          |
The RSPB view |
The RSPB view
Thousands of RSPB members and local people helped to deliver environmental protection when they objected to a proposal to build a massive wind farm on the island of Lewis. On 21 April the Scottish Government turned down the proposal on environmental grounds. The wind farm would have damaged Scotland’s second largest Special Protection Area, with its important populations of golden plovers, dunlins, greenshanks and golden eagles—there are better places to put wind turbines than here. We would like to thank the Scottish Government for making the right decision and our members for expressing their views so effectively. Wise decisions like this, which take account of all environmental considerations, do not undermine the roll out of renewable energy as some commentators suggest. The RSPB has been at the forefront of organisations encouraging governments to meet their renewable target—but in the most environmentally sustainable way possible. There is ample scope to build wind farms in the right places and still protect the natural environment. What are the right places for wind farms? We will need more onshore wind power, meaning more well-selected wind farms in the countryside and urban areas. But the greatest scope for expansion of UK wind power is offshore. We salute recent government announcements that recognise the importance of this method of energy generation. The RSPB has worked closely with developers planning wind farms in the Thames Estuary and off the Lancashire coast. Concerns over wildlife impacts were resolved once the developers were fully appraised of the issues, but unfortunately neither scheme has got very far because of other constraints, nothing to do with nature conservation. Wind farm proposals are more likely to be held up by objections from the Ministry of Defence and shipping interests, and by delays in the supply of turbines, than by nature conservation concerns. The RSPB has been at the forefront of organisations encouraging governments to meet their renewable target—but in the most environmentally sustainable way possible. However, governments have been lamentably slow at tackling the knowledge gap about important wildlife sites at sea. On land we are learning to build wind farms in the spaces between our important wildlife sites in order to minimise the harm to the natural world; the same ought to be true at sea, but only if we have the necessary information. It is no more than common sense to survey the marine environment to identify the very best wildlife sites as a precursor to the development of marine wind farms. We call upon politicians to ensure that the necessary deployment of marine wind farms minimises the harm to wildlife. And then there is the Severn Barrage—at a minimum of £15 billion—£15,000,000,000— the largest investment in renewable energy mooted to date. This is one that we must get right. The barrage could certainly produce a lot of renewable energy, but would it be costeffective? An economic report commissioned by the RSPB and others shows that the energy produced by a barrage would come at twice the price of that from other renewable energy projects. It is hard to see how the government could opt for this as a rational way forward on economic grounds, even if it chooses to ignore the environmental damage a barrage would cause to migratory fish and birds. The Lewis wind farm and Severn Barrage proposals, and indeed the currently ill-judged policy on biofuels, may all stem from the best of political motives—to combat climate change. But the wish to do good should not blind us to the likelihood of doing harm. It is often said that we must do everything we can to tackle climate change but that cannot include saying yes to policies that are counter-productive (such as biofuels), or schemes that unnecessarily damage the environment (the Lewis wind farm) or that simply waste vast quantities of money (the Severn Barrage). Future generations will judge us by the quality of the decisions made now. Better home insulation, more efficient cars, offshore wind, advanced biofuels, stemming the growth in air travel and, yes, tidal and wave power all may have important parts to play in reducing our greenhouse gas emissions, and we need to find the right mix of measures. Plans coming forward must be cogent as well as bold, with intelligent environmental and economic solutions, to build a more secure climatic future for people and for wildlife. 
Graham Wynne, chief executive of the RSPB |
The RSPB ViewThe RSPB's Chief Executive, Graham Wynne, writes this regular column in the quarterly membership magazine, BIRDS. What can I do?Get involved in writing letters and e-mails to support RSPB campaigns and use your voice for nature. |
Black browed albatross, West Point Island, Falklands - Grahame Madge (The RSPB)
Family Birdwatching through living room window - Andy Hay (rspb-images.com)
Landsacpe view across lake at first light, blue clear sky, Lake Vyrnwy - RSPB Images - Ben Hall (rspb-images.com)
Bird illustrations by Mike Langman (RSPB)