National Trust wades into Navitus Bay wind farm debate applauding changes but saying more needs to be done

Mike Unsworth

CHANGES: Map showing the boundary of Navitus Bay

First published in News by , Chief Reporter

THE National Trust has waded into the debate over the wind farm planned for the Dorset coast – welcoming changes but saying more needs to be done.

The organisation said this week that the changes, reported earlier this month in the Daily Echo, were “a move in the right direction”.

But it said it remained concerned about the impact of the proposal. Earlier this month, developer Navitus Bay Development Ltd said it was removing the uppermost triangle of the planned site, meaning it would now be 12 miles off Christchurch instead of 10 and 13 from Bournemouth instead of 12.

But it would remain nine miles from Durlston and Swanage and campaign groups against it said the changes made no difference, with one saying it amounted to “rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic”.

Now, the National Trust’s assistant director of operations, Ian Wilson, has said: “We welcome the reduction in scale of the proposed wind park but would like to see more done to reduce the impact of the wind farm.

“We believe that offshore wind should make an important contribution to the country’s renewable energy targets, but it has to be in the right place at the right scale. We cannot support proposals that would seriously damage the beauty of the coastline we look after on behalf of the nation.

“The trust remains committed to working with all interested parties to make this development the best that it can be, and to find the best balance between the overall impact on the environment and landscape, and the need to generate clean and affordable energy.”

Navitus Bay plans to submit a planning application to the Government in the spring, and project manager Mike Unsworth said when the changes were announced that it showed it was listening to the concerns of the public and statutory consultees.

The changes would mean that the park would now cover an area of 155 sq km, compared to 175 sq km and the maximum number of turbines will be reduced from 218 to 194.

The National Trust said it would continue to urge Navitus Bay to explore every option to reduce the wind park’s visual impact, including moving the development further out to sea, as well as potentially reducing the height and number of turbines.

Comments (17)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:38pm Thu 20 Feb 14

Ebb Tide says...

He seems to be in agreement with the founder of the green movement who is understood to be sad that so many are prepared to sacrifice what little the UK has in order to show the rest of the world that they really shouldn't ignore our example. Wind power is also expensive with the impoverishing floor prices currently advocated..
He seems to be in agreement with the founder of the green movement who is understood to be sad that so many are prepared to sacrifice what little the UK has in order to show the rest of the world that they really shouldn't ignore our example. Wind power is also expensive with the impoverishing floor prices currently advocated.. Ebb Tide
  • Score: -3

12:50pm Thu 20 Feb 14

fedupwithjobsworths says...

Sod wind farms ... build more nuclear power stations!
Sod wind farms ... build more nuclear power stations! fedupwithjobsworths
  • Score: 8

1:02pm Thu 20 Feb 14

muscliffman says...

The public should be informed how much this pointless, non existent and popularly unwanted Navitus wind farm has ALREADY cost them?

Perhaps the Echo could do some investigative journalism and find out........after all it would lately be a novelty and this subject won't upset their 'friends' in Bournemouth Town Hall!
The public should be informed how much this pointless, non existent and popularly unwanted Navitus wind farm has ALREADY cost them? Perhaps the Echo could do some investigative journalism and find out........after all it would lately be a novelty and this subject won't upset their 'friends' in Bournemouth Town Hall! muscliffman
  • Score: 0

1:07pm Thu 20 Feb 14

Ebb Tide says...

fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Sod wind farms ... build more nuclear power stations!
It would be good to know why we are not subsidizing research into carbon capture and storage to any great degree.

Also since the vast reach of the Atlantic effectively stores wind into waves, it would be good to know why we seem to be disregarding the harnessing of wave power. Such an effort might carry the additional benefit of taking energy out of the waves that batter our coasts from time to time.

Winfrith has accepted nuclear activities without adverse public reactions in the past. Why not for the future ?
[quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: Sod wind farms ... build more nuclear power stations![/p][/quote]It would be good to know why we are not subsidizing research into carbon capture and storage to any great degree. Also since the vast reach of the Atlantic effectively stores wind into waves, it would be good to know why we seem to be disregarding the harnessing of wave power. Such an effort might carry the additional benefit of taking energy out of the waves that batter our coasts from time to time. Winfrith has accepted nuclear activities without adverse public reactions in the past. Why not for the future ? Ebb Tide
  • Score: 8

1:19pm Thu 20 Feb 14

Ebb Tide says...

muscliffman wrote:
The public should be informed how much this pointless, non existent and popularly unwanted Navitus wind farm has ALREADY cost them?

