Wind power developers will go to great lengths to convince local residents that a prospective site will not cause any problems to the local environment or the people who live within it, indeed they will spout all sorts of carefully worded statistics and promises that paint a green image of a potential development. 

Wind Prospect did this to great effect in our area by several methods, and won over many of the locals with their promises that there would not be any detrimental affects of the wind farm.

Below is a reproduction of the letter allegedly sent out by the developers to local residents.

What this letter does not make clear is the realities of living with turbines as neighbours and the affect that they have on both the local environment and the quality of life of local residents. Now that we have the experience of having an operating windfarm on our doorsteps we believe this letter was grossly misleading and is a completely unbalanced and unrealistic portrait of a windfarm development.

March 1995

Dear Householder,

I am writing to let you know personally of our plans to develop a small windcluster at Far Old Park Farm, Ireleth.

Windcluster Limited is a small British company which develops windclusters for the generation of clean electricity. For the last two years we have operated the Haverigg Windcluster near Millom, generating electricity for about 500 homes in the area. This site has proved a major success both on technical and environmental grounds.

In January of this year, we were awarded a further contract under the government’s scheme to encourage renewable energy generation, the Non Fossil Fuel Obligation, for a windcluster at Far Old Park Farm. We have therefore applied for planning permission to erect 9 turbines at the site. Each turbine will be 40 metres in height, with 3 blades, with the whole site supplying a maximum of 5.4 megawatts of electricity to the NORWEB network. On the reverse of this letter is a plan of our proposals.

As a local resident, you will naturally be concerned that our proposals are acceptable in terms of their appearance and other potential effects on your local environment I believe the key issues are:

the development is small in scale and the site has been carefully designed to minimise any visual impact

the site will generate electricity for about 4,500 homes in the area, or 85% of the entire populations of Askam, Ireleth, Lindal, Marton and Dalton.

the electricity will be cheap to produce, well under half that from the nearby Haverigg Windcluster.

The design and control systems will ensure that there will be no noise nuisance or effect on TV or radio reception at any property in the area.

it is our intention, as far as possible, to place the major construction contracts with local contractors to ensure maximum benefit to the area.

It is also our intention to explore the scope for setting up a modest Environmental Improvement Fund.

All the relevant information is contained in a detailed Environmental Statement accompanying our planning application.

In addition, we are holding an exhibition of our plans for the site at the Haverigg Windcluster on Saturday 8th April between 12 noon and 430pm and again on Saturday 20th May. We will be on hand to answer your questions and you will be able to judge for yourselves the look and feel of an operating windcluster. I hope to see you there.

Euan Cameron

Director

Our experience suggests that the reality of having the windfarm built is somewhat different! To take the points raised one by one......

The "small windcluster " conjures up an image of a unobtrusive collection of "windmills" tucked away out of sight in the corner of a field. In reality these things are monsters! They can be seen for miles and it seems difficult to believe that any consideration was given to minimising their visual impact on our area as the turbines have been placed around the crown of a hill ensuring that they dominate the skyline - no matter from which direction you approach! 

In reality, the promised  "40 metres in height " really meant a height from tip to toe of 64 metres! 

See our photo gallery and draw your own conclusions on Wind Prospects promise that "the development is small in scale and the site has been carefully designed to minimise any visual impact"

Wind Prospect's promise that enough electricity will be produced for about 4500 homes. This seems wildly exaggerated according to the formula released by the British Wind Energy Association because according to them the Askam windfarm has a total rated capacity (B) of 4.62 MW or 4620 kW. Using the formula they provide to calculate the number of homes served gives: 

Number of homes = (4620 x 0.3 x 8760)/4200 = 2891 homes

That's 1609 less than Wind Prospect promised!

8760 is the number of hours in a year and 4200 is the average consumption of electricity per household (in kWh) using the BWEA figures. 

According to the BWEA, the 0.3 value represents the useful working time of the windfarm (i.e. its only producing a usable amount of electricity about one third of the time). We believe that in reality this figure is actually even lower than this - more like 0.23 if the neighbouring Harlock wind farm is a guide  - reducing the number of homes supplied to only 2216. 

That's 2284 less than Wind Prospect promised!

At an installation cost of over £3.5 Million we wonder how the cost of this electricity would compare to that produced from installing an additional gas turbine housed in the nearby Roose power station, not forgetting that the windfarm electricity price is propped up by the NFFO subsidies paid to PowerGen Renewables and gained from a levy placed on our electricity bills.

The energy suppliers are forced to purchase this premium priced electricity by virtue of the NFFO arrangement - cheaper electricity bills? Quite the opposite it would seem, in fact the Country Guardian document, "The Case Against Windfarms" states that "Wind energy is not cheap, let alone free, but costs anything from 116% to 440% of the price of conventionally generated electricity!"

The promise of "no noise problem" has turned out to be one of the most significant affects of this development. Once the turbines began operation, and the true scope of the noise problem became apparent, Dr Cameron declared he was "mystified" by the noise complaints and arrogantly referred to us as "Residents like yourselves who perceive a problem". Those unfortunate enough to be closest to the turbines are experiencing a barrage of background noise which is, according to several local residents, making them physically ill and mentally worn out. The issue of this type of noise affecting health is not new and is supported by the findings of the Darmstadt Manifesto, which is signed by nearly 100 German doctors and professors.

Television reception has been affected in the area surrounding the windfarm and at least one property has required complete replacement of the TV aerial system with a remote aerial located at an elevated position some metres away from the affected house, others have had to call aerial specialists out to resolve reception problems.

As for using local industries for the "major construction" to ensure "maximum benefit to the area". Wind Prospect used a very small team of workers from a local electrical contractor firm and there are no significant long term employment prospects for any locals. In fact Wind Prospect contradicted themselves in the planning application by boasting of the lack of supervision and maintenance required!

It now transpires that the £600,000 of benefit to the local employment promised in the planning application turned about to amount to only £80,000!

It seems to us that the major financial benefit to the area has been to the landowner, Mr Lindow from Old Park Farm who stands to make a tidy sum every year whilst his neighbours continue to suffer the consequences of this project.

Wind Prospects' promised "Environmental Improvement Fund" has never materialised, although PowerGen Renewables made a £12,500 "contribution" to Askam and Ireleth Regeneration Fund (insisting in the local press that it should not be considered as compensation), they have also paid £1000 to the Community Sports Hall and made smaller donations to the village school and football club.

As far as we can see the most significant environmental contribution that PowerGen Renewables have made is to rip up 45 metres of native hedgerow, install a network of hardcore roads across the fields and bulldoze up the grass verges of the narrow lane that leads to the windfarm so that they can squeeze up the massive earth moving machinery and cranes required for the installation and maintenance of the turbines!

In our experience the promises made by the developers in their "Dear Householder" letter have turned out to be largely unsubstantiated. We hope that for future developments of this type PowerGen Renewables and Wind Prospect seriously consider presenting a more balanced and realistic portrait of the likely effects that such a windfarm development will have on the surrounding population.