The government has set out its plans to get Britain building. Early signs have demonstrated its determination, particularly around approval of three new solar farms and the freeing up of onshore wind planning. But the wildcard, of course, is local communities.

How to sway those directly impacted by a development is a challenge.

Labour has made it clear it sees growing the economy as its best way of securing prosperity for the country. To do this, it needs to be able to support construction – potentially overriding community concerns.

Scotland is no stranger to questions around energy projects, with a more welcoming approach to onshore wind turbines.

“The best sites have been taken up and now, of course, the wind industry is moving downhill, nearer to people. The concern is proximity,” John Campbell, from Borders Wind Farm Watch, said.

Campbell was talking to E-FWD shortly after the Scottish Borders Council Planning Committee had rejected the Wull Muir wind farm application.

National planning policies

The vote went against the Wull Muir project on the grounds it contravened policy 11 of the National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) and policy ED9 of the Scottish Borders Local Development Plan 2016. The project, it was said, would have “have significant adverse landscape and visual impacts”.

NPF4 requires planners to give weight to the broader need of decarbonisation when considering local projects. However, policy 11 of the framework also calls for consideration of the impact on the landscape.

It is not just Wull Muir that has fallen foul of this tension in NPF4. The Lethen and Narachan wind farms were rejected earlier this year by the Scottish government, citing concerns around the impact on a local castle and national scenic area respectively.

“Scottish Ministers noted that although significant weight needs to be placed on GHG reduction targets, the policies within NPF4 should be read as a whole and balanced when reaching a decision on applications for wind energy development,” said an article on the decisions by Burges Salmon.

The challenge in the framework is how to find the balance. The wording of NPF4 notes that there will inevitably be an impact from renewable energy projects. “Where impacts are localised and/ or appropriate design mitigation has been applied, they will generally be considered to be acceptable” it stated.

The challenge is, then, on authorities to determine what developers have done to mitigate the impact of the design.

At Wull Muir, the councillors had previously rejected the plan, which triggered a redesign. The rethink moved the site further from an escarpment, but increased the turbine height to 149 metres.

Turbine size

Campbell called out the “marked increase in the proposed size of the turbine installations. Since 1994, they’ve gone from 65 metres to blade tip to 149 metres to blade tip. They’re in a different league, different orders of magnitude – and that comes with all sorts of engineering problems.”

There is already ill will between communities and the authorities. Campbell noted that while energy was not devolved to the Scottish government, planning is. As such, it is the authorities in Edinburgh who call the shots about projects moving forwards.

Wull Muir and its backer, EnergieKontor, are not alone in rethinking designs. Statkraft announced on August 8 that it was redesigning its Mossy Hill site, near Lerwick in Shetland, to reduce the number of turbines from 12 to eight. This will reduce installed capacity from 48 MW to 36 MW.

Statkraft is making up for the reduction in numbers by increasing the size of the turbines. It described this as marginal, in a move from 145 metre tip height to 155 metres.

Statkraft principal wind project manager John Thouless said the original plan was nearly 10 years old. “It’s right to look again to see if what was consented is still the best way to build the project. We’ve decided to reconfigure the design, and are putting forward improved plans, meaning the visual impact of the wind farm is reduced,” he said.

The changes require a new planning application. Statkraft said it had taken into account “constructive feedback” from consultation events earlier this year. The Norwegian company bought Mossy Hill in 2023 from Peel Energy.

There are competing imperatives at work. Companies and the regulator will aim to minimise cost, in an effort to protect shareholders and end consumers. Such an approach, though, can alienate impacted communities.

Export links

Campbell described the Scottish government’s relationship with communities as “appalling”. Much of the expansion to renewable energy plans in Scotland has been based around export plans into England.

“A wind farm is no use unless it can deliver electricity to the point of consumption,” Campbell observed. “The Scottish government has bolted ahead with wind generation in a manner which has given us this gross excess of production, instead of paying attention to the UK market.”

The drive to build out new energy projects is becoming more apparent – and is linked to the ability to get building. ScottishPower managing director Keith Anderson told PA recently that, if conditions improve, his company would spend more.

Currently, ScottishPower plans to spend £12 billion by 2028. “If the government can halve the time it takes to get projects through planning, I’ll double the amount I invest in this country,” he told the news agency.

Campbell noted the increased drive from companies to seize the advantage. “As long as the incentive to generate power and generate profit is there, the corporates are going to get more aggressive. But the corollary is that communities are also going to get better informed, and therefore more responsive.”

Direct involvement

Communities may object to power plans on many grounds. Perhaps underscoring many objections, though, is a sense of powerlessness and loss of agency. There is an idea that major infrastructure works are foisted on local communities – having a direct impact on an unlucky few, so the rest of us can achieve a net zero future.

A report from Renewable UK, with Aldersgate Group and CPRE, called for a better planning system. This would deliver speed of decarbonisation “whilst protecting nature and landscapes, and enhancing communities’ right to input”.

Communications with communities are not straightforward. Talks need to begin early but can provide useful information about how to overcome local challenges.

The Renewable UK report said there must be consideration paid to benefits for communities. These may include funding for local projects or direct benefits to individuals in certain areas. The government seems to back such plans, with talk of mandatory “community benefits” for transmission infrastructure. There is often more opposition to grid works than generation assets themselves.

Agricultural land accounts for around 71% of the UK’s landmass. The onus of supporting projects will therefore fall largely on farm owners. There are signs that they support such projects. A recent study from Investec showed that farmers see such investments as diversifying income streams, reducing carbon emissions and enhancing sustainability.

The study reported that 68% of respondents to a survey had invested in biomass projects, followed by wind at 51% and solar at 39%. Only 2% of those farmers surveyed were not involved in any sort of renewable energy plan.

Capacity for scrutiny

The question of rewards for communities can be a complicated one. In 2019, a court case found a council should not have taken into account an annual donation from an energy project to a community during a planning application. Planning approval is admittedly only one part of the puzzle, but it does highlight a particular pinchpoint for new energy plans.

Amid the drive for local approval, though, is a question of whether there is sufficient local capacity to provide proper scrutiny. “Some councils are so stretched they’re not able to be consultees”, to wind farm planning applications, Campbell said. “They just don’t have the resources to respond constructively or destructively to wind farms.”

He also expressed scepticism about community consultations. “Setting up a few boards in a village hall and hanging around for two or three hours? They call that a consultation? It’s really depressing, actually. This should be a great national effort. But it isn’t, I’m afraid. It’s a battleground.”

Investment in communities

One way the new government aims to zero in on its energy plans – combining security with decarbonisation – is via local power.

One of GB Energy’s stated aims is to deliver small to medium-scale renewable projects, providing up to 8 GW of clean power. To accomplish this, the new company would share ownership of projects with private developers. GB Energy will provide £600 million in funding for local authorities and up to £400mn in low-interest loans for communities.

The local power plan aims to “create thousands of skilled, clean energy jobs across the country and change communities for the better”. The aim is for the profits from such projects to flow back into local communities.

The Renewable UK report went on to note the lack of true interaction with communities. “Co-design or co-development of solutions is not standard practice or required in the current process,” it said.

Another area where communities are coming up against commercial interests is the Port Talbot steelworks. There, Tata Steel is facing a need to decarbonise operations, to turn a profit and navigate local demands for jobs.

Ben Burggraf, CEO of Net Zero Industry Wales, explained to E-FWD the site was facing up to the economic reality.

“The decision to close the blast furnaces and move to electric arc is the right direction to move in. The problem is the pace of the transition, which is driven by economic reality,” he explained.

Unite the Union hands over petition calling for support at Tata Steel's Port Talbot works — *Unite the Union hands over petition calling for support at Tata Steel’s Port Talbot works. Source: Unite the Union*

Wider plans

“The redundancies are a hard part that needs to be managed. There’s a need to find a solution that doesn’t just look at the town and the steelworks, but thinks about the wider plan. That doesn’t mitigate the short-term pain, but it says there’s a bright light at the end of the tunnel,” Burggraf said.

Port Talbot needs a “real regional plan”, that can offset the impact of the short term economic challenge. “Without a plan there will be a longer-term economic impact. There’s a real need for highly skilled jobs.” Around south Wales there are new opportunities around offshore wind.

Burggraf noted there would be a need for some retraining but that experiences of the steelworks, of understanding industrial processes, was transferable. “The steelworks is one of the most advanced manufacturing plants in Wales. That skillset is there but it needs to be organised properly.”

Discussions of planning tend to focus on the legal aspects. The new government has plans to roll out planning reforms and build infrastructure of all sorts. There is even a Labour Growth Group of MPs committed to “backing the builders, and not the blockers”.

As this group notes, to achieve these growth plans, it will require “difficult conversations in our own communities”. Going further, though, it is crucial that projects focus on early talks with communities and how best to align competing interests.

Different communities will need different things. Where the provision of new jobs may work in one area, cash or community incentives may work in another. Scotland’s NPF4 sets the scene to support new projects, in much the same way that the London government is also moving to back such plans. But as seen at the Wull Muir wind farm, high-level policy objectives can get lost in encounters with local needs.

Related Content

The price of power and pitfalls of reform

“Just get moving” on Tees Valley’s path to energy leadership

Tees Valley aims to transform industrial foundations into energy future

The UK’s renewable energy costs paradox