Dáil debates

Wednesday, 3 February 2010

Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Second Stage (Resumed)

 

4:00 pm

Photo of Simon CoveneySimon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)

I am pleased to have an opportunity to try to impress some views on the Minister and his team on the further amendments required to be made to the Bill.

I will speak about the need to link energy policy with planning and development policy given that we are currently in the process of planning and starting to deliver a transformative agenda in terms of this country's energy marketplace that we hope will by 2020 have constructed up to 6,000 MW of capacity from wind. That will require somewhere between 2,000 and 3,000 turbines, each one as tall as the spire in Dublin. Those huge construction projects will impact on communities across the country. We are also planning an ambitious roll-out of ocean energy and wave energy projects.

The Bill in its current construct gives rise to concern that we have not integrated energy policy with planning policy to the extent that is required. That is surprising, considering that the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources and the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government come from the same party and have a similar ideology, which is trying to take this country down a route of renewable energy sources, which I support. We need to ensure that from a practical implementation point of view, which is why I am somewhat pleased at the presence of the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Finneran. I see him as a practical Minister in terms of putting a practical roadmap and viable plan in place that is cost effective for the massive infrastructural construct that is required. It should not cost energy users an absolute fortune. The biggest impediment to the energy revolution that is envisaged here is the construction of the grid infrastructure to deliver that. For example, we need to connect up the wind farms and beef up the electricity infrastructure to a level that is able to take the kind of power that will come from the west, north-west and south-west from big wind energy projects. We need to take another look at the way in which we approach the issue.

The Gate 3 process is deeply flawed in that what we are essentially doing is choosing the areas of the country where we are going to build dozens of wind farms on the basis of how long the developers have been waiting for a decision on grid connection. All over the country we have speculators in this marketplace who have no intention of ever building a wind farm, but they have applied for planning permission and grid connection so that they can sell on those rights when they get them to some big player such as Bord Gáis, Airtricity or Viridian. I am hugely supportive of what the Government parties are trying to do in terms of dramatically increasing the amount of electricity generated from renewable sources, in particular from wind, to meet the targets it has set but they are not planning in the correct way. Parts of the country where infrastructure will be built should be zoned. Those parts should be selected on the basis of wind speed, aesthetic amenity and wind consistency. During the planning stage, we should choose the parts of the country that are most suited to this dramatic construction project with huge towers being built to carry turbines, which will drive the country's power in the future.

We, as policymakers, working with planners should design the zones in the State that are most suited and then we should approach ESB Networks and EirGrid to connect these zones. Billions of euro will be spent on grid infrastructure over the next number of years, including on 410 kV lines, 220 kV lines and 110 kV lines, which will link large wind farms. The problems, objections, community concerns, costs and challenges, which may involve putting some of the infrastructure underground should not be addressed in an uncoordinated fashion, as is happening with Gate 3 currently. Will the Minister seriously consider this issue? I am trying to raise it in as constructive a way as I can.

I refer to the microgeneration industry. If farmers are permitted to build turbines on their farms to produce their own power, first, an export tariff scheme must be in place to encourage them to do this from a financial perspective and, second, it must also be ensured that, from a planning perspective, they can do so easily and cost effectively.

Planning issues arise in the development of wind farms. Granting planning permission for five years for such a farm is an issue, given the time it takes to secure grid connection is between eight and ten years. The permission, therefore, will expire before the vast majority of applicants are connected to the grid. The Bill makes provision for applications to the local authority for a five-year extension to planning permissions but the conditions for doing so are not defined. Developers are being asked to spend vast sums on these projects and they must be given certainty about extensions for planning permission. This is an important issue. If an extension is secured, the legislation provides that an applicant cannot ask for a second extension. If a developer has an awkward site for which it may take more then ten years to secure grid roll-out and grid connection, it is insane for us as policymakers to say he or she cannot apply for a second extension. He or she should be able to and the application should be judged on its merits. Perhaps it should not be as easy to be approved for another extension but we cannot prohibit that in law.

Another issue is the use of the Planning and Development (Strategic Infrastructure) Act 2006 for large wind projects. The Minister proposes that the qualifying criteria be reduced. It was suggested that a wind farm project would have to comprise at least 50 turbines before going down the strategic infrastructure route but the number has been reduced to 25. I could understand the thinking behind that if the legislation was working but it is not quicker for a developer to go down this route and it is much more costly. Developers need to come up with €100,000 upfront. If this legislation is used to streamline the planning system, deadlines will have to be set for An Bord Pleanála to deliver. We should consider waiving the €100,000 application fee for the development of wind farms if we are to positively discriminate in favour of this industry to allow those involved to build as quickly as we hope they will build.

Joined up thinking is needed between the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, EirGrid and the other arms of the State responsible for delivering the roll-out of infrastructure that can facilitate the private sector to build wind farms. It also needs to be ensured that the public are protected and their interests and concerns are taken into account regarding this significant construction project. Should we, for example, introduce guidelines regarding the distance between a tower carrying a turbine and a residential property? Addressing such issues will encourage people to develop appropriate sites in isolated areas that do not have scenic amenity problems. This will be welcomed by communities living nearby and it will not result in turbines being built on top of houses and residential communities.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.