| Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005. |
Christchurch council latest to lodge “serious” objections to Navitus Bay proposals
Credit: By Katie Clark | Daily Echo | 2 October 2014 | www.bournemouthecho.co.uk ~~
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Serious objections have been raised by Christchurch Council over the ‘monstrous’ Navitus Bay wind farm.
At an extraordinary meeting on Monday, councillors sent a strong message to the wind farm developers that they would not accept the damage the wind farm was likely to inflict on the Christchurch coast and countryside.
The scheme, which could see up to 194 turbines as high as 200 metres, has many critics, including opposition groups Poole and Christchurch Bays Association and Challenge Navitus, with Bournemouth and Purbeck councils also objecting.
As well as the visibility of the turbines from the coast and the effect on wildlife and tourism, councillors also objected to the large cable trench earmarked for Hurn Forest.
In unanimously objecting to the windfarm, councillors detailed their concerns in a local impact report to be sent to the developers in support of the authority’s stance.
Leader of Christchurch council, Cllr Ray Nottage said since 2011, ‘no one subject had exercised people more than this project’.
He said he ‘wasn’t convinced’ by the arguments for employment benefits, and hit out at the unpredictability of wind farms to create the amount of energy required.
Cllr David Jones, who described the wind farm as a “monstrosity”, said he was concerned by frequency of the word “mitigation” in the council’s impact report.
“It seems to me that the damage that could be done to the area cannot be mitigated; it will be too great”, he said.
Cllr Margaret Phipps, portfolio holder for the environment, said: “The environmental impact of this supposedly green wind farm is huge. I think it is actually environmentally wasteful. Surely producing renewable energy isn’t supposed to involve this sort of destruction to seascape, landscape and wildlife?
“I agree with other members that no mitigation can compensate for the damage to be caused.”
She added: “This proposal is in the wrong place.
“Turbines too close to shore and on a migratory bird route, the cable route corridor too long and too wide.
“The entire proposal has massive environmental and ecological consequences.”
This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.
The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.
| Wind Watch relies entirely on User Funding |
 (via Stripe) |
 (via Paypal) |
Share:
[ Short URL: https://wind-watch.org/news/?p=67096 ]
