Today is D-day for a wind turbine planned for Bodham.

North Norfolk District Council recommends refusal of controversial Bodham wind turbine

By ALEX HURRELL, Reporter Friday, August 17, 2012
12:09 PM

A controversial plan for a wind turbine in a north Norfolk village is set to be thrown out next week because of the structure’s impact on surroundings including historic Baconsthorpe Castle.

North Norfolk District Council officers are recommending refusal of a plan for a turbine, measuring 86.5m to its blade-tip height, on land at Pond Farm, Bodham.

In a report to next Thursday’s development committee officers say the benefits - electricity and cash for community causes - would not outweigh the “identified harm to the wider landscape and a number of heritage assets.”

The application has generated a hurricane of protest. NNDC received 1,826 representations, of which 1,456 were against and 368 in favour.

Opponents feared for the visual and sound impact of a turbine on the environment, which was compared by one correspondent to a 22-storey building.

They also questioned the efficiency of turbines, argued that they belonged off-shore and said approval would set a damaging precedent.

One person said: “To build a turbine at Bodham would be as contemptible an assault on our national heritage as taking a Stanley knife to a publicly-owned painting by John Constable.”

Parish and town councils at Aylmerton, Baconsthorpe, Beckham, Brinton, Holt, Kelling, Plumstead, Sheringham and Stibbard also objected to the application. Bodham Parish Council was evenly split on the plan, submitted by the Mack-family-run firm Genatec.

Thursday’s meeting, at NNDC’s Holt Road headquarters in Cromer, begins at 9.30am.

49 comments

Norfolk Dumpiling; I wouldn't contest your calculations. However what you have failed to do is factor in the issue that energy in the form of heat isn't the only by-product from the use of fossil and nuclear fuels is it? Not only do you have CO2 but oxides in their various guises, VOC's, sulphur (look up acidic lakes in Scandinavia, yes that was us!) I haven't even touched on radioactive waste. The output from the genration of electricity from wind is... well, electricity.

Report this comment

norfolkboy15@gmail.com

Wednesday, August 22, 2012
it is a pity that the "Pro-wind turbines" posters seem technically incompetent with respect to understanding the science and calculations which back GOOD energy generation technologies. They are also obviously technically ignorant about something called 'energy density'. Find out about it and you will discover that 1kg water releases 1,000x, 1 kg fossil fuels 100,000,000x and 1 kg nuclear 1,000,000,000,000x times that which 1 kg of moving air can produce. So what would you rather invest your money in especially knowing that carbon dioxide is the chemical food of life. On the science alone, wind generation does not "cut the mustard" except in farming money for greedy vested interest charlatans and destroying our environment. You are quite welcome to offer 'sound science responsibly' to justify Bodham [See National Planning Policy Framework, Page 2 "Achieving sustainable development", 5th Guideline] but somehow there is no technologically sound argument, so thus the scheme must be rejected as serving no purpose except to have many of us subsidising for 25 years the electricity bill of the organisation responsible for the PlanApp.

Report this comment

Norfolk Dumpling

Wednesday, August 22, 2012
Sayitasitis; You are as always completely wrong in assuming that a mere web-forum is a fair representation of the overall picture. Indeed recent surveys have always shown that there is a silent majority who support renewable schemes. It is purely the hostility of people such as yourself that stops them from speaking up. If you wanted a open and honest debate on the issue i'd strongly suggest you changed your approach.

Report this comment

norfolkboy15@gmail.com

Wednesday, August 22, 2012
weaversway; based upon your last comment one would therefore assume that you are also busy lobbying against the humongous tax breaks afforded to the oil & gas businesses? How about the massive subsidies given to the nuclear group. The subsidy for nuclear by the way last for decades, not the 25 years we'd be looking at for a wind farm.

