Norfolk Vanguard: Ministers wrong over wind farm go-ahead, says judge

A High Court judge has quashed permission for one of the world's largest offshore wind farms to be built off the east coast of England.

The Norfolk Vanguard Offshore Wind Farm was granted development consent in July by the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS).

But Mr Justice Holgate overturned the decision following legal action from a man living near a planned cable route.

A Department for BEIS spokeswoman said it was "disappointed by the outcome".

"We will be considering the judgment carefully before deciding next steps," she added.

The legal challenge was brought by Raymond Pearce, who lives near Reepham in Norfolk, who had raised concerns about the effect the development would have on the landscape and the view.

He argued that ministers had not taken into account the "cumulative impacts" of the project, proposed by the energy company Vattenfall, and had given "inadequate" reasons for not doing so.

Trenches, into which cables would be laid from the wind farm to onshore substations, would pass within 80m (262ft) of Mr Pearce's house.

Mr Justice Holgate said the Vanguard development was closely related to a second wind farm project called Norfolk Boreas.

The judge heard that a substation site planned for both projects near Necton, about 40 miles (65km) from the coast, had attracted "substantial objections".

Ruling in Mr Pearce's favour, he said regulations had been breached as a result of a failure to evaluate available information about the "cumulative impacts of the Vanguard and Boreas substation development".

Speaking to BBC Look East after the ruling, Mr Pearce accepted it was not an "outright" victory, but added "it's a very good start though".

He said: "For the people of Norfolk who will be potentially adversely impacted by multiple cable corridors then it really is a very good start, that finally they have a voice and somebody is recognising these national infrastructure projects will have an impact on ordinary people's lives."

He said it was "absolutely fantastic we are progressing towards a zero-carbon economy", but that "the impact in just developing the onshore infrastructure will be devastating, not only on the climate... but on the local environment"....

The Guardian was gushing about it when the planning permission was granted:

UK gives go-ahead to giant windfarm project off Norfolk coast
This article is more than 7 months old
1.8GW Vanguard project gets greenlight, with approval on 2.4GW Hornsea 3 expected in autumn

It will be interesting to see how it reports this knock-back.

The Guardian's going for it today:

Facebook announces UK trial to tackle climate misinformation
Labels to be attached to posts directing users to Facebook’s Climate Science Information Center

Call to tax international flights to raise climate funds for poor countries
Six experts say failure to reform climate finance risks undermining trust in Paris agreement

Australia risks being left behind in petrol-fuelled 'parallel world' as other countries embrace electric cars
Morrison government’s inaction is driving away chance to build a new low-emissions economy, industry experts say

[I'm not sure that "left behind" is the best choice of words].

Australians fear climate change more than catching Covid, survey shows
Edelman Trust Barometer records big gains for attitudes towards government, media and business, but not technology

36% people said they were more afraid of climate change than they were of contracting Covid-19.

Does that justify the headline?

Rick Perry says Texans will endure blackouts 'to keep the government out of their business'
Former Texas governor says winter weather crisis should not be used as an opportunity for Democrats to advance energy policies

The Guardian view on Texas storms and power cuts: preparing for the worst
Editorial
The outages endured by residents result from the state’s political decisions – but all of us need to think more about ensuring resilience

The irony of the final paragraph in a piece pushing the green agenda is extraordinary:

While the UK has one of the most reliable supplies in the world, proper preparation is required as it transitions to a decarbonised supply. Last year’s report on resilience by the NIC warned that we need a new framework for infrastructure that stresses the importance of being able to cope with crises, tests for vulnerabilities regularly and drives adaptation before it is too late. That means a strong role for the government and regulators in setting and maintaining standards. Consumers cannot often choose different levels of resilience, and infrastructure failures do not just affect consumers. “Resilience is not properly valued in the market,” it concluded – as Texans could now testify.

Meanwhile Paul Homewood takes down the BBC and the Guardian's desperate push to spin the story as being vindication of climate hysteria and "renewable" energy:

Factchecking BBC’s Factcheck

Astonishingly, Harrabin has two pieces up just today about the Cumbrian coal mine:

Cumbria coal mine: Tory MPs urge council to give plans the green light

I don't find this piece to be very balanced either.

