Wind Turbines Bill 2012: Second Stage

Senator John Kelly

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I am delighted the Minister of State is present and I will appeal to her sympathetic nature to legislate on this. I ask her to take on board the issues and for any legislation to have these issues included. The debate may not take two hours and I hope for the full support of the Minister of State. The purpose of this Bill is to bring regulation to the minimum distance between a wind turbine and residential premises. At present, the distance is 500 m, a figure that has been in place for a number of years during which wind turbines have become taller. Some turbines on wind farms are as tall as the spire on O'Connell Street. The spire is very much in one's face when one is 500 m away from it.

In 1988, the Aarhus Convention granted the public rights on access to information, public participation and access to justice in Government decision-making processes on matters concerning the local, national and transboundary environment. It focuses on interactions between the public and public authorities. In 1988, all countries in Europe signed up to it except Ireland and Russia. Subsequent to that, the EU signed up to it, meaning Ireland is legally bound to play by the rules of the Aarhus Convention. They are not being implemented in this country even though there are many commonsense recommendations. The main recommendation is that public consultation and participation is vital on environmental matters. That is the only protection or safeguard for someone who does not want a wind turbine in their backyard.

Developers drive around the country and see a site for a wind turbine or farm. In the dark of night, they approach farmers and offer them sweet deals to rent land for 25 or 30 years for €25,000 or €30,000. They draw up contracts, which are signed, sealed and delivered. Once that happens, the developers undertake the public consultation process but it is too late because they have contracts signed. It is an unstoppable train in one direction. Even where councils refuse admission, An Bord Pleanála grants permission.

The UK authorities are going to do the same as what I am doing. In the House of Lords, there is a Bill on Committee Stage along the same lines as my Bill except that the distances proposed are even further from private residences. The UK Bill also proposes compensation for those affected by wind turbines.

I am tabling this Bill on a matter of human rights because people should have the right to live in a healthy environment without noise or nuisance. When wind turbines are foisted on people, that right is taken away. Wind turbines also devalue property. A couple of weeks ago, a couple in the UK were forced to leave their house because of the noise from the wind turbines. They took the developers to court, won the case and were compensated.

My Bill proposes that wind turbines between 25 m and 50 m should be 500 m away from private residences, those between 50 m and 100 m should be 1 km from private residences, those between 100 m and 150 m should be 1.5 km away, and anything over 150 m should be 2 km away. In the UK, the required distance is 3 km from private residences. I propose no minimum distance for wind turbines under 25 m.

Learned Senators in this House have much to contribute on the related issue of wind energy. There is a need for a debate on wind energy to see if we will achieve our targets or whether it is a pointless exercise. However, that debate is for another day and the issue today is to protect people. I would not like to count the e-mails I received from all parts of the country, complimenting me on publishing this Bill, since the start of the process. Until this point, there has been no protection for people and Governments over the past few years, including the previous Government supported by Senator Leyden, have been promoting big business and walking on the small person who has no say. It is time we stood up for the small person. I want us to buy into the principle of the Aarhus Convention, which is a rights-based approach. Current and future generations have the right to live in a healthy environment. It is not a lot to ask for. I look for the full support of the Minister of State on this.

Senator John Whelan

I am glad to be able to second Senator Kelly's proposal. I thank the Minister of State for coming before the House to take the Bill.

It is important to point out that no one here opposes wind energy or wind farms. It is not a frivolous or trivial protest and is not based on trying to impede the roll out of new technology, green technology and wind energy. As Senator Kelly pointed out, the jury is still out on the viability of wind energy. However, that is not the matter before us today.

There are no standards or best practice. By their nature, wind farms will normally be sited in rural areas on high ground or coastal landscapes in order to function. The Bill is straightforward and simple and in that regard it deserves cross-party support. It should be accepted by the Government in order to protect homesteads and families. It is fine for us to drive across Europe or Ireland and admire wind farms in the distance. I am in favour of them in principle.

There are proposals by Coillte to site a new wind farm on Cullenagh Mountain in an area which is not too far from where I live. It has to go through due process and the project is currently in train. Nobody should be expected to suffer from wind farms being imposed on them without some basic standards being applied with regard to minimum distance. I would like to say I will not muddy the waters but I would include pylons and power lines in the requirements for minimum distance. They are inextricably linked. If a wind farm is built it has to be connected to the grid and requires power lines and pylons to transmit energy. We should look at best practice and standards in other countries such as Denmark where provisions are made to protect homesteads, rural dwellers, farmers and families. Minimum distance should be set out in regulations regarding the proximity of pylons and power lines to homes. That is a row for another day.

We are not tilting at windmills. There is a genuine effort to reflect and respond to concerns that have been brought to the attention of Senator Kelly and other colleagues from people across the country. I would like the Minister of State to take into account the remarks that were put on the record of the House which will be reiterated today by Senator Barrett. He, with good science and statistics, continues to draw our attention to the concerns of the OECD about the viability and sustainability of wind energy. It is important that we do not sleepwalk, as a community and Government, into the next big bubble and bet the house on technology that might not be sustainable.

Senator Terry Leyden

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and thank her for taking this Bill. I congratulate Senator Kelly on proposing the Bill and Senator Whelan for seconding it. They have done the House some service by bringing the Bill to its floor. They have raised issues of concern to constituents in Roscommon. The Minister of State was a councillor and will be well aware of the issues that have arisen and will arise in the future. As Senator Whelan said, the Bill is very clear and refers to the distance from houses. The height being linked to the distance to a dwelling house is an ingenious formula. There are different options.

I do not want to rain on anyone's parade today but it is highly unlikely that the Minister of State and Government will adopt the Bill. That can be taken for granted. I shake the Senator's hand and congratulate him. We will have refreshments.

Senator Mary Moran

For us all.

Senator Terry Leyden

I will not go that far. If the Bill is passed it will be a great achievement for the Senator.

Senator John Kelly

I understand how frustrated the Senator might have felt that the then Government would not pass his Bill.

An Cathaoirleach

Senator Leyden to continue, without interruption.

Senator Terry Leyden

To put things in context, the then Government let the Bill through, thanks to the late Brian Lenihan. It was passed and approved unanimously by my colleagues at the time, both Fine Gael and the Labour Party.

An Cathaoirleach

Is that connected to this Bill?

Senator Terry Leyden

Yes. It is very relevant. It refers to the passage of a Bill through the House, in which I am sure the Cathaoirleach is interested. A question was put to me by Senator Kelly. The Labour Party and Fine Gael supported my Bill unanimously in a previous House. When I brought it back to the House both parties reneged on a commitment given. The Bill would have been of benefit to people. I am not finished with it and I will have to speak to the Taoiseach about the matter. He may be the only one who can rescue it.

The Bill which has been put forward today is admirably suitable and worthwhile. I am a realist and have been in government. Governments do not like Private Members' Bills or anyone taking the limelight for himself or herself. They like to bring forward their ideas and Bill. The Civil Service will go out of its way to make sure the Bill never sees the light of day. Fianna Fáil would support this Bill. Support might or might not be unanimous.

Wind energy is a very important industry but is currently subsidised and is not necessarily the most economic. However, it will be in the future given the rising cost of oil and so forth. The issue of distance from houses is very important as far as Sliabh Bán outside Strokestown and Dysart in south Roscommon are concerned. Residents in those areas are very concerned about the potential environmental damage to their lives and residences from wind turbines. It is a reasonable point of view and has to be considered. The point was made in other contributions.

No environmental impact study of turbines is required in the areas to which I referred but they should have to be taken into consideration. Those who benefit from turbines will make the point that they are of great benefit to the economy. Those who do not benefit would experience unexpected major disadvantages in their environments. No one would have expected the situation in Sliabh Bán to have arisen.

Roscommon County Council has dealt with this issue in great detail. Senator Whelan referred to power lines and telecommunications masts. There are TETRA masts located beside Mr. and Mrs. Michael Hussey. Senator Kelly is well aware of the family in which there are four young children. This very large mast is just 30 m from the residence. Planning permission was refused by Roscommon County Council and then granted by An Bord Pleanála. The mast is far too close to the house and is a danger to health, particularly that of the children.

On the points made by Senator Whelan, we could, if we proceed to Committee Stage, draft some amendments to take into account both telecommunications and power distribution masts. I hope we have a debate on Shannonside radio on this matter to discuss the issues involved. I congratulate Senator Whelan on bringing the Bill to the House. I hope we will have a good debate on the old question of wind energy and its control.

Senator Cáit Keane

I do not have any direction from the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, any other Minister or the Civil Service. I do not know about Senator Leyden; perhaps he has more experience than I have.

The Bill proposes to regulate the distance between wind turbines and residential premises. There are quite a few issues that must be evaluated when considering the Bill. Rather than considering each in isolation, we should consider them all together. Consideration must be given to Ireland's renewable energy targets and the benefits that can be accrued from using cleaner, greener energy sources. It is a question of striking a balance between human rights and energy provision requirements. We must work on this.

Renewable energy development is a vital part of Ireland's strategy to tackle the two major challenges facing us today: ensuring a secure supply of energy and combating climate change. Wind energy can be produced indigenously. We had a great debate only a week ago on energy. All the issues raised are very relevant today in the context of wind turbines.