Report this comment

norfolkboy15@gmail.com

Wednesday, August 22, 2012
The small band in favour of cash machine on shore turbines are doing their best to spin this proposal as 'green', as they were in the 'Look East' item this evening. It is not green. It is the colour of vested interest money. The subsidies we are paying for them is obscene and just a way of transferring cash to landowners. I say again, tell your MP and local councillors your vote will not go to them if they go on with these monstrous schemes

Report this comment

weaversway

Tuesday, August 21, 2012
NB15.... You are, again, completey wrong in your views, it must be obvious to most, if not you, that more than 80% of those responding to the planning application are against, if you read down the, now, 42 comments, to even this minor announcement you surely see that those for are both in the minority and usually, ill informed as to the subject. If this is passed, then N Norfolk will lose FAR more than it could ever gain, tourism, in particular, is a major "industry" here, tourists do not travel to view absurd industrial money turbines, especially if they also know that it can't, simultaneously, power 90 kettles, and even worse know that they are also financing it!!!

Report this comment

windup

Tuesday, August 21, 2012
NB15... Once again we disagree!! Your first sentence should have read....." One can only hope that the planning inspector will see that this 555ft (blade tip) above sea level eysore will only generate 180Kw and destroy the visual appeal of all of N Norfolk!!" Also N Norfolk is doing more than it needs to keep even you at bay, 88 turbines in Sheringham Shoal, 176 planned for Dudgeon, N Walsham and soon Northrepps solar farms just to start. So, do, even you, honestly believe that the loss of a180Kw eyesore is really worth the trouble?? I think not, even the most enthusiastic money turbine lover could surely see that!

Report this comment

Windless

Tuesday, August 21, 2012
One can only hope that the Planning Inspector will see sense and allow this proposal. For too long North Norfolk has been the heart-land of the Conservative UKIP anti-progress brigade. As for the issue of back-up generation, I think you'll find all forms of electricy generation requires back-up of some form. What do you think happens when a nuclear power station is taken off-line? By having a wide portfolio of renewable energy projects including wind, solar, tidal and hydro the UK can have an efficient sustainable power network. Naturally the Conservatives & UKIP would much prefer we go begging to Russia and the Middle East for our electricity. Before anyone says it shale gas is an environmental disaster waiting to happen.

Report this comment

norfolkboy15@gmail.com

Tuesday, August 21, 2012
ND, Many in the pro green lobby see wind turbines as progress, when they are indeed a step backwards to the days of windmills, which with the advent of electricty were found to be unreliabe and unable to meet the demands place upon them. so If the good people of Bodham need electricty they can build a nuclear power station in the parish, and they will have my support.

Report this comment

Hugh

Tuesday, August 21, 2012
The facts are plain. Onshore wind turbines are a complete waste of time. They delivery very little energy, but plenty of dosh for vested interests. I suggest you ask your representative at local and national level if they support these cashcows and vote accordingly. Sayitasitis, don't worry about what D Mc posts. if he had his way we'd cover the county in housing and the fields in giant whirling landowner money machines. The only way we will stop this vandalism is to withhold our vote from any **&*^ that believes in them

Report this comment

weaversway

Tuesday, August 21, 2012
Sayitasitis, Ian and Hugh. I don't want to sound rude as my comment may be out of place BUT. As a lifetime technical man, it is fantastic to be commenting on a website article with possibly laymen who have bothered to spend the time and energy to unearth the facts about this obsolete technology. There are several on here who have not changed their "green" religious rhetoric for the past three years, and within the safety of the "green" bubble probably never will.

Report this comment

Norfolk Dumpling

Tuesday, August 21, 2012
Looking at this from the outside, and adding up the total of these posts, for the PROS & ANTIS, the score seems to be 22 against, 13 for and 1 who is unsure of his views! The FACTS are that this application is HUGELY unwanted by the vast majority (circa 80% against at NNDC right now) and a general agreement, as Ian says, that a MONEY TURBINE is just that, a means of robbing all utility bill payers (to no possible benefit to them BTW) just to pay the absurd subsidies these things are allowed to collect. The NOISE issue should, perhaps, be seen as the NOISE of the £1 coins rattling down the tower from the MONEY generator at the top!!!! AND, even worse to no possible benefit to the National Grid. D McC must be in a terrible state right now, especially if his lights are still ON!!

