Old Post Proposed Wind Turbines













Proposed wind turbines at            

                                                                           

                                                                           


                                                                            1.Trelights, Port Isaac
                                                                            2. Smeathers Amble Wadebridge
                                                                            3. Meadow Bank St Minver



PA12/04547  Erection of a single wind turbine with maximum blade tip height of 77m. Formation of new vehicular access track and associated infrastructure | Treswarrow Park Farm Trelights Port Isaac Cornwall PL29 3TW


PA12/03959 | EIA screening request for proposed wind turbine | Smeathers Amble Wadebridge Cornwall PL27 6ET
The public consultation period for this application has ended. We are no longer accepting comments from the public on this application.








PA12/04686 | Screening opinion request in respect of the proposed erection of single wind turbine | Land North East Of Meadow Bank St Minver Wadebridge Cornwall
If you go to The Cornwall Council planning application section you can enter the reference numbers shown above for more information.

The following information is taken directly from the National Trusts Website:
Peter Nixon, Director of Conservation at the National Trust, said: “The National Trust position remains unchanged. We have a duty to protect beautiful places, and believe that any wind energy proposals should be located, designed and on a scale that avoids compromising these.

“We believe strongly in the need to grow renewable energy generation and wean ourselves off fossil fuels. We have a target to generate 50 per cent of our own energy from renewables by 2020, including wind where it is not too large for its setting. We’re trying to show how this can be done without putting at risk our beautiful natural and built heritage.”

Last updated 13/02/12

Background

In February 2010 we launched our ‘Grow Your Own’ strategy with ambitious targets to source 50 per cent of our energy from renewable sources by 2020. We are using a wide range of technology, including where appropriate wind, to reach these targets.

More information on energy and climate change

The following is from the Cornish Guardian:

Cornwall Declares War On Wind Farms
E-mailPrintPDF
COULD this be the tipping point for the proliferation of wind turbines in Cornwall?
The Government is considering huge cuts in subsidies to onshore wind farms which, it says, add £6 to everyone's annual electricity bill.
Lincolnshire Council is the first to declare war on wind turbines with proposals to block any within 10 miles of homes.
Council leader Martin Hill has declared Lincolnshire has 75 large turbines and doesn't want any more. Cornwall has a lot more, with probably hundreds of new planning applications in the pipeline.
A few years ago, it was rare for Cornwall Council to refuse permission, irrespective of local feeling.
These days, the authority is taking more heed of residents' views and judging for itself the effect a particular turbine will have on the landscape, and some are now even being turned down.
Anti-turbine groups have pointed out for years that they are inefficient and, like subsidised solar farms, companies have little to lose and a lot to gain by building them. That goes for the landowners too, who allow these structures to be built in their fields for profit.
Opponents point to countries such as Denmark and Germany, which were both well ahead of the UK in harnessing the power of wind to generate electricity, but have since decided they weren't such a good idea after all, and have dismantled a great many of them.
Environmental groups support turbines, pointing out that the only alternative is more nuclear power stations. While no one would object too much to offshore wind farms, the rights of communities living near proposed sites to support or object to them must always hold sway when planning decisions are being made.
When a local authority refuses permission for a wind farm, companies usually challenge that decision in the High Court, and often win: but now even judges are considering their impact on local communities.
A few weeks ago, a High Court judge ruled that the rights of villagers in Norfolk to preserve their landscape was more important than the Government's energy targets.
Many people in Cornwall like wind turbines, both aesthetically and on environmental grounds, but even they would not suggest they are efficient in supplying the percentage of electricity to the grid once claimed by the companies that build them.
Communities which fight turbines always say they ruin the landscape. What they never say, in public at least, is that they are also afraid they will devalue their homes.
If the Government does reduce subsidies, there will be fewer wind farms, that's for sure, but what is the alternative for generating electricity other than more and bigger power stations? The Government should bite the bullet and admit offshore wind farms are the real answer.
They will be far more costly, but if companies do choose to put them out at sea, people would not mind too much paying subsidies towards that. Tory politicians wouldn't kick up a fuss either, as there are few votes to be had out at sea.
Yes, the tide is turning for onshore turbines, but to protect Cornwall's wonderful landscape, the Government should not dither over reducing these subsidies as it did with solar farm tariffs, causing a flood of fresh bids to beat the deadline.
There are probably hundreds of turbine applications in Cornwall now in pre-application discussions with the local authority. Cornwall should take Lincolnshire's lead and stop them in their tracks.
Cornish Guardian, 7 June 2012

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 




 











 

 

 



























































































 



 

 



  

































































Appeal Status:











Appeal Decision: