IT'S a Marmite issue. When it comes to wind turbines, you either love them or hate them.

A cursory look at the Harborough Mail's letters page each week shows that few subjects in recent years have been more divisive.

For more than two years, comments from pro- and anti-wind turbine advocates have rebounded back and forth with allegations of misinformation slung from both sides.

To confuse matters for the neutral, it would appear various reports from scientific experts seem to contradict each other and are used to support one side or the other.

Like fox hunting, few other issues have attracted such vociferous and passionately-held polar-opposite opinions.

The contentious issue will again be in the spotlight at a special meeting of Harborough District Council's planning committee on Tuesday where the first wind farm application to impact on the Harborough town area and its surrounding villages will be the only item on the agenda.

Energy4All wants to build three, 125-metre tall, 90-metre wide turbines on farmer James Wright's land between Lubenham and Gartree.

Two applications for Lutterworth villages have already been going through the planning process, but it is the first wind proposal to face a decision for the Harborough area.

The agenda for Tuesday's meeting records 2,564 letters have been sent to the council objecting to the plan and 206 in favour – the most representations ever received by the council on a single issue.

Opinions have also been sought from eight statutory bodies such as English Heritage and British Waterways, the district and county councils, eight parish councils, developers William Davis who are building Airfield Farm near the proposed site, two other stakeholders, campaign group Stop the Gartree Wind Farm Action Group and Market Harborough Civic Society.

Subjects covered (see panel) range from highways and health issues to the potential effect on bats and inmates at nearby Gartree Prison.

* The 165-page agenda for Tuesday's meeting is available to view online at www.harborough.gov.uk or at the district council's offices in Adam and Eve Street.

Energy Company Answers Questions

MAIL deputy editor Alex Blackwell spoke to Energy4All's director of marketing Simon Williams and British Wind Energy Alliance (BWEA) spokesman Nick Medic to try to clarify some of the many questions surrounding the Gartree wind turbine plan.

* Who are Energy4All?
Energy4All (E4A), based at Barrow-in-Furness in Cumbria, was formed in 2002 and has set up seven wind farm schemes in the UK and has four or five other proposals in the pipeline.
Mr Williams said the company is a not-for-profit enterprise and its website explains it is a limited company whose mantra is "delivering community-owned green power". It is owned by the seven wind co-operatives it has so far helped set up around the UK at Baywind (Cumbria), Westmill (Oxfordshire), Boyndie (Scotland), Fenland (Lincs), Isle of Skye (Scotland), Kilbraur (Scotland) and Great Glen (Scotland).

* How many homes, on average, would the three
turbines serve?
The power output on average, would be 7.5 megawatts of power, enough to power about 3,000 homes at any one time. The East Midlands green energy target set by the Government is 175 megawatts by 2020.

* Will the power created by the turbines be used to supply homes around Gartree and Lubenham?
No, it would go into the National Grid. A sub-station at the site would feed into the grid. According to the BWEA, such power is sold by wind farm co-operatives to energy companies such as E.On or Npower.

* How effective would the turbines be at Gartree?
E4A says the turbines would be in use between 70 and 85 per cent of the time. If wind speeds exceed 25 metres per second the turbines would switch off automatically, to prevent the generator from overheating. Wind speeds must be greater than three mps to work.

* How much CO2 would be reduced by these turbines?
E4A says 6,400 tons of CO2 per year – the equivalent of 36 New York to London flights in a Boeing 747/8 – and 128,000 tons of CO2 over 20 years (720 flights).

* How much will it cost to build the turbines?
E4A refused to say how much it would cost to build its turbines, saying the information is commercially sensitive and market rates fluctuate.
However, the BWEA said the average cost of a 125-metre turbine varies from £750,000 to £1.2million, meaning the site at Gartree could cost between £2.25million and £3.6m to build.

* How will the finance be raised to build the turbines?
E4A says the finance would come from a share issue. Shares will cost £1 with a minimum investment of £250 and a maximum legal limit of £20,000.
At five of its other wind farm projects where data is available, it has respectively attracted 1,300 shareholders (raising £2m), 716 shareholders (£750,000), 570 shareholders (£812,137), 677 shareholder (£1,288,270) and 517 shareholders (£1,043,900).
Shares would be offered to the local community first, then to members of its seven other co-operatives.
The company firmly denied that any Government subsidies were available for the building of the turbines.

How the Council's Planning Decision Will Work

THE CRUNCH planning decision at 6.30pm on Tuesday is open to the public in the council chamber at the district council's offices in Adam and Eve Street (entrance opposite the Old Grammar School building).

Anyone can attend but the public gallery only has seats for about 100 people, available on a first-come, first-served basis with priority given to registered speakers.

The length of the meeting partly depends on the number of speakers, who get a maximum of three minutes to air their views. Ward councillors get a maximum of five minutes. The committee is then able to ask the speakers any questions.

As of Tuesday, there was just one person registered to speak but the deadline for applying is not until Monday. To be eligible to speak, the points expressed must differ from those being put forward by other speakers. Phone the council on 01858 821342.