Report this comment

windup

Monday, August 20, 2012
ND... You are correct, just downloaded the performance figures (from the Genatec website!!) for the e48, 800Kw money turbine. At 7msec its 180Kw, at 8msec its 275Kw more or less exactly the 50% you quote. Either way its still a money turbine whose electrical energy will be as much to the National Grid, as is an ashtray on a motorcycle!!

Report this comment

Windless

Sunday, August 19, 2012
Hugh and Ian, I totally agree. On wind speeds to claim working at 8msec instead of 7msec will give an increased output of 50% more at 8 compared with 7 because power output is proportional to the cube of wind speed. When wind is dropping from 8 to 7, then a power drop of 40% can be expected at 7 compared with 8. Nuclear, which produces no CO2 when generating, has been the way to go for the past 20 years. Instead our technically illiterate political caste and advisors have sold off our expertise and industry to foreigners and tried to replace this with wind and solar farms. Our children will pay the inescapable financial penalty with rolling black-outs to boot. Long may local councillors recognise the calculated sophism in PlanApps of this type.

Report this comment

Norfolk Dumpling

Sunday, August 19, 2012
CR, DMcC... I know you'll both get fed up with this, but the 26 turbines here WERE turning earlier, but have all stopped now. Just exactly what more useless form of energy (or NOT at the moment) generation could be created? This is absurd the energy created (Sorry not now as it'll be binned on Thursday) by the planned Bodham money turbine is of no use to the grid, at all. Just exactly how is the grid to cope with, not only a tiny amount of electricity, but also so variable, from zero to not much?? Your answers will be interesting, and probably inaccurate!!

Report this comment

Windless

Sunday, August 19, 2012
Hugh and Ian, I am in total agreement with you and especially with regard to nuclear generation completely displacing renewables as the Governments header for baseload power generation. However, we have a problem in that our technically illiterate and power generation incompetent MPs sold off our nuclear expertise and industry to foreigners like Japan and France and we need a UK-designed nuclear industry which will serve us and our future generations as well as be available for export around the world, just like the 1950s-60s. We have already wasted ten years when we could have been advancing thorium molten salt technology and selling it around the world. For those who don't know it, thorium is a UK sourced fuel.

Report this comment

Norfolk Dumpling

Saturday, August 18, 2012
nhs lover, Labour partys Manifesto 2010, chapter 8, A Green Recovery, page 8:3 "We have taken the decisions to enable a new generation of nuclear power stations," I agree that nuclear power stations are the way forward.

Report this comment

Hugh

Saturday, August 18, 2012
"However having a money turbine in your garden is a damn good thing for the landowner!!" Never said a truer word, Ian. I wonder if t was stipulated that any landowner applying to erect a turbine must have it within 100 feet of their own abode, would they be so keen?

Report this comment

weaversway

Saturday, August 18, 2012
Nor Dump... I agree there are figures around here which are iify at best. There was no Met Mast for Bodham so any wind speed figures are suspect, to say the least. The DECC windspeed for the one square kilometer arond the site quote a 45meter above ground level windspeed of 7Metres per second, In the planning blurb, Genatec claim a windspeed of 8 Metres per second, may not seem much of a difference but it is important when you look at the turbine output for the various windspeeds this is a significant increase. Either way this eyesore, potentially, is no use to either the National Grid or you or me. However having a money turbine in your garden is a damn good thing for the landowner!!

