Navitus Bay boss speaks out over opposition to wind farm scheme

Dorset Echo: PLEA: Mike Unsworth, inset, project director of  the Navitus Bay wind farm PLEA: Mike Unsworth, inset, project director of the Navitus Bay wind farm

THE company behind the proposed wind farm off the Dorset coast has expressed ‘disappointment’ at the opposition from local councils Dorset County Council and Poole Conservative councillors have both spoken out against the scheme.

In reply Mike Unsworth, project director at Navitus Bay has pointed up the benefits the £3billion project would bring.

“We are disappointed at the stance taken by the Dorset County Council and the Conservatives Councillors of the Borough of Poole Council on the proposed wind park,” he said.

“Polls conducted for Navitus Bay by independent researchers, combined with our own experience of talking to local residents, indicate majority support for the project and wind energy more generally across Dorset, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight.

“If the wind park is given planning permission, it will not only make an important contribution to renewable energy production in the UK, it will also have a significant positive impact on the local economy.

“According to latest independent projections, peak construction years could support a minimum of 1,700 jobs. The wind park’s operations and maintenance (O&M) base – for which Poole, Portland and Yarmouth Harbours have been shortlisted as hosts – is expected to support around 140 jobs annually.

“The O&M base alone is expected to provide an economic value to the region of £590 million over the 25-year lifespan of the project.

“We would urge local residents and organisations who want to see these benefits realised across the region to register their views with the Planning Inspectorate.”

Poole’s 19-strong Conservative group has issued a statement unanimously opposing the wind farm, stating that to “place an inefficient industrial complex” in an area of outstanding natural beauty ‘offends common sense’.

And Dorset County Council’s cabinet upheld the planning committee’s opposition to the application in its current form.

There were fears it could produce as little as 20 to 30 per cent of the one gigawatt estimated output quoted in the original application.

Comments (10)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:44am Sat 7 Jun 14

Watchful_Eye says...

“Polls conducted for Navitus Bay by independent researchers, combined with our own experience of talking to local residents, indicate majority support for the project and wind energy more generally across Dorset, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight."

Can Navitus publish this information, showing who was asked, when and where?
“Polls conducted for Navitus Bay by independent researchers, combined with our own experience of talking to local residents, indicate majority support for the project and wind energy more generally across Dorset, Hampshire and the Isle of Wight." Can Navitus publish this information, showing who was asked, when and where? Watchful_Eye
  • Score: 5

9:00am Sat 7 Jun 14

TenBobDylanThomasHardy says...

Watchful_Eye, it's all referenced from the Navitus Bay website, not sure if it can be accessed directly but the Researcher's details and University links are there.
Watchful_Eye, it's all referenced from the Navitus Bay website, not sure if it can be accessed directly but the Researcher's details and University links are there. TenBobDylanThomasHardy
  • Score: 3

9:29am Sat 7 Jun 14

annotater says...

Speaking as a resident of more than 50 years and I know a lot of locals, I have yet to meet someone who is for the eyesore.
Strange how the poll result is on their web site! I can't think why ... can you?
Speaking as a resident of more than 50 years and I know a lot of locals, I have yet to meet someone who is for the eyesore. Strange how the poll result is on their web site! I can't think why ... can you? annotater
  • Score: -1

9:53am Sat 7 Jun 14

PossumGoose says...

Unesco have suggested that they will remove the Jurassic Coast World Heritage standing if this scheme goes ahead. Think of the income lost if that happens.
Unesco have suggested that they will remove the Jurassic Coast World Heritage standing if this scheme goes ahead. Think of the income lost if that happens. PossumGoose
  • Score: 2

10:22am Sat 7 Jun 14

islandman says...

We have just returned from a few weeks away, where part of it was spent at a Haven Holiday Camp at Gt Yarmouth (not our choice). Standing on the beach, looking out to sea, were 30 wind turbines. My god, what monstrosities. Instead of looking for shipping, our eyes were drawn to the wretched things.

Another day, we visited the small thriving Norfolk town of Swaffam. There looming over the tops of houses, were wind turbines, so close they appeared to be in someone's garden (which they weren't).

Yes they might be a necessity, but "not in our backyard".
We have just returned from a few weeks away, where part of it was spent at a Haven Holiday Camp at Gt Yarmouth (not our choice). Standing on the beach, looking out to sea, were 30 wind turbines. My god, what monstrosities. Instead of looking for shipping, our eyes were drawn to the wretched things. Another day, we visited the small thriving Norfolk town of Swaffam. There looming over the tops of houses, were wind turbines, so close they appeared to be in someone's garden (which they weren't). Yes they might be a necessity, but "not in our backyard". islandman
  • Score: -1

8:48pm Sat 7 Jun 14

luffy22 says...

islandman wrote:
We have just returned from a few weeks away, where part of it was spent at a Haven Holiday Camp at Gt Yarmouth (not our choice). Standing on the beach, looking out to sea, were 30 wind turbines. My god, what monstrosities. Instead of looking for shipping, our eyes were drawn to the wretched things.

Another day, we visited the small thriving Norfolk town of Swaffam. There looming over the tops of houses, were wind turbines, so close they appeared to be in someone's garden (which they weren't).

