Worried about Whittonstall

I have been working with Whittonstall Action Group who are opposing a planning application for a large opencast development at Hoodsclose, overlooking the villages of Ebchester and Medomsley. The proposed site will be close to a primary school and will operate for at least 7 years. Restoration after opencast takes decades. The landscape is permanently altered and for biodiversity to even partially recover, a detailed aftercare plan is needed. A restoration team would have to carry out remedial work to prevent habitat destruction. If restoration is carried out, the impact on biodiversity leads to populations that are more susecptible to disease and extinction.¹ If restoration is not carried out then we are left with land that is of no ecological value.

The reason that I am particularly worried about the long term future of the Hoodsclose site is that UK Coal have sold the land to a property developer.² They have not withdrawn the opencast application but they no longer own the land out of which they plan to extract 200 million tonnes of coal. The only explanation for this bizzare piece of business is that they are experiencing such financial difficulties that they need the cash.³

The sale demonstrates that any restoration pledges made by UK Coal must now be viewed with suspicion. Recent developments should convince the planners at Northumberland County Council of what we already know; that UK Coal have absolutely no interest in the long term future of the land, the school or the people of the surrounding villages.

Coal is our heritage, not our future.


Links
Recent ITV Coverage of the development can be found here:
http://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/2013-02-15/opponents-say-opencast-mine-would-scar-northumberland-landscape/

1. http://liamrcarr.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/succession-genetic-diversity-and-coal.html
2. http://www.journallive.co.uk/northumberland-sites/corbridge-northumberland/corbridge-and-stocksfield-news/2013/02/14/confusion-as-uk-coal-sells-land-ahead-of-whittonstall-opencast-hearing-61634-32810584/
3. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/mining/9735823/UK-Coal-Britains-biggest-coal-miner-makes-final-bid-for-survival.html

High Bradley Wind Turbines

Update

The planning application for the wind turbines has been refused. the refusal notice can be found here on Durham County Councils website . The majority of the people that attended a public meeting on the turbines were against. This can be viewed as a postive outcome for those in the local area who have voiced concerns on the matter. It's is a strange anomaly tha the majority of wind turbines are in the North East of England and in Scotland but the majority of electricty is consumed by the South East.

I have only one concern about the refusal however: One of the objectors was the Coal Authority. The presnce of wind turbines could make a planning application for an opencast coalmine less straight forward. Many local residents might describe wind turbines as an eysore - a blot on the Landscape. My house faces the site and if I was forced to choose between looking out onto 2 wind turbines or a permanent and irreversible carving up of the landscape and ecology of the area in which live and have grown up, I know which one I would choose.



Report from public meeting 10/07/12

I was at a public meeting last night about the proposal to erect two 45m high twin blade wind turbines near to High Bradley farm, between Leadgate and Medomsley. The turbines will be visible from my kitchen window and back garden.

I spoke at the meeting, saying that renewables were the future and that both land based and offshore wind had to be part of that. Then I pointed out that there were several wind turbines in the North West of County Durham. There are several of the very large variety; 125m ones at Tow Law, Burhope and overlooking Shotley Bridge. There are a few of the smaller variety; the 50m one at Greencroft and I think there are a few near Quaking Houses.

I then asked if the number of wind turbines already in North West Durham would be taken into account in the planning process. I was not given a straight answer on this by either of the County councillors present (one of whom is on the planning committee). I can't work out whether ‘cumulative effect’ would carry greater weight than ‘precedent’, maybe they couldn't either.

The owner of the land was not at the meeting but his agent spoke, puttting forward the case for the turbines. The loudest voices in the meeting were strongly against. We are lucky enough to live in a democracy. It is the views of the majority of the local community that should count.