Report this comment

Windless

Saturday, August 18, 2012
Sorry, sum should have shown (0.262x0.8x8760) divided by 5.523 = 332

Report this comment

Norfolk Dumpling

Saturday, August 18, 2012
Genatec ES, P.33, claims 2700MWh pa. from 0.8MW turb. This equates to a Load Factor 38.5%. DECC DUKES 2011, last published, gives 2010 as 21.7% with longterm 26.2%. So 38.5% seems a good porkie to lull NNDC. Using 4,100kWhyr (Ofgem) claim 660 average sized homes. But DECC 2010 'xls' data-sheet shows North Norfolk average consumption is 5,523kWh with Norfolk average as 4,770kWh. So we could realistically expect (0.262x0.8x8760)5.523 = 332 homes only. Would 660 be another porkie? 430gmsCO2kWh is NOT DEFRA [523] but a 2008 adjudication by ASA with which BWEA, now RenewablesUK, agreed. Wind can NEVER displace coal, and now and in the future it is gas at 270gCO2kWh. Thus CO2 savingsoffset is only likely to be (0.262x0.8x8760)x0.27 tonnes pa = 495.7 tonnes. Compare claimed 1200 tonnes or even a possibly fraudulent claim of 2300 tonnes. Even this is unlikely as this turbine will enforce a 24365 fossil fuel [gas] backup for when the wind so often does not blow. Have we found a third blatant porky? It pays to be technically literate so as not to get taken in. Who will disprove my comment?

Report this comment

Norfolk Dumpling

Saturday, August 18, 2012
CR, McC,,, Sorry if this is repeated but I have upset the IT police once again. Anyway, you'll be relieved to know that the 26 turbines outside my hotel window have started again. Quite how the Danish or, indeed our, national grid cope with this stupidity is beyond me, as an ex Flight Engineer and well familiar with controlling a handful of throttles, I wonder how the grid manages with this absurdity. One thing is for sure, the 180Kw average from the HUGELY unwanted Bodham turbine is not going to affect our National Grid too much, I doubt that the throttles will have to move too much, or even bother!!!

Report this comment

Windless

Saturday, August 18, 2012
CR,,,, Doug Mc Coy... Sorry to go on about this but all 26 turbines here in Copenhagen have stopped again, not ONE turning. My only conclusion is that wind power is a joke and the PROPER providers of electrical energy have to compensate for its uselessness, as, as far as I am aware there is still plenty of electrical energy here at my location. So the oil, coal, gas, solar and nuclear boys are clearly well ahead of the game, thankfully, or D McC would be having another stress attack right now, glad he's not here, I couldn't cope!! So, hopefully no money turbine for Bodham on thursday then, the proof is already here.

Report this comment

Windless

Saturday, August 18, 2012
CR... Callum, re your point about Sheringham Shoal being visible from your hotel. Of course it'll not affect business, it's visible but too far away to be offensive, also too far away to be HEARD! If it was on the beach in front of the hotel and 425ft high, I think things would be different. On the other subject, D McC and you can relax again now, the 26 turbines here off Copenhagen are turning again so we'll all be ok. The Danish Plan B obviously worked though, the lights were on in the city all night and I suffered no power loss. Oh, BTW I just lloked at Gridwatch and found that wind is contributing 1.3Gw of its rated capacity of (according to Nick L) 4.7Gw, so but its low standards it's actually doing quite well today, so the nukes can be shut down a tiny amount and have a microscopic break!!

Report this comment

Windless

Saturday, August 18, 2012
Hugh.... You are absolutely correct, tourism is probably 50% + of the industry in N Norfolk. The "Big Skies" concept is heavily pushed by the tourism people, any time I drive back home to N Walsham through Kings Lynn towards the east, even I (who lives here as I've said) remark or comment on this with my wife. The VERY last thing I'd want to see in MY big sky is an industrial money turbine spoiling that view. And, it would annoy me even more to know that, effectively I (and all others) pay for it, and my considerable knowledge of the subject also tells me that it is not generating any useable electricity for the good of UKPLC. As you said, well done NNDC!

Report this comment

Windless

Saturday, August 18, 2012
Time after time the facts have been presented. On shore wind turbines are not an efficient way to produce energy and they are also unreliable, needing a backup system to power energy when they produce practically nil output. Add, thy are a blot on the landscape and the majority do not want them. Let's also add they give the genuine environmental argument a bad name. We are being conned by vested interests. They are a complete waste of time and money. And of course its your money, the consumers, that is funding these follies. On shore wind turbines are just a massive scheme to charge the many much more, lining the pockets of the few.

