scepticism, pragmatism, evangelism … geraint ellis, john barry and clive robinson queen’s...
TRANSCRIPT
Scepticism, Pragmatism,
Evangelism …
Geraint Ellis, John Barry and Clive Robinson Queen’s University, Belfast
Public attitudes to wind farms
Overview:
The importance of public attitudes Conventional understanding of public
attitudes Developing a better understanding Key values informing opposition and
support Case study: The Tunnes Plateau
The importance of understanding public attitudes
The key barrier to expanding wind energy is not technological, but institutional.
Many institutional factors are influenced by public attitudes.
The most important influence on individual applications appears to be the attitude of the local population.
Claims over public attitudes is one of the key points of debate between regulators, developers and objector interests.
Understanding of public attitudes is poor, badly framed and under developed.
Research on public attitudes
Establishes some understanding and identifies key issues.
Describes but does not explain perceptions of windfarms.
Most research in this area based on a number of key weaknesses.
This has had a negative and misguided impact on policy towards objectors.
Weaknesses of current research into public attitudes
The over-reliance on the opinion poll
Weaknesses of current research into public attitudes
The concept of NIMBYs and implied ‘deviancy’The attitude-behaviour gapLack of understanding of public attitudes have
real effects and can misguide policy: Implied ignorance and the need for more information Monolithic notions of opposition Lack understanding of the dynamic of the dispute Entrench conflict Not in long tem interests of the sector
The need for an alternative approach
Institutional context for wind farm planning: National Government objectives for:
Climate change Energy security Economy
Local authority aims to: Satisfy majority of constituents Strengthen local economy Protect the environment Secure “good” planning
Community concerns with: Landscape Property values Stability The future
Private sector issues: Investment opportunities Minimising costs Certainty Address wider community and environmental concerns?
The wider political and ethical context for wind farms
Energy and Climate Change Technology and Progress Place, Change and Landscape Opposition and Participation Knowledge, Problem Framing and
Understanding
… all of which challenge some form of conventional wisdom.
The clash of values
Wind farm conflicts are not a clash of “facts”, but of values related to: Governance Participation Technology Power distribution Landscape aesthetics
These are not measured effectively through opinion polls
To respond to this, one must thoroughly understand the values that inform both opposition and support, not just establish more “facts”.
Key values informing opposition
Sacrifice and disempowerment Lack of trust Language of war, conflict and defence Industrialisation and commercialisation Foreignness and alien nature of wind farms Denial of NIMBY label. Sceptical of ‘non-local forces’ Questioning viability of wind farms.
Problems of aesthetics and objectivitySupport = VirtueOpposition = Conservativism and IgnoranceWind as a business opportunityRationality, Rigour, SciencePartnershipEmissaries of supportUrgency and Threat
Key values informing support
The Tunes Plateau Case Study
Major offshore wind farm proposal, off North coast of NI.
Study supported by ESRC conducted in 2005-06.
Identified range of issues seen as relevant. Identified key themes of support and
opposition.
Tunnes
Governance
PlanningBio-
Diversity
Supply
Economics
CZM
Climate Change
Amenity
Foot-Print
Infra-structure
Can affect radar, mobile phones, radio communications, sonar, television signals
Restrict the size of vessels using the Foyle estuary and affect ferry services
Wind industry is heavily subsidised which distorts the real costs
People are taxed to pay for wind
More should be done to stop existing emissions
Location
Tunes Plateau – an invention
Windmills 60 – 80m high, 600m apart 5km off shoreUncertainty over number of turbines
Be visible from Shrove, Greencastle to Castlerock, Portrushand Giants Causeway
Visual pollution
Will cause drop in tourist numbers
May destroy blue flag beaches
Negatively affect shipping routes
Prohibit trawling and net fishing industries
May provide nursery reefs for fish and protected area
Noise pollution
May cause turbulence and wind damage
Affect the movement of the sands and the formation of the Tunns
Cause sands to move away from the spit
Effects are unknown
Disrupt bird migration paths (Whooper Swans)
Affect fish migration (Salmon & Eels)
Blades may kill birds
Will need landfall station somewhere
No power stations will close
Navigation lights at night
Concerns over the procurement process and how B9 awarded contract
Undemocratic that Gov Dept can press ahead without Assembly debate
May affect future development associated with Derry Airport by restricting flight paths
Dispute over ownership of the seabed
Local people will pay for this through their taxes, high electricity costs and loss of natural resources
Land use planning procedures do not apply at sea and siting offshore is a way to circumnavigate due process
This process is being driven by Kyoto which lacks credibility since the US has not signed up
