Banks Renewables applies for planning permission for controversial Killington windfarm scheme

This image, produced by FELLS using Scottish Natural Heritage guidelines, shows how the Killington windfarm would look This image, produced by FELLS using Scottish Natural Heritage guidelines, shows how the Killington windfarm would look

ENERGY giant Banks Renewables has formally submitted a planning application to build a controversial windfarm at Killington.

The move follows several public exhibitions on proposals for three 135-metre turbines between the A684 and junction 37 of the M6, which have angered campaigners but have the backing of climate change activists.

Opponents argue the location is ‘inappropriate’ for development and are concerned about the site’s proximity to the M6 corridor and the proposed boundary extension of the Yorkshire Dales National Park.

Phil Dyke, Banks Renewables development director, said: “A great deal of careful planning has gone into creating an environmentally-suitable and efficient design for what we believe is an excellent location for this type of development.

“Generating more of the energy that we all use from renewable sources is one of the biggest challenges facing us in the coming decades, and we hope that South Lakeland District Council will recognise the contribution that the Killington scheme can make towards meeting it.”

Banks has created a so-called ‘community benefits fund’, worth £675,000 over 25 years, it said would pay for improved broadband for homes and businesses and help cut fuel bills.

Residents would decide how the fund, which the company hopes would ‘secure a positive, long-term local legacy for the windfarm’, is spent on community projects.

However, Dr Mike Hall, chairman of Friends of Eden, Lakeland and Lunesdale Scenery (FELLS), said the fight to block the scheme would be stepped up through rallies in New Hutton, Killington, Sedbergh and Barbon.

“Apart from Windermere, Killington is the major lake in South Lakeland which is used enormously for recreation,” said Dr Hall.

“It’s been there for 200 years, therefore it’s quite inappropriate to put a windfarm alongside a major leisure site of South Lakeland.

“Windfarms produce intermittent, low levels of electricity and save almost no carbon.”

Westmorland and Lonsdale MP Tim Farron added his voice to the opposition this week.

Mr Farron said windfarms should be focused offshore, adding: “Wind is an important part of the energy mix but, if you’re building two or three of these turbines on the fells, it adds very little to it and causes divisions in communities.”

Tanya Hoare, coordinator of STAK - Stop Turbines At Killington, said the group was not opposed to green issues but the impact on the landscape from the Killington scheme would be too high a price to pay.

“The landscape is a major reason why visitors and residents live in this area,” said Mrs Hoare.

“Many people are unaware of how immense and intrusive these turbines will be - almost twice the height of those at Lambrigg - it will really change the ambience of this area.”

But South Lakes Action on Climate Change is supporting Banks, stating that the Lake District’s ecology was ‘significantly affected’ by climate change and windfarms were one way of helping secure Britain’s energy security.

Banks has promised to create up to 50 jobs through £4m worth of construction, security, accommodation and catering contracts.

And it said the windfarm would supply electricity to 8,100 homes annually, taking 14,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere.

Originally, the company said 9,500 homes could benefit.

The decision to approve or reject the windfarm will made by South Lakeland District Council’s planning committee.

An SLDC spokeswoman said the committee’s 18 councillors could rule on the application as early as December.

Comments(10)

cumbrianrealist says...
12:58pm Tue 2 Oct 12

9500 homes? That there number ain't right! Something smells fishy to me.

onelocal says...
1:03pm Tue 2 Oct 12

Wow, Community Benefits Fund £675,000 over 25 years. At today's value that's all of £27,000 per year, in 25 years it will be peanuts compared with the millions Banks will take in subsidies, sales of electricity and payments when the turbines don't run because there is no demand.
Lets see whether the councils take their 30 pieces of silver.

snuggle-bunny says...
5:01pm Tue 2 Oct 12

If they're so good perhaps the managing directors etc of banks renewables or members of sldc would like to build them outside their houses or near to a nice view. No doubt some sort of sweetner(s) will persuade the powers that be to accept the application- free holiday abroad anyone

loughrigg says...
9:09pm Tue 2 Oct 12

What would you like? A wind turbine (the ones at Killington look quite nice) or a coal / nuclear power station in your back yard?
You use electricity - its got to come from somewhere. Come and put a wind turbine near my house and put a dirty great coal station near the whingers on this site.

onelocal says...
9:40pm Tue 2 Oct 12

Missing the point, it's not about whether they look nice, it's about whether they work, and whether they produce an efficient supply of electricity at a reasonable cost. It's becoming more and more understood that they don't, and merely provide huge subsidies to companies like Banks Renewables, paid for by the consumer.

Lakeuk says...
10:02pm Tue 2 Oct 12

Most forms of power generation get subsidies of some sort whether nuclear, coal, gas, solar, wind etc...

UK plc has made a commitment to 20% of power generation from renewables by 2020, currently the UK are way of that target, we going to have to get used to being more self efficient in where our energy comes from - otherwise it's going to get very expensive

fellsmike says...
5:03pm Wed 3 Oct 12

Many people say they would prefer a wind farm to a nuclear power plant. Sadly, it isn't that simple. It would take 140 Killington wind farms (420 turbines) to match the capacity of just one of the reactors at Heysham. While Heysham can run up to 90% of the time on demand, wind blows when it will and often not when we need the power. Killington Lake is a beautiful location. Help us keep it that way by registereing your support on www.killingtonwindfa
rm.co.uk by clicking the 'Count Me In' button.

Mike Hall (FELLS)

Utter says...
6:08pm Wed 3 Oct 12

Personally I think we should look at hydro. But that's just me!

tictoc1 says...
9:48am Tue 9 Oct 12

Just out of a matter of interest, how many of the people against these turbines either live close to Killington, will be affected by them or will see them daily?

keeplakesgreen says...
2:21pm Tue 9 Oct 12

When the country is covered in tens of thousands of 400 plus foot high wind turbines, (which it would have to be if wind turbines were to make a meaningful contribution to support modern energy demands) then pretty much everyone will be affected by them daily.

Apart from the fact wind turbines are in reality a subsidy scam paid for by electricity consumers and pretty hopeless at generating electricity as and when needed there are undeniable health problems for some living near them from audible and inaudible infra sound and turbine flicker. Undeniable that is unless you happen to be the wind industry. Surprise, surprise.

Thankfully more and more people are waking up to the fact that its not a very sensible idea to believe the propaganda and fall for the tricks (community fund bribes) of an industry when that industry is trying to protect the billions of pounds it will rake in from subsidy.

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