Report this comment

weaversway

Saturday, August 18, 2012
Callum, when I said "Nobody in their right mind," I should have known that was inviting you to reply! #15 years!

Report this comment

Hugh

Saturday, August 18, 2012
Hugh - You clearly have very little knowledge of tourism in North Norfolk. I just so happen to work at a Hotel that overlooks the Sheringham Shoal. Business has not diminished as a result. And as for people "in there right mind" there are several hundred people within view of the turbine who have supported the application. Both the Shop and Pub in Bodham have supported the application as they appreciate the economic benefit. How is your economic management Hugh #SubTrain

Report this comment

Callum Ringer

Saturday, August 18, 2012
Callum24. There are frequently periods when wind is failing to produce any significant output over the whole of the UK. Not my subjective view, but a matter of official record. For example, on Thursday, 9 August, all the metered turbines in the UK, headline capacity 4,686MW, were producing as little as 14MW. That is less than the headline capacity of 4 standard offshore turbines (Siemens 3.6MW). I could give you a long list of days when it has been down to single figures. Output figures are recorded by the Balancing Mechanism website at www.bmreports.com Of as much concern as erratic output is the difficulty in accurately forecasting wind output, even in the short term. Thus further detracts from its value to the Grid.

Report this comment

NickL

Saturday, August 18, 2012
hugh you are a member of the conservative party. earlier this year your leader and the prime minister said "on-shore wind plays a role in a balanced uk electricity mix". he is committed. why isnt your party in north norfolk?

Report this comment

nhs lover

Friday, August 17, 2012
Nobody in their right mind would want to see a monstrosity like a wind turbine from their home, wind turbines will have a detrimental effect on tourism in North Norfolk, which will lead to many small towns and villages becoming isolated, as tourist take their bussiness to unspoiled rural areas of the country. Well done NNDC.

Report this comment

Hugh

Friday, August 17, 2012
Well, Ian, here in North Norfolk ( you know,the place we are talking about) It is both sunny, AND windy! A great afternoon for renewable Energy. See, this proves the point that it is always sunny and windy somewhere. There is also a conventional power station switched off somewhere . . . . And of course you still don't answer the question of what we do when it runs out. (not in your lifetime perhaps!)

Report this comment

Callum Ringer

Friday, August 17, 2012
CR... I'm confused and think you may be too! It's daylight here (Lots actually) but not windy. It'll be dark soon and, probably still not windy either. So, no wind today, no wind output, very sunny today, lots of potential solar output, ok dark soon, but whichever way you look at it, still not windy??? So after dark, the combined lack of effort from both solar and wind =0, at this rate D McC will have an anxiety attack!! Don't worry though, I can just see exhaust gases from the power station, so I'll be all right tonight!

Report this comment

Windless

Friday, August 17, 2012
Ian, you seem to be missing the point. Your 26 huge turbines may not be turning. All power stations have periods when they are not turning. Unless it did not escape your attention, the sun does not shine at night, yet the wind doth blow. We could be quite happily sufficient using a combination of renewable sources.

Report this comment

Callum Ringer

Friday, August 17, 2012
CR... Do you mean forever or just today? The 26 HUGE turbines here are still stationary so, clearly, not generating? Strangely though we still seem to have adequate amounts of electricity. BTW CR, you are aware that wind energy is actually created by SOLAR, so we could eliminate one factor in the equation and just do SOLAR instead!!

Report this comment

Windless

Friday, August 17, 2012
As mentioned before, Ian - At least the Wind will not run out.

Report this comment

Callum Ringer

Friday, August 17, 2012
CR None turning here in beautiful Copenhagen, well it was beautiful until they built the eyesores, which are, STILL, not turning!! It's a pity I can't send you a pic as the turbines (stationary) are in the backdrop of an oil fired HUGE power station, not exactly pretty in itself, but it's a bl**dy good job it's there as our lights may be out by now, D McC's, big concern!!!!! Clearly the Danes DO have a plan B!

Report this comment

Windless

Friday, August 17, 2012
Andy, just in case you did not know, sending representation to NNDC does not count as "democracy" - in Bodham the anti brigade threatened to hold a parish poll . . . they backed out, amongst the reasons is they would have lost.

Report this comment

Callum Ringer

Friday, August 17, 2012
The usual pro wind enthusiasts are out again I see. The numbers for are outweighed by those against which I thought was about democracy? Perhaps the planners are also mindful of the recent decision regarding wind turbines by the VOA that tbe value of nearby proiperties will go down and this means less council tax income? Why do the pro lobby continue to ignore the fact that wind turbines must have 100% backup - provided by gas generators or the lights really will go out far too often. Also wind generated power currently has a guarantee minimum price of nearly three times the current market price for electricity. Wind power is not the answer to relaible cost effective electricity generation.

Report this comment

andy

Friday, August 17, 2012
UKIP supporters seem to want us to rely on the Middle East for oil and petrol... some "independence" that is!

Report this comment

omnishambles

Friday, August 17, 2012
At least, Ian, the wind wont be running out.... I have just been looking out to the Sheringham Shoal - All turning. Looks lovely.

Report this comment

Callum Ringer

Friday, August 17, 2012
DMcC... 88 OFFSHORE turbines in Sheringham shoal, 176 planned for Dudgeon, N Walsham solar farm, oon Northrepps solar farm. Do you really think with that lot we're really worried about the loss of this one? I am fairly sure your lights won't go out!! BTW I assume you have a plan B for when it's not windy?? I'm in Copenhagen right now, looking at 26 just off the coast, NONE turning! Hope the Danes have a plan B!

Report this comment

Windless

Friday, August 17, 2012
I have to congratulate those who have used such a large range of scare stories and pseudo science to sway the planning committee into refusing the application. Whilst they have scored a victory for parochial politics they have not done anything to alleviate the fears many of us have about a future which will involve power cuts and soaring electricity bills. Still, I wonder when the lights go out who'll they'll blame then?

Report this comment

Douglas McCoy

Friday, August 17, 2012
Rather a one sided article - and panders completely to the mis-information distributed by a well funded and ill informed minority of people hell bent on stopping anything happening in this area. As pointed out by the commenter below, NNDCs officers have been very selective about which heritage they take into account and have ignored completely the historical usage of this site as an RAF Radar station, the 2 pylons currently in place, and the historical evidence for a windmill - I'm sure Bodham Church will suffer more as a result of refusal as it will no longer get the £25,000 it would receive as a condition of approval . . . No joined up thinking . . .

Report this comment

Callum Ringer

Friday, August 17, 2012
pylons, cabling, wiring, tv masts and mobile phone masts can all be found in the area but i don't hear the people of bodham calling them an assault on the countryside.

Report this comment

nhs lover

Friday, August 17, 2012
Looks like NNDC are only taking into consideration the NIMBY heritage values. What about the historical usage of this piece of land for a wind mill, and the 2 pylons that all ready there, and the 8 massive structures that were there for RAF West Beckham? Surely this land is appropriate because of its historical association with tall structures and utilisation of the wind!

Report this comment

Jonny Boggis

Friday, August 17, 2012
Again the scaremongers are out- 22 storey building! Is this comparable to the existing mast? Does that detract from the natural asset? Did the radar masts at West Beckham detract or leave a generation of mentally scarred individuals?

Report this comment

JP Ringer

Friday, August 17, 2012
so bodham parish council didnt vote against and yet the planners side with the views of other parishes

Report this comment

Double Bill

Friday, August 17, 2012
Trevor Ivory said the council was making North Norfolk "a centre-of-excellence for renewable energy". They cocked up the cabling decision at Great Ryborough and now look set to turn this down. So much for being green!

Report this comment

omnishambles

Friday, August 17, 2012

More News

Click here to read more of our digital publications