Perhaps the Echo could do some investigative journalism and find out........after all it would lately be a novelty and this subject won't upset their 'friends' in Bournemouth Town Hall!
We have a non sequitur. The Echo and "investigative journalism". Surprising really in view of the amount of information / prompts in the threads of comments that they receive from so many.

Do me a favour Echo and prove me wrong : prove that forensic journalism is within your power so that it helps the understanding of your Readers on significant local issues. You could market explanatory booklets on the salient local issues.
[quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: The public should be informed how much this pointless, non existent and popularly unwanted Navitus wind farm has ALREADY cost them? Perhaps the Echo could do some investigative journalism and find out........after all it would lately be a novelty and this subject won't upset their 'friends' in Bournemouth Town Hall![/p][/quote]We have a non sequitur. The Echo and "investigative journalism". Surprising really in view of the amount of information / prompts in the threads of comments that they receive from so many. Do me a favour Echo and prove me wrong : prove that forensic journalism is within your power so that it helps the understanding of your Readers on significant local issues. You could market explanatory booklets on the salient local issues. Ebb Tide
  • Score: 4

4:16pm Thu 20 Feb 14

Tommo. says...

This makes interesting reading -

http://www.telegraph
.co.uk/earth/energy/
windpower/10389434/M
ini-nukes-beat-monst
er-wind-farms-on-eve
ry-count.html
This makes interesting reading - http://www.telegraph .co.uk/earth/energy/ windpower/10389434/M ini-nukes-beat-monst er-wind-farms-on-eve ry-count.html Tommo.
  • Score: 0

5:01pm Thu 20 Feb 14

Townee says...

Perhaps they should paint the wind farm blue that way no one would notice it that far away.
Perhaps they should paint the wind farm blue that way no one would notice it that far away. Townee
  • Score: 3

6:31pm Thu 20 Feb 14

garethwatkins says...

fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Sod wind farms ... build more nuclear power stations!
Nuclear is NO option. The cost is so great that foreign investment and hence control is required. Despite more than 60+ years of nuclear power we are still no closer to solving the issue of how to deal with the waste, it remains deadly for longer than the time thats passed since the egyptian pyramids were built and the longterm cost of storage is huge. Plus where to store it? The nimbys dont want to look at windturbines but quite happy to dump nuclear waste somewhere else?
In an ever uncertain world with resources becoming scarcer and population increasing whatever energy strategy the UK follows should ensure as much self sufficiency as possible, paid by ourselves and controlled by ourselves.
This means making the most of whatever natural resources we have and this may well have to include offshore wind, fracked gas, plus wave energy which is abundant and totally underresearched and underfunded.
Equally we need to consider how many homes could be made more energy efficient for the cost of a single wind turbine!
[quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: Sod wind farms ... build more nuclear power stations![/p][/quote]Nuclear is NO option. The cost is so great that foreign investment and hence control is required. Despite more than 60+ years of nuclear power we are still no closer to solving the issue of how to deal with the waste, it remains deadly for longer than the time thats passed since the egyptian pyramids were built and the longterm cost of storage is huge. Plus where to store it? The nimbys dont want to look at windturbines but quite happy to dump nuclear waste somewhere else? In an ever uncertain world with resources becoming scarcer and population increasing whatever energy strategy the UK follows should ensure as much self sufficiency as possible, paid by ourselves and controlled by ourselves. This means making the most of whatever natural resources we have and this may well have to include offshore wind, fracked gas, plus wave energy which is abundant and totally underresearched and underfunded. Equally we need to consider how many homes could be made more energy efficient for the cost of a single wind turbine! garethwatkins
  • Score: -1

7:18pm Thu 20 Feb 14

Ophilum says...