After debating the issue, the committee of 12 councillors (eight Tories and four Lib Dems) will take a vote to approve, refuse or defer the proposal.

If the plan is refused, Energy4All can appeal to the Government's Planning Inspectorate. It would mean a Government-appointed planning inspector presiding over a public inquiry, which would probably take about three weeks, with an ultimate decision then due about four months afterwards. In the case of the Swinford wind turbine application which was approved by a planning inquiry in December, Harborough Council decided not to appeal this decision because it was considered not to have a legal argument and would be too expensive.

If the plan is approved, Energy4All has not yet said when it would like to start building the turbines or when they would be operational.

If the plan is deferred, it could open the council up to an appeal from Energy4All for "non-determination", when the authority fails to meet its statutory time limit for determining planning applications. It would mean the Planning Inspectorate making a decision and the local council would be by-passed. This happened in the case of both the Swinford wind turbine plan and the Ashby Magna plan. So far, Harborough Council has yet to approve or refuse any wind turbines plans.

Key Issues for the Planners to Consider

EXPERTS in Harborough Council's planning department have recommended that councillors reject the application.

The chief reason given by officers is: "The size, siting and prominence of the turbines, would appear as a dominant and intrusive feature,
and would be imposing and overbearing on views into and out of
Lubenham conservation area, to the detriment of its character and appearance."

However, it will be up to the councillors to debate the issues and decide for itself what happens to the proposals. Below are some of the key issues which will be debated.
* Landscape and visual impact on the countryside.
* Government-set wind targets to be met by 2020.
* Noise. Whether there is sufficient separation between the turbines and nearby homes.
* The impact of "shadow flicker" to nearby residents.
* Heritage/tourism issues. English Heritage says it is not clear if a proper assessment has been carried out over the turbines' impact on nearby Foxton Locks.
* Wildlife: potential impact on birds, badgers, bats and great-crested newts.
* Flood risk. The Environment Agency has raised concerns about lack of information in a report and says conditions need to be met.

The Mail asked two people on either side of the debate for theire views...
PRO by Prof John Twidell, Bridgford House, Horninghold.

"ELECTRICITY is available so easily from utilities that most of us fail to consider how and where it is generated.

Harborough area electricity enters the National Grid predominantly from coal and gas power stations. The fossil fuels consumed are finite and cause considerable pollution, including excessive CO2.

This causes human-induced climate change, which our nation has legal agreements to mitigate.

I welcome agreements to reduce fossil fuels, because there is sufficient energy in our local environment from renewable sources, such as sunshine, crops, biomass, wind and wastes.

Using local resources improves energy security, improves our skills base, circulates money locally (as in farmers' markets) and means we are not entirely parasites on outside providers.

For utility electricity, the most cost-effective and proven renewables technology is wind power. Electricity from wind turbines is now accepted worldwide as "mainstream" generation, satisfying comprehensive and detailed requirements for safety, insurance and financing.

Being involved with wind power for 40 years, I know that modern turbines operate quietly, safely and efficiently as highly developed modern engineering, whilst allowing agriculture to continue.

Yes, the output varies as the wind but such variation is similar to the variation of demand, for which grid operators easily cope. There may be some adverse impact on avian life, as with all structures, but the environmental safeguards of planning ensure ecological populations are maintained.

The impact on ecology from climate change, which wind turbines mitigate, is far larger.

The bottom line is that I would welcome wind turbines near my home."

ANTI by Pete Schofield, Westland Close, Lubenham.

"IN the villages of Lubenham, Gartree, and Foxton there is serious concern by many over the proposed site for the three turbines Energy4all wish to erect.

The site will, as far as Lubenham is concerned, be less than one kilometre (approx 620yds) from the village centre and the following topics need to be considered, as once they are up, it will be too late to do anything about it.

Domination of a rural site. Visible intrusion into village conservation area. Massive disruption during installation. Unproven (either way) medical issues. Only computer projections for detailing public impact. About 8,500 possible recipients of any health issues within a 2.5km radius. Possible damage to a major gas pipeline. Potential disruption to communications, ie TV.

Harborough will be visually defined by the turbines. Possible effects on prisoners' behaviour.

Also, who is responsible for the safety of these units, and it seems that there are is no national code of practice concerning the installation.

It has been reported that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, reporting the tragic future of the Himalayan glaciers, has now admitted their experts' claims were based on a news story in the New Scientist which was based on a telephone conversation with an Indian scientist, and was little more than speculation, and the IPCC is losing the trust of more governments who are no longer heeding its advice.
Is the position as dire as is made out?

Once the turbines will be up, it will be too late."

*WHAT DO YOU THINK? POST A COMMENT ON THIS FEATURE BY CLICKING ON THE BLUE 'REGISTER' ICON IN THE TOP LEFT-HAND CORNER OF THIS PAGE - IT IS FREE AND TAKES FIVE SECONDS TO REGISTER.