Camilty Wind Farm - Partnerships for Renewables

Camilty Wind Farm
2.4 Consideration of Alternatives
2.4.1 The EIA Regulations require the ES to include “an outline of the main alternatives studied by
the applicant or appellant and an indication of the main reasons for his choice” (Sch.4(1)
para.2).
2.4.2 National planning and energy policy makes it clear that there is no requirement for renewable
energy developments to demonstrate an overall need for new renewable generation or a
need to be located in a specific location. The Energy Review of 2006 and the White Paper of
2007 both contained a Renewables Statement of Need which states: “Renewable energy as
a source of low-carbon, indigenous electricity production is central to reducing emissions and
maintaining the reliability of our energy supplies at a time when indigenous fossil fuels are
declining more rapidly than expected”.
2.4.3 The 2007 Energy White Paper provides further clarification stating at section 5.3.67:
“Recognising the particular difficulties faced by renewables in securing planning consent,
the Government is also:
• Underlining that applicants will no longer have to demonstrate either the overall need
for renewable energy or for their particular proposal to be sited in a particular
location”
2.4.4 The Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act as amended by The Planning etc (Scotland)
Act 2006 does not, expressly or otherwise, require planning authorities to consider alternative
sites in the determination of the application. Instead, the emphasis of the Act is on the
consideration of the particular application in question.
2.4.5 Planning Advice Note 58 (PAN 58) states in paragraph 70 that:
“In presenting alternatives, applicants and planning authorities need to recognise the
constraints of commercial confidentiality and the potential for creating blight, especially
where a development is part of a programme and the alternatives are projects which may
come forward in due course.”
2.4.6 PAN 58 continues in paragraph 71 that:
“The [EIA] Regulations do not require the applicant to ‘invent’ alternatives where none
has been considered (although the lack of alternatives should be explained). It is
accepted that the alternatives available will be constrained by economic and operational
reasons. The planning authority should determine the planning application on the merits
of the proposal before them and not on the merits of potential alternatives (for some
projects however the existence or otherwise of a feasible alternative may be a material
consideration in the determination of the application).”
2.4.7 Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) does not identify in the criteria for determining wind farm
applications the requirement to consider alternative sites. However it provides, in paragraph
187 that “planning authorities should support the development of wind farms in locations
where the technology can operate efficiently and environmental and cumulative impacts can
be satisfactorily addressed.”
2.4.8 The policy context if therefore clear that there is neither a requirement to justify the viability of
a wind energy proposal nor the need for it to be located in a particular location.
Nevertheless, Chapter 3: Design Evolution of this ES describes the site identification process
March 2013 2-24 ES Chapter 2
The EIA and Scoping Process
Copyright Partnerships for Renewables Development Co. Ltd 2013 ©