The national trust are just another green lobby group and believe in all this global warming rubbish, wind farms are of no use as it costs us all to much money in subsidies to make them viable to the fat cats who want to get rich at our expense, if they are so good at making electricity build them with your own money not our tax money.
The national trust are just another green lobby group and believe in all this global warming rubbish, wind farms are of no use as it costs us all to much money in subsidies to make them viable to the fat cats who want to get rich at our expense, if they are so good at making electricity build them with your own money not our tax money. Ophilum
  • Score: -1

7:35pm Thu 20 Feb 14

kalebmoledirt says...

Build the turbines on Studland heath.And leave the boring horizone clear on the few days that there is no fog ,heat haze or rain,prove the point and anchor a balloon 9 miles out and see how many times it comes into view.go look at the horizone of Kent ,you have look hard to see them except at night when they appear as the tree huggers alternative to a nuclear power stations built along the coast
Build the turbines on Studland heath.And leave the boring horizone clear on the few days that there is no fog ,heat haze or rain,prove the point and anchor a balloon 9 miles out and see how many times it comes into view.go look at the horizone of Kent ,you have look hard to see them except at night when they appear as the tree huggers alternative to a nuclear power stations built along the coast kalebmoledirt
  • Score: -1

7:41pm Thu 20 Feb 14

davecook says...

Just allow any number of wind farms but without any subsidy. Then watch the number of applications including Navitus all dry up overnight.
Just allow any number of wind farms but without any subsidy. Then watch the number of applications including Navitus all dry up overnight. davecook
  • Score: 4

7:55pm Thu 20 Feb 14

Hessenford says...

Ophilum wrote:
The national trust are just another green lobby group and believe in all this global warming rubbish, wind farms are of no use as it costs us all to much money in subsidies to make them viable to the fat cats who want to get rich at our expense, if they are so good at making electricity build them with your own money not our tax money.
Well said.
[quote][p][bold]Ophilum[/bold] wrote: The national trust are just another green lobby group and believe in all this global warming rubbish, wind farms are of no use as it costs us all to much money in subsidies to make them viable to the fat cats who want to get rich at our expense, if they are so good at making electricity build them with your own money not our tax money.[/p][/quote]Well said. Hessenford
  • Score: 1

7:56pm Thu 20 Feb 14

kalebmoledirt says...

garethwatkins wrote:
fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
Sod wind farms ... build more nuclear power stations!
Nuclear is NO option. The cost is so great that foreign investment and hence control is required. Despite more than 60+ years of nuclear power we are still no closer to solving the issue of how to deal with the waste, it remains deadly for longer than the time thats passed since the egyptian pyramids were built and the longterm cost of storage is huge. Plus where to store it? The nimbys dont want to look at windturbines but quite happy to dump nuclear waste somewhere else?
In an ever uncertain world with resources becoming scarcer and population increasing whatever energy strategy the UK follows should ensure as much self sufficiency as possible, paid by ourselves and controlled by ourselves.
This means making the most of whatever natural resources we have and this may well have to include offshore wind, fracked gas, plus wave energy which is abundant and totally underresearched and underfunded.
Equally we need to consider how many homes could be made more energy efficient for the cost of a single wind turbine!
In a fair debat,I'm with Gareth .Just hope he doesn't give the impression he's an astronaut by wearing a big watch that looks like it came from the same place as his degree, e-bay
[quote][p][bold]garethwatkins[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: Sod wind farms ... build more nuclear power stations![/p][/quote]Nuclear is NO option. The cost is so great that foreign investment and hence control is required. Despite more than 60+ years of nuclear power we are still no closer to solving the issue of how to deal with the waste, it remains deadly for longer than the time thats passed since the egyptian pyramids were built and the longterm cost of storage is huge. Plus where to store it? The nimbys dont want to look at windturbines but quite happy to dump nuclear waste somewhere else? In an ever uncertain world with resources becoming scarcer and population increasing whatever energy strategy the UK follows should ensure as much self sufficiency as possible, paid by ourselves and controlled by ourselves. This means making the most of whatever natural resources we have and this may well have to include offshore wind, fracked gas, plus wave energy which is abundant and totally underresearched and underfunded. Equally we need to consider how many homes could be made more energy efficient for the cost of a single wind turbine![/p][/quote]In a fair debat,I'm with Gareth .Just hope he doesn't give the impression he's an astronaut by wearing a big watch that looks like it came from the same place as his degree, e-bay kalebmoledirt
  • Score: 0

