to the Kyoto protocol. This means that we have to reduce our emissions of greenhouse gases such as Carbon dioxide, methane and Nitrous dioxide by 2010 in line with other world countries. If we don't, scientists predict that global warming will cause significant climate changes with global temperatures rising by as much as 3 deg C during this century
Consequences of these temperature rises will lead to flooding and drought affecting people's health and way of life. Rising sea levels, as a consequence of the Polar Ice caps melting, will put small island communities at the risk of existence and, in the UK, threaten coastal communities, such as Redcar with flooding. In addition we can expect an increased risk of flooding bought about by more intense rainfall. Something many of us have probably already experienced over the past 2 - 3 years.
WHERE DO WIND FARMS COME IN?
The power of the wind to generate electricity has been identified as an environmentally friendly alternative to coal or gas as a fuel and a safer alternative to nuclear generated electricity. It's a 'renewable' (i.e. limitless) source of energy (the wind being for ever - as opposed to coal or oil which has a finite time before it runs out). It does not generate the greenhouse gases associated with global warming during its operational lifetime. Unquestionably, it is a cleaner source of electricity.
To harness the power of the wind large propeller-driven turbines are mounted on columns to make the most of the windstream. The design and shape of these objects is such that they also take up a small "footprint" on the ground and are low maintenance, as opposed to large fossil or nuclear power stations which take up large areas of land, generally leave pollutants behind, and can be costly to maintain.
By placing a number of wind turbines together a "wind farm" is built.
Location map of proposed Tees Bay wind farm. Click for a larger image
The wind farm destined for Tees Bay will have the potential to generate enough electricity to power 72,000 households, more than enough for every home in Redcar and Cleveland
Because the wind is not reliably constant at any one site, security of supply is improved by dispersing wind farms over a wide area, offering a greater 'spread' of weather conditions to draw power from.
WHAT IS THE DOWNSIDE ?
There are reports that the propellers can generate high levels of noise, enough to keep people awake at night and spook animals such as horses, cattle and sheep.
They can be a hazard to birds during migration flights. Their lack of ability to see the propellers turning mean that the birds can fly straight into the blades with devastating effects. The RSPB have serious misgivings on the location of off shore wind farms. Successful offshore wind farm bids raise serious concerns for birds (see The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds)
There are suggestions that they can generate low frequency sounds that can actually make people feel sick and, in worse case scenario, kill people (during the war it's known that the military where developing low frequency sound emitters as a weapon). It has been claimed that wind farms 'make people sick who live up to a mile away'
(Sunday Telegraph, 25/01/04) though this wind farm would be outside that range. There is little substantive research to link low level noise with stress and ill health. A DEFRA report reviews what evidence there is.
It is also argued that the visual impact of a wind farm can have a detrimental effect on local communities with respect to tourism and/or property valuations. The computer generated image below shows the turbines from the beach at the Majuba Road car park, where a major leisure and residential development is planned.
Opponents raise other site-specific objections. The first is the proximity to a sight of special scientific interest (SSSI). According to the Government's own guidelines no wind farm should be located within 7kms from an SSSI. This current proposal is only 1.5kms away.
There is also a burgeoning sea sport population that could be affected by the close proximity to the beach. This could also have a knock on effect with local tourism.
Some opponents also come up with more bizarre arguments, claiming, for instance, that the turbines will blow sand and steelworks dust around!
GETTING IT IN PERSPECTIVE
It's important not to fall into the trap of tunnel vision when considering the pros and cons of the Tees Bay wind farm.
VISUAL: Is the view from the beach at Redcar going to be seriously impaired by wind turbines against the north west (ie Hartlepool and Durham) skyline? Is the view from Coatham Sands against a sea horizon so widely valued and enjoyed that it should stand in the way of this development?
BIRD KILL: How real is the threat presented to local and migratory bird populations? How does it compare with other threats to bird survival; the 'creep' of high-risk industry over Seal Sands, the long term impacts of global warming, or more mundane killers like road traffic, habitat loss, and intensive agriculture? Would protest effort be better directed there?
HEALTH: Is there really any direct link between the offshore turbines and stress-related ill-health on land ? What would be the comparable effects of a 'do-nothing' policy, more accepting of the fact of global warming, sea level rise, and climate change?
SO WHAT NOW?
"Save Our Shoreline", is the local action group comprising of concerned residents, members of Teesside RSPB, and resident forum groups, as well as the local MP Vera Baird. Contact Vera's office for details, or to comment.
Alternatively write to the secretary of state, Mr Stephen Timms, offering your comments. The address is:
The Secretary of State for Energy
C/o The offshore renewable consents unit
Bay 296
1 Victoria Street
London
SW1H DET
Or by e-mail to
Offshore.wind-farms@dti.gsi.gov.uk
Finally....
You could join us in the "Impact" group. We're residents, concerned about the impact of industry on our quality of life, our health, and our environment. We're independent of industry and local councils, and we aim to provide a resource and a platform that local communities can trust and use to improve local conditions.
We do all we can to make sure these pages are accurate and reliable. If you should spot any errors, please let us know, with an e-mail to impact-comment [at] blueyonder.co.uk.
