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