10:25pm Thu 20 Feb 14

Ebb Tide says...

davecook wrote:
Just allow any number of wind farms but without any subsidy. Then watch the number of applications including Navitus all dry up overnight.
Yes the subsidies are the problem not the solution. They distort too much.
[quote][p][bold]davecook[/bold] wrote: Just allow any number of wind farms but without any subsidy. Then watch the number of applications including Navitus all dry up overnight.[/p][/quote]Yes the subsidies are the problem not the solution. They distort too much. Ebb Tide
  • Score: 1

10:29pm Thu 20 Feb 14

garethwatkins says...

Hessenford wrote:
Ophilum wrote:
The national trust are just another green lobby group and believe in all this global warming rubbish, wind farms are of no use as it costs us all to much money in subsidies to make them viable to the fat cats who want to get rich at our expense, if they are so good at making electricity build them with your own money not our tax money.
Well said.
1 - name me a source of energy that has not made fat cats rich? None! Whatever energy sources we develop someone, somewhere will get rich, so this is a pointless addition to the debate on whether we should allow this windfarm to go ahead or not.
2 - belief in global warming or not? As far as I can see the worlds climate has always changed ( the ice age etc. ) so it is very likely that it is changing now and given how intolerant our civilisation is to climate changes then however it changes and whatever causes it, natural or man,ade, is going to cause all of us big problems in the very near future regardless of whether we build wind turbines or not.
3 - do offshore windfarms generate greener electricity anyway? How much pollution and greenhouse gas is produced in the manufacture, installation, maintenance and eventual decommission of a wind turbine and all its onshore facilities too? I am not convinced that they are greener than gas fired power stations.
4 - do wind turbines provide us with energy security for the future? then yes, they can help to do this. I suspect that many voices who comment here will not like buying gas and electricity from foreign countries and making foreign fat cats rich, so maybe a national energy policy that puts national self sufficiency as the highest priority would be preferabel to these people? In which case they may just have to put up with looking at a few windturbines across the bay.
[quote][p][bold]Hessenford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ophilum[/bold] wrote: The national trust are just another green lobby group and believe in all this global warming rubbish, wind farms are of no use as it costs us all to much money in subsidies to make them viable to the fat cats who want to get rich at our expense, if they are so good at making electricity build them with your own money not our tax money.[/p][/quote]Well said.[/p][/quote]1 - name me a source of energy that has not made fat cats rich? None! Whatever energy sources we develop someone, somewhere will get rich, so this is a pointless addition to the debate on whether we should allow this windfarm to go ahead or not. 2 - belief in global warming or not? As far as I can see the worlds climate has always changed ( the ice age etc. ) so it is very likely that it is changing now and given how intolerant our civilisation is to climate changes then however it changes and whatever causes it, natural or man,ade, is going to cause all of us big problems in the very near future regardless of whether we build wind turbines or not. 3 - do offshore windfarms generate greener electricity anyway? How much pollution and greenhouse gas is produced in the manufacture, installation, maintenance and eventual decommission of a wind turbine and all its onshore facilities too? I am not convinced that they are greener than gas fired power stations. 4 - do wind turbines provide us with energy security for the future? then yes, they can help to do this. I suspect that many voices who comment here will not like buying gas and electricity from foreign countries and making foreign fat cats rich, so maybe a national energy policy that puts national self sufficiency as the highest priority would be preferabel to these people? In which case they may just have to put up with looking at a few windturbines across the bay. garethwatkins
  • Score: 1

9:17am Fri 21 Feb 14

Ebb Tide says...