Yes they might be a necessity, but "not in our backyard".
'Yes they might be a necessity, but "not in our backyard".'
Yes 100% right, not in our backyard. Sad the way people think, the more this carries on the more I wonder for out grandchildren growing up in a world of no electricity and a ruined planet due to having to find more ingenious ways of gather fossil fuels to pollute the atmosphere.

So think about what you want in a few years time; A view where you can see in the distance a few big white towers, not to different to looking at the London skyline from the surrey hills or not being able to see anything due to rising sea levels eating away the land mass and smog from the fossil fuels. I guess all the selfish NIMBY's will all be dead by then of old age 'so whats the issue?' i'm alright jack springs to mind.
[quote][p][bold]islandman[/bold] wrote: We have just returned from a few weeks away, where part of it was spent at a Haven Holiday Camp at Gt Yarmouth (not our choice). Standing on the beach, looking out to sea, were 30 wind turbines. My god, what monstrosities. Instead of looking for shipping, our eyes were drawn to the wretched things. Another day, we visited the small thriving Norfolk town of Swaffam. There looming over the tops of houses, were wind turbines, so close they appeared to be in someone's garden (which they weren't). Yes they might be a necessity, but "not in our backyard".[/p][/quote]'Yes they might be a necessity, but "not in our backyard".' Yes 100% right, not in our backyard. Sad the way people think, the more this carries on the more I wonder for out grandchildren growing up in a world of no electricity and a ruined planet due to having to find more ingenious ways of gather fossil fuels to pollute the atmosphere. So think about what you want in a few years time; A view where you can see in the distance a few big white towers, not to different to looking at the London skyline from the surrey hills or not being able to see anything due to rising sea levels eating away the land mass and smog from the fossil fuels. I guess all the selfish NIMBY's will all be dead by then of old age 'so whats the issue?' i'm alright jack springs to mind. luffy22
  • Score: 6

9:45pm Sat 7 Jun 14

PossumGoose says...

Luffy,
What you fail to realise is that for every MegaWat invested in wind turbines, has to be matched by the equivalent capacity of 'conventional' generation. This is a statutory requirement to ensure continuity when there is no wind. The through-life carbon cost of turbines is surprisingly high.
Luffy, What you fail to realise is that for every MegaWat invested in wind turbines, has to be matched by the equivalent capacity of 'conventional' generation. This is a statutory requirement to ensure continuity when there is no wind. The through-life carbon cost of turbines is surprisingly high. PossumGoose
  • Score: -2

11:16pm Sat 7 Jun 14

luffy22 says...

PossumGoose wrote:
Luffy,
What you fail to realise is that for every MegaWat invested in wind turbines, has to be matched by the equivalent capacity of 'conventional' generation. This is a statutory requirement to ensure continuity when there is no wind. The through-life carbon cost of turbines is surprisingly high.
Thanks very much for a polite answer, which is something that is not often given on here, I'm no scientist and I don't pretend to know much on this subject but it does seem to me even with your very well put argument that if half of the power is supplied by wind power that is far better for my children and grandchildren than non of it.
[quote][p][bold]PossumGoose[/bold] wrote: Luffy, What you fail to realise is that for every MegaWat invested in wind turbines, has to be matched by the equivalent capacity of 'conventional' generation. This is a statutory requirement to ensure continuity when there is no wind. The through-life carbon cost of turbines is surprisingly high.[/p][/quote]Thanks very much for a polite answer, which is something that is not often given on here, I'm no scientist and I don't pretend to know much on this subject but it does seem to me even with your very well put argument that if half of the power is supplied by wind power that is far better for my children and grandchildren than non of it. luffy22
  • Score: 6

6:05am Sun 8 Jun 14

mark@greenhill says...

To the person who claimed they had never met anyone in favour of this project, might I suggest you ask around outside of your own house?

I'm completely in favour for many reasons, and utterly fed up with the nimby attitude of the loud minority.

I would hazard a guess that a large number of the anti everything brigade, are simply thinking of their own views out to sea, or they are part of the "I'm allright Jack" mentality?

A large number of the rest of us, actually find them fascinating things to sit and watch, and if they are part of the future generating capacity of this country, then we should have our share in that, especially if the construction, and installation/mainten
ance brings much needed work to our area.
To the person who claimed they had never met anyone in favour of this project, might I suggest you ask around outside of your own house? I'm completely in favour for many reasons, and utterly fed up with the nimby attitude of the loud minority. I would hazard a guess that a large number of the anti everything brigade, are simply thinking of their own views out to sea, or they are part of the "I'm allright Jack" mentality? A large number of the rest of us, actually find them fascinating things to sit and watch, and if they are part of the future generating capacity of this country, then we should have our share in that, especially if the construction, and installation/mainten ance brings much needed work to our area. mark@greenhill
  • Score: 8

5:09pm Sun 8 Jun 14

TenBobDylanThomasHardy says...

Not quite sure what 'Statute' PossumGoose is referring to? Given that there is significantly more 'conventional' generating capacity than there is Renewable I can't see what the problem is, every Renewable project is simply adding to the total capacity. Accept that, as demand increases there is a need to 'back-up' the renewables but does that justify not building any renewables?
Not quite sure what 'Statute' PossumGoose is referring to? [Please advise further] Given that there is significantly more 'conventional' generating capacity than there is Renewable I can't see what the problem is, every Renewable project is simply adding to the total capacity. Accept that, as demand increases there is a need to 'back-up' the renewables but does that justify not building any renewables? TenBobDylanThomasHardy
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

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