Recent volatility in fossil fuel prices has demonstrated that regions with high dependency on energy imports are exposed to a high level of risk. This volatility makes it difficult for investors in the economy to make reliable long-term forecasts of their energy costs. It is estimated that between 25% and 30% of capital investment in renewable energy is retained in the local economy. All this must be taken into consideration in decisions we make on energy and masts.

There are wind turbines that fall into the category of exempted developments. They probably cause as much trouble as any other project. Section 3 of the Bill states no relevant authority may grant planning permission for the construction of a wind turbine generator unless it meets a minimum-distance requirement under section 4, subject to the exception in section 5, namely, the one based on the consent of the residents. However, nothing is said about the current exempted developments. S.I. No. 83 of 2007 was introduced into law as part of an attempt to ease the burden of planning for renewable energy systems, including wind turbines, solar PV systems, etc. All of this must be examined.

S.I. No. 600 of 2001 gives planners the right to refuse an exemption if it interferes with the character or landscape of an area. There are many other issues in this regard that must be considered in conjunction with this Bill. I understand where the Senator is coming from in this regard.

With regard to domestic houses, the maximum permitted height of an exempted turbine from ground to blade tip is 13 m. I presume this will still stand under the Bill. There is no change being made because the Bill is silent on the exemptions. I presume this silence means that the status quo remains.

The noise level should be taken into consideration when setting a new limit, as this Bill proposes. There is a maximum noise level set at present. We should consider it if we are taking distance into account. There is currently no legislation in place prescribing the separation distance between wind turbines and residential properties but there are some safeguards and guidelines in place. Suitable siting considerations are standard in planning processes, or should be. Interpretation by many planners is wide open and this is probably what Senator Kelly is trying to counteract. Local topography, ground cover, population distribution and acoustic characteristics all play a part in the planning assessment, which differs from site to site.

The rationale behind the proposal to regulate the distance between turbines is well intentioned. The planning guidelines are designed, or should be designed, to ensure consistency throughout the country in the identification of suitable locations for wind energy developments. I do not know whether a separation distance will lead to consistency nationally. Some of the best wind sites may be excluded. There is a lot of NIMBYism but not all objections fall into this category. As Senator Kelly stated, human rights must be considered.

How was the distance proposed in section 4 chosen and how were the figures arrived at? Under the provisions of the Bill, a turbine of 24 m would involve no minimum distance from a residential dwelling whereas one of 25 m, which is only 1 m taller, would have to be 500 m therefrom. Let no one misinterpret me because I am a believer in the setting of a minimum distance where a development may be harmful to the residents concerned. For example, when I was a member of South Dublin County Council, I instigated a minimum limit of 100 m in respect of telephone masts. This was adopted in the council's development plan, although it was overruled on one occasion by An Bord Pleanála. I am not against limits but want to ensure there is a scientific reason for choosing one. I ask the Minister of State to consider this.

Connection to the grid and mast sizes comprise another issue. Planners make it very difficult for wind energy providers when they ask them to provide a photomontage, which costs approximately €10,000. One planning condition that I came across was that tall, quick-growing trees should be planted in close proximity for screening purposes. Is it sensible to grow trees that may block the wind close to a wind turbine? Planning issues must be considered in this regard.

Wind energy developments are required to demonstrate environmental benefits and how environmental and social impacts have been minimised through the careful consideration of the location, scale, design and other measures.

When considering minimum distances, the Minister of State should bear in mind that the establishment of rigid separation distances and linking them to turbine height could actually lead to negative outcomes for householders. For example, it could lead to proposals being submitted for the building a greater number of smaller turbines of 24m, which is below the 25m threshold. Do we want this? It is not sustainable for either energy producers or households.

There are many questions I could ask. I thank Senator Whelan for raising this issue. We must put considerable thought into the matter if we are to secure energy provision and safeguard households. I am open to persuasion on the scientific value of setting certain distances. I have not conducted the research myself on that matter.

Senator Sean D. Barrett

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy O'Sullivan. When the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Rabbitte, was speaking in the House on 1 February, he stated:

Towards the end of 2011, the International Energy Agency carried out its four-yearly review of Irish energy policy. The review includes a detailed assessment of the efficiency of the Irish electricity and gas sectors, taking full account of the EU regulatory context for these sectors. I look forward to receiving its assessment of our energy policy in a few months. This analysis will feed into a review of the existing 2007 energy White Paper that my Department will carry out over the coming months in consultation with stakeholders and with a view to publishing during this year a new energy policy framework for 2012-2030.

On what oil price does each alternative depend? Each is technically feasible and has very strong advocates, but sometimes what is possible in engineering terms does not make economic sense. As the Minister of State knows, the OECD, in its review of the Irish economy, which the National Competitiveness Council includes in the competitiveness challenge report for 2011, advocated the discontinuation of supports for offshore wave and tidal energy. In its view, these options are too expensive.

The Competitiveness Council recommends that the price support scheme for onshore windmills should be revised so that as we move closer to achieving our renewable energy targets, price support levels for new projects are phased out over time. There is €35 million from the PSO levy on electricity users which goes to subsidise renewable energy at the moment. It is recommended that the schemes should be discontinued for offshore wave and tidal energy, and scaled down for onshore windmills.

The council also points out that we will have to review policy because EirGrid 25 was based on anticipations of economic growth which, alas, we do not have. In fact, Professor Colm McCarthy estimates that by 2014 we will be about 40% behind where we would expect to be in the national development plan in terms of GDP. He has been making the point that one does not need the same volumes of investment to cater for an economy which — unfortunately, much as we wish to change it and will work to do so — will be substantially below what was predicted when the national development plan was drawn up. Postponing capital projects is justified in that case.

The Minister is undertaking the review, which I welcome. We look forward to hearing his thoughts later this year. I welcomed his speech here on 1 February. Independent people have cast doubts on the offshore projects I mentioned, including wave and tidal energy, as well as biomass. These are all technically feasible but they may not make sense unless the price of oil doubles. There are similar concerns that we may end up with excess capacity because economic growth in a recession will be less than expected. The €35 million in support for renewable energy, including onshore windmills, should be revised as we move closer to the target. The target will be smaller as we will be consuming less energy due to the regrettable recession.

On pollution matters, An Bord Snip's suggestion is to price those benefits on carbon tax. One can spend a lot of money for a small benefit but the carbon price gives us the shadow price. We are not alone in this situation. There has been such a strong surge without much analysis in favour of alternative energy that it is difficult to redress that. In the United Kingdom the makers of solar panels pursued a successful law case against the government. We can therefore build up irrational expectations that some activities will be worthwhile, but it would require a massive oil price rise to be so. I do not know where we fit into the picture as regards gas coming from the Corrib field. What will that do to Ireland's energy requirements?

Part of the success of wind energy in Denmark is due to a gas price which seems to be 50% higher than the price we pay in Ireland. Things that are possible in Denmark, therefore, may not make economic sense here. The Bill is important in opening up a discussion as to what the best energy policy is but we must include some numbers. When do we flick the switch to bring in these various options? Some have been ruled out, while others may be marginal. As the Competitiveness Council has said, subsidies may have to be curtailed. The fear is that if one does too much in this direction, one will reduce the chances of recovery in the overall export sector because we must keep our competitiveness strong. Energy costs are a major factor in that and they are within our control, which is why I welcome the Bill before us.

Senator Martin Conway

I commend Senator Kelly for introducing this Bill. This area requires much discussion and analysis. From the perspective of this House, it is a first and positive step. Many "ifs" and "buts" have been expressed by a number of people. I have been contacted by some groups in my area of County Clare, as Senators Kelly and Leyden in Roscommon and others have been. Such groups have issues with the current law and the fact that wind turbines will be located near their dwelling houses. County Clare is awash with wind as the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, knows well because she is a regular visitor. Clare County Council was one of the first local authorities to adopt a proper wind strategy, including buffer zones. Even with such a strategy, there are issues of concern. Senator Kelly is proposing a 500 m buffer zone around wind turbines, but in some cases in Clare we are talking about a distance of 2 km. I would be more comfortable having a minimum buffer zone of 1 km. A distance of 2 km should be standard, rather than 500 m which is extremely close to dwellings for noise. In addition, wind turbines may interfere with panoramic views of the ocean.

Clare County Council decided the best approach was to adopt a proper wind strategy. The council went through the consultation process with various stakeholders on both sides, received their submissions and held hearings to come up with a proper strategy. Even with that there are still significant objections. A detailed national strategy is required at this stage to deal with the issue. Arguments from abroad suggest that wind is perhaps not the best form of creating energy and that alternative ways should be examined. Denmark and other countries are no longer convinced that wind turbines are either appropriate or efficient.

Alternative energy is in its infancy here and we have not had a proper discussion on it. My biggest fear is that we could irreparably damage our tourism product if we are not careful. Just because an area has no dwelling houses, it does not mean it is not valuable in terms of its intrinsic beauty; it may be part of our overall tourism offering. In Clare, hill-walking and rock-climbing are significant