garethwatkins wrote:
Hessenford wrote:
Ophilum wrote:
The national trust are just another green lobby group and believe in all this global warming rubbish, wind farms are of no use as it costs us all to much money in subsidies to make them viable to the fat cats who want to get rich at our expense, if they are so good at making electricity build them with your own money not our tax money.
Well said.
1 - name me a source of energy that has not made fat cats rich? None! Whatever energy sources we develop someone, somewhere will get rich, so this is a pointless addition to the debate on whether we should allow this windfarm to go ahead or not.
2 - belief in global warming or not? As far as I can see the worlds climate has always changed ( the ice age etc. ) so it is very likely that it is changing now and given how intolerant our civilisation is to climate changes then however it changes and whatever causes it, natural or man,ade, is going to cause all of us big problems in the very near future regardless of whether we build wind turbines or not.
3 - do offshore windfarms generate greener electricity anyway? How much pollution and greenhouse gas is produced in the manufacture, installation, maintenance and eventual decommission of a wind turbine and all its onshore facilities too? I am not convinced that they are greener than gas fired power stations.
4 - do wind turbines provide us with energy security for the future? then yes, they can help to do this. I suspect that many voices who comment here will not like buying gas and electricity from foreign countries and making foreign fat cats rich, so maybe a national energy policy that puts national self sufficiency as the highest priority would be preferabel to these people? In which case they may just have to put up with looking at a few windturbines across the bay.
A UK energy policy is a good idea.

No doubt one will become available after 2015 to replace the 'off the cuff' statements we get now from a discredited "greenest government" currently failing to produce a credible energy policy.

A credible policy should reflect our own resourcefulness and not impoverish us by the neglect of such resources.
[quote][p][bold]garethwatkins[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Hessenford[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ophilum[/bold] wrote: The national trust are just another green lobby group and believe in all this global warming rubbish, wind farms are of no use as it costs us all to much money in subsidies to make them viable to the fat cats who want to get rich at our expense, if they are so good at making electricity build them with your own money not our tax money.[/p][/quote]Well said.[/p][/quote]1 - name me a source of energy that has not made fat cats rich? None! Whatever energy sources we develop someone, somewhere will get rich, so this is a pointless addition to the debate on whether we should allow this windfarm to go ahead or not. 2 - belief in global warming or not? As far as I can see the worlds climate has always changed ( the ice age etc. ) so it is very likely that it is changing now and given how intolerant our civilisation is to climate changes then however it changes and whatever causes it, natural or man,ade, is going to cause all of us big problems in the very near future regardless of whether we build wind turbines or not. 3 - do offshore windfarms generate greener electricity anyway? How much pollution and greenhouse gas is produced in the manufacture, installation, maintenance and eventual decommission of a wind turbine and all its onshore facilities too? I am not convinced that they are greener than gas fired power stations. 4 - do wind turbines provide us with energy security for the future? then yes, they can help to do this. I suspect that many voices who comment here will not like buying gas and electricity from foreign countries and making foreign fat cats rich, so maybe a national energy policy that puts national self sufficiency as the highest priority would be preferabel to these people? In which case they may just have to put up with looking at a few windturbines across the bay.[/p][/quote]A UK energy policy is a good idea. No doubt one will become available after 2015 to replace the 'off the cuff' statements we get now from a discredited "greenest government" currently failing to produce a credible energy policy. A credible policy should reflect our own resourcefulness and not impoverish us by the neglect of such resources. Ebb Tide
  • Score: 0

8:51pm Fri 21 Feb 14

TOM AND JANE says...

Wind turbine construction is by no means green as their massive blades are made from composites materials, honeycomb, carbon, glass and no amount of resin. The electrical energy produced can hardly be called economical and affordable, costing at least 5 times that of a gas powered station, taking into account all the subsidies paid to the foreign companies building them. The Germans and Danes from practical experience have now given up on them, the former now building numerous coal fired powered stations. When will our government learn the mesage before our electricity becomes the most expensive in Europe making our Industry totally uncompetitive?
Wind turbine construction is by no means green as their massive blades are made from composites materials, honeycomb, carbon, glass and no amount of resin. The electrical energy produced can hardly be called economical and affordable, costing at least 5 times that of a gas powered station, taking into account all the subsidies paid to the foreign companies building them. The Germans and Danes from practical experience have now given up on them, the former now building numerous coal fired powered stations. When will our government learn the mesage before our electricity becomes the most expensive in Europe making our Industry totally uncompetitive? TOM AND JANE
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree