Revealed: Government Failed to Consider Economic Impacts of Policies that Led to Huge Decline in Onshore Wind

authordefault
on

The UK government did not assess the economic or environmental impacts of a policy change that led to a huge decline in onshore wind developments, DeSmog UK can reveal. The inevitable collapse in onshore wind energy production had a huge impact on jobs in the renewable energy sector and is regarded as a missed opportunity to reduce energy sectorย emissions.

The policy effectively halted the progress of an industry supported by over 75 percent of the Britishย public.

In mid 2015, Communities Secretary Greg Clark declared that onshore wind developments would only take place in areas designated by local authorities as suitable in โ€˜Local or Neighbourhood Plansโ€™, and have the backing of the localย community.

The government was also preparing to hand across the power of consenting onshore wind projects of over 50 megawatts from the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) (now the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS)) to the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) (now the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG)).

This was all part of a strategy to give more say to local communities over where wind turbines should beย built.

Combined with the withdrawal of subsidies, the policies led to a 94 percent decline in onshore wind planning applications since their introduction inย 2015.

Government data shows that only two new projects have received planning permission since the changes came intoย place.

FOI responses and research by 10:10 Climate Action and DeSmog UK show that the only assessments undertaken related to policy changes looked at how families, equality and local democracy would be affected. The FOIsย reveal:

  • There was no detailed assessment ofย how these planning policy changes would affect the onshore wind industryโ€™s growth or decline – such as businesses at risk or job losses, or lost economicย contribution;
  • There was no assessment of how the policies would affect the UKโ€™s carbon emissions compared to baselineย trajectories;
  • And there was no assessment ofย how the policies might affect consumersโ€™ fuelย bills.

โ€˜Shockingย Revelationโ€™

Politicians and analysts decried the governmentโ€™s lack of research before implementing policies that significantly stymied the low-cost, low-carbon and popular powerย source.

Caroline Lucas, MP and co-leader of the Green Party, told DeSmog UK:

โ€œThis is a shocking revelation. For no assessment to be made in relation to the impact on the industry really does expose the Government’s contempt for onshore wind, and their utter unwillingness to seeย reason.

โ€œWe know that ministers are more motivated by a small cabal of their own backbenchers than the evidence on this issue – and their failure here underlinesย this.โ€

Alan Whitehead, Labourโ€™s shadow minister for energy and climate change, said the lack of impact assessments showed โ€œa shocking display of poor governanceโ€.

โ€œThis ill-considered action has thrown away a strong British industry of the future, potentially increased energy prices by effectively outlawing the cheapest form of clean energy in the country todayโ€, he told DeSmog UK.

In 2012 over 100ย MPs – almost all of whom were Conservative – wrote an open letter to David Cameron urging him to halt onshore wind in the UK. The signatories included notable climate science deniers Jacob Rees-Mogg, Sammy Wilson, as well as two of only five MPs that voted against the Climate Change Act in 2008, Phillip Davies and Christopher Chope.

More recently, backbench opponents warned the government not to drop its manifesto pledge to block onshore wind, after energy minister Claire Perry said she is looking at ways โ€œto see how we might bring forward onshore wind, particularly for areas of the UK that want to deployย itโ€.

Dr Jonathan Marshall, head of analysis at the Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit told DeSmog UK:

โ€œThis looks like another snap policy decision made in the rush to nix onshore wind that wasnโ€™t really fully considered. In rushing through as many roadblocks to onshore wind as possible, the government knackered the industry, as we have seen in the yearsย since.

โ€œItโ€™s even more marked now as other European nations are seeing ever-lower prices for onshore wind auctions, which will only increase the cross-channel gap in energyย costs.โ€

Lucas echoed this: โ€œOnshore wind is a cheap, abundant form of energy that has been attacked by the Tories for no good reason. Ministers should think again about their decisions on this issue, and scrap the defactoย ban.โ€

Ellie Roberts, a campaigner at 10:10 Climate Action said: โ€œFamilies facing high energy bills are being let down by the governmentโ€™s ongoing ban on the cheapest new energy source – onshore wind. So the fact that the government only performed a minimal, barely relevant assessment on wind planning barriers will come as a real slap in theย face.โ€

Onshore wind is now the cheapest form of power generation – costing significantly less than new nuclear and biomass plants, which are governmentย subsidised.

And new onshore wind power could provide power at almost half of the cost of electricity from the government-supported new nuclear plant Hinkley Point C, according to an analysis by ARUP last year.

โ€œThere is an increasing body of evidence to show that wind farms are actually quite popular, even with conservative members and voters,โ€ Marshallย added.

A 2016 ComRes survey found 73 per cent of the British public support onshoreย wind.

Assessing Impacts on Family andย Equality

Government departments did undertake some impact assessments regarding the policyย changes.

One was in relation to โ€˜the families testโ€™ – which assesses a policyโ€™s impact on the โ€œstrength of family relationshipsโ€ – and another looked at the impacts on equality.ย ย 

The document, obtained by FOI request by 10:10, shows that the government doesnโ€™t expect any discernible impact on families or the formation ofย families.

It does say there is a risk of individuals with protected characteristics under the Equalities Act โ€œhaving greater difficulty participatingโ€ with community decisions about onshore wind, but that local authorities have a duty to account forย this.

The document also states that the policy would probably decrease โ€œthe rate and number of wind turbines approved (in areas where these do not have community backing), and that this may slow progress towards tackling climate change, the effects of which often impact disproportionately on individuals with protectedย characteristicsโ€.

But it dismisses the link between the policy and the aggravated impacts of climate change as weak. โ€œThe risk of this indirect impact on protected characteristics is therefore small, distant and remote,โ€ itย concludes.

It also states that enough onshore wind had already been approved to meet the UKโ€™s 30 per cent renewables energy by 2020ย target.

An MHCLG spokesman told DeSmog UK: โ€œWe do not believe that more large-scale onshore wind power is right for England, but it can be developed where there is publicย support.

โ€œPeople can have their say on wind power during our planning policy consultation which is open until May, and there was also the chance to offer views during the Housing White Paperย consultation.โ€

In response to a FOI request, BEIS told DeSmog UK that they had no impact assessments relating to Clarkโ€™s policy statement – meaning there was no additional assessment made by DECC ahead of the policyย change.

Industry insiders say the policy made a massive contribution to the stalling of onshore wind in the UK because not all local authorities identified sites where onshore wind developments could beย situated.

MHCLG stated that all relevant government departments were consulted as part of generating thisย policy.

Fewย Predictions

Shortly after Clark’s statement, DECC did an impact assessment considering the costs and benefits of transferring the power of consent for onshore wind projects over 50 megawatts to the Communities Secretary inย England.

It considered the impact of the changes on the cost and duration of onshore wind applications – and concluded firms โ€œcould potentially benefit from a shorter application process and lower internal costs ofย applicationโ€.

But the impact assessment did not consider the macro-economicย implications.

The governmentโ€™s assessment was circumspect about predicting the growth or decline of the onshore wind industry, stating that there were not enough past decisions to be able to extrapolate into theย future.

A recent report from the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit thinktank suggests that upgrading the UKโ€™s existing onshore wind farms withย the newest turbines could save consumers ยฃ77 million on their energyย bills.

The closest the governmentโ€™s assessment came to a prediction was a statement on the impact of the policy on carbon emissions: โ€œAs no change in the level of onshore wind generating capacity is projected as a result of this policy in isolation, there are no estimated impacts on CO2ย emissions.โ€

Image: Gizy/Flickr CC BYย 2.0

Get Weekly News Updates

Related Posts

on

The new leader of the opposition has regularly criticised the UKโ€™s green ambitions.

The new leader of the opposition has regularly criticised the UKโ€™s green ambitions.
on

Lucy von Sturmer and Duncan Meisel are building communities of creatives dedicated to preventing the advertising and public relations industry from casting polluters as climate saviours.

Lucy von Sturmer and Duncan Meisel are building communities of creatives dedicated to preventing the advertising and public relations industry from casting polluters as climate saviours.
Opinion
on

It's time to come together to collectively work through the anxiety, grief and overwhelm so many of us are experiencing.

It's time to come together to collectively work through the anxiety, grief and overwhelm so many of us are experiencing.
on

UCP pledges to abandon the provinceโ€™s net zero targets, and remove the designation of CO2 as a pollutant.

UCP pledges to abandon the provinceโ€™s net zero targets, and remove the designation of CO2 as a pollutant.