This is more about reaching EC quotas on carbon than a properly thought out process
Local Benefits
If the turbines are going to be made at H&W it should be clearly stated how much benefit it will bring
Supply is intermittent and unpredictable
Will not be able to adjust to peak demand times
The technology does not exist to store the power effectively
Culture
Mythological importance of the Tunns
Red sails in the Sunset
The Irish citizens will receive no benefits and are not included in the decision making process
Offshore windfarms still need pylons and infrastructure once they come ashore
Local people will not benefit from cheaper electricity
If the developers provide some form of local benefits that may be seen as a bride
People have no choice but to object loudly as silence is seen as acceptance
Planning service does not have the legislation to cover this development
The benefits to climate change of this project will be negated by the environmental damage it causes
There are other sites which have less intrinsic value
B9 did not have alternative sites to consider
This is about making money for corporations not saving the environment
Climate change is a fact exasperated by human activity that needs urgently to be addressed
Wind farms are part of a combined strategy to combat climate change
There is no application because this process is a feasibility study – it is about finding out the whole story
All the impacts will be assessed and mitigated for
There is no trustworthy process to assess impacts that is not influenced by the developer
Climate change will destroy the area more permanently than a few wind turbines
Turbines are temporary structures for 25 years which will be removed
Money invested in the wind industry is used to develop more effective technologies
We all live in a capitalist economy
Conventional power supplies will run out and we need new technologies to deliver power
Conventional power stations are also subsidised by taxes
Conventional power stations are very inefficient
Conventional power generation and fuel use drives climate change and should be changed
Modern turbines are less intrusive
Jobs will be created
Tourists will not be put off
The generating technology chooses the location, there are limits to what can be achieved
Drift net fishing for salmon has been banned by the EU and turbines may provide habitats suitable for rod and line fishing
Large exclusion zone around turbines for small vessels on traditional fishing grounds
Wave and tidal power would be less intrusive and more reliable
Some of the companies behind the project are big polluters and involved in nuclear industry
Decision should delayed until C Z Management Strategy is implemented
Idealised Supporter Discourses
Rationalising Globally - Sacrificing Locally:Deeply concerned about climate change and energy security, suggests that addressing these challenges should override any local impacts.
Local Pastoralist – Developer ScepticA more traditional, pastoral view of the environment, unhappy about potential impacts on the North Coast. Offers reluctant support in the recognition of the need for more sustainable energy.
Embrace WindVery strong belief in wind power, future-orientated and uncritical of the proposal and wind farms developers.
Site Specific Supporter – Energy PragmatistHigh level of concern with energy issues, a more pragmatic outlook, resulting in site-specific support for the Tunes Plateau scheme.
Idealised Objector DiscoursesAnti-Wind Power - Local Resister
Deeply sceptical of the concept of wind power, shows confidence that the project can be resisted through local activism.
Wind Power-Supporter - Siting SheriffOffers support to the concept of wind power but expresses major site-specific concerns related to the Tunes Plateau proposal.
Anti-Developer – Local PragmatistDeep suspicion of wind farm developers, less concerned about “big” issues like climate change, most motivated by the potential of tangible local impacts, such as the loss of jobs.
Economic Sceptic- Siting CompromiserMost concerned with shorter term, impacts of the proposed scheme, willing to consider other siting option as and applies a more reasoned, economic rationale to evaluating wind power.
Supporter-Objector ComparisonsConsensus:
Concern and awareness over climate change. All value seascape –differences in how turbines impact on this. Scale of proposal is an important consideration. Lack of recognition that both sides of the argument engaged in
propaganda. Agreement that some issues are not that important to debate –
veracity of impact studies, democratic credentials of authorisation process.
Disagreement: Visual quality vs. action on climate change. Value of wind power and place in energy mix. Use of ratepayers money to fund campaign. Disagreement on sincerity of developers.
Final thoughts…
A need for a change in perception:Not a conflict, but a debate. Ignorance is not generally a cause of objection, or support. The manner of how the debate is conducted is critical – the
need for trust.
A need for a change in approach: The need for more collaborative approach, based on better
mutual understanding.Not to aim for consensus, but search for a settlement of
differences Recognising the virtues of objection and using it as a positive
attribute. The lack of trusted umpires