Caít Keane (Fine Gael)

I do not have any direction from the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, any other Minister or the Civil Service. I do not know about Senator Leyden; perhaps he has more experience than I have.

The Bill proposes to regulate the distance between wind turbines and residential premises. There are quite a few issues that must be evaluated when considering the Bill. Rather than considering each in isolation, we should consider them all together. Consideration must be given to Ireland's renewable energy targets and the benefits that can be accrued from using cleaner, greener energy sources. It is a question of striking a balance between human rights and energy provision requirements. We must work on this.

Renewable energy development is a vital part of Ireland's strategy to tackle the two major challenges facing us today: ensuring a secure supply of energy and combating climate change. Wind energy can be produced indigenously. We had a great debate only a week ago on energy. All the issues raised are very relevant today in the context of wind turbines.

Recent volatility in fossil fuel prices has demonstrated that regions with high dependency on energy imports are exposed to a high level of risk. This volatility makes it difficult for investors in the economy to make reliable long-term forecasts of their energy costs. It is estimated that between 25% and 30% of capital investment in renewable energy is retained in the local economy. All this must be taken into consideration in decisions we make on energy and masts.

There are wind turbines that fall into the category of exempted developments. They probably cause as much trouble as any other project. Section 3 of the Bill states no relevant authority may grant planning permission for the construction of a wind turbine generator unless it meets a minimum-distance requirement under section 4, subject to the exception in section 5, namely, the one based on the consent of the residents. However, nothing is said about the current exempted developments. SI 83 of 2007 was introduced into law as part of an attempt to ease the burden of planning for renewable energy systems, including wind turbines, solar PV systems, etc. All of this must be examined.

SI 600 of 2001 gives planners the right to refuse an exemption if it interferes with the character or landscape of an area. There are many other issues in this regard that must be considered in conjunction with this Bill. I understand where the Senator is coming from in this regard.

With regard to domestic houses, the maximum permitted height of an exempted turbine from ground to blade tip is 13 m. I presume this will still stand under the Bill. There is no change being made because the Bill is silent on the exemptions. I presume this silence means that the status quo remains.

The noise level should be taken into consideration when setting a new limit, as this Bill proposes. There is a maximum noise level set at present. We should consider it if we are taking distance into account. There is currently no legislation in place prescribing the separation distance between wind turbines and residential properties but there are some safeguards and guidelines in place. Suitable siting considerations are standard in planning processes, or should be. Interpretation by many planners is wide open and this is probably what Senator Kelly is trying to counteract. Local topography, ground cover, population distribution and acoustic characteristics all play a part in the planning assessment, which differs from site to site.

The rationale behind the proposal to regulate the distance between turbines is well intentioned. The planning guidelines are designed, or should be designed, to ensure consistency throughout the country in the identification of suitable locations for wind energy developments. I do not know whether a separation distance will lead to consistency nationally. Some of the best wind sites may be excluded. There is a lot of NIMBYism but not all objections fall into this category. As Senator Kelly stated, human rights must be considered.

How was the distance proposed in section 4 chosen and how were the figures arrived at? Under the provisions of the Bill, a turbine of 24 m would involve no minimum distance from a residential dwelling whereas one of 25 m, which is only 1 m taller, would have to be 500 m therefrom. Let no one misinterpret me because I am a believer in the setting of a minimum distance where a development may be harmful to the residents concerned. For example, when I was a member of South Dublin County Council, I instigated a minimum limit of 100 m in respect of telephone masts. This was adopted in the council's development plan, although it was overruled on one occasion by An Bord Pleanála. I am not against limits but want to ensure there is a scientific reason for choosing one. I ask the Minister of State to consider this.

Connection to the grid and mast size comprise another issue. Planners make it very difficult for wind energy providers when they ask them to provide a photomontage, which costs approximately €10,000. One planning condition that I came across was that tall, quick-growing trees should be planted in close proximity for screening purposes. Is it sensible to grow trees that may block the wind close to a wind turbine? Planning issues must be considered in this regard.

Wind energy developments are required to demonstrate environmental benefits and how environmental and social impacts have been minimised through the careful consideration of the location, scale, design and other measures.

When considering minimum distances, the Minister of State should bear in mind that the establishment of rigid separation distances and linking them to turbine height could actually lead to negative outcomes for householders. For example, it could lead to proposals being submitted for the building a greater number of smaller turbines of 24 m, which is below the 25 m threshold. Do we want this? It is not sustainable for either energy producers or households.

There are many questions I could ask. I thank Senator Whelan for raising this issue. We must put considerable thought into the matter if we are to secure energy provision and safeguard households. I am open to persuasion on the scientific value of setting certain distances. I have not conducted the research myself on that matter.