Meanwhile, Harrabin's still fighting his one-man campaign against the Cumbrian coal-mine, with the full support of his employers:

Cumbria coal mine: What is the controversy about?
By Roger Harrabin
BBC environment analyst

It is, perhaps, an attempt at balance, but IMO it doesn't do a very good job. It includes this statement, which I think is highly questionable:

Unemployment in the area is less than the national average...

It ,may be that unemployment in Cumbria is less than the national average, but west Cumbria, where the mine is proposed, is a deprived area of high unemployment. I would be surprised, very surprised indeed, in fact, if unemployment rates in west Cumbria were less than the national average. Unfortunately I'm struggling to find statistics drilled down that far.

The usual slant from the BBC:

Last coal shipment leaves River Tyne

Anyway, it appears that the Belgians are still burning coal!

I thought everything was supposed to change when Trump was replaced by Biden.

EU trade chief warns Biden over ‘Buy American’ push
Valdis Dombrovskis says EU will track whether US is straying outside WTO commitments.

Europe's trade chief Valdis Dombrovskis has fired a warning shot at new U.S. President Joe Biden over his plans to press U.S. authorities to "Buy American."

In an interview with POLITICO and other media, Dombrovskis said the EU, the world's biggest trade bloc, would closely monitor whether preferential treatment for U.S. contractors on public projects contravened international commitments.

"We will be assessing to which extent the U.S. complies with its [World Trade Organization] commitments under the global procurement agreement," he said.

U.S. President Joe Biden has already started tightening U.S. rules that force federal authorities to buy from American suppliers. This could run foul of Washington's commitments at the World Trade Organization (WTO), under which it wins access to other countries' public procurement markets in exchange for keeping its own market open.

While signaling the EU was worried about Washington's steps, Dombrovskis stopped just short of saying Biden was breaking WTO rules.

"As regards Buy American, this is something which will require some more in-depth assessment, what are the exact implications, what are the implications for EU companies, what does it mean for U.S. commitments in the WTO framework," Dombrovskis said....

Sweden’s fading enthusiasm for onshore wind farms
A big wind project in central Sweden is arousing strong local opposition.

Sweden faces a looming green electricity shortage, but its plan to scale up wind power has hit a problem: resistance from Swedes who don’t want giant turbines as neighbors.

Sweden, like a number of other northern European countries, sees wind power as a relatively cheap and quick way to move away from the fossil-fuel-driven power generation which has exacerbated the global climate crisis.

The Nordic country plans to scale up its wind power capacity to 100 terawatt-hours by 2040 — of which 80 TWh would be on land — from the current 28 TWh generated by a fleet of 4,000 turbines. The scale of that ambition is shown by plans for the 4 gigawatt Markbygden complex in the northeast of the country — a project that will be Europe's largest onshore wind farm with about 1,100 turbines when it's completed.

But as the rollout gathers pace, public sentiment is turning against turbines sprouting across some of Scandinavia’s most beautiful landscapes.

A plan by German company WPD to build 30 of these 250-meter-high structures on a hill called Ripfjället outside the central Swedish village of Malung is prompting a particularly sharp backlash.

The local municipal council approved the plan last month, and it's now before county-level committees for further examination.

Arne Söderbäck, who heads the organization No to Wind Power on Ripfjället, which is fighting the project, condemned the decision.

“I am not against wind power, but this is not the place to develop it,” Söderbäck said. “Build the turbines near the cities where the power is needed."

Söderback said the damage the new turbine park would do to the natural environment, which local people and wildlife — including eagles, wolverines and bears — depend on, would outweigh any economic or wider ecological benefits.

On a recent weekday near Malung, which lies on the main road to popular ski resorts further north, businesses were open as usual, despite the coronavirus pandemic, allowing tourists to do things like rent a snow scooter or buy a reindeer skin rug.

Many local entrepreneurs are worried that wind turbines will put these tourists off.

“Visitors to our area want to see nature, not noisy industrial sites,” a film on tourism on the No to Wind Power on Ripfjället website said.

A recent survey by Gothenburg University showed support for investment in wind power is drifting lower nationally — 65 percent of Swedes now want more wind farms, down from 80 percent a decade ago.

However, in areas where turbines are actually being built, support appears drastically lower.

A referendum held in Malung last year on the Ripfjället project showed 52.1 percent against while only 44.6 percent were in favor. ...

Not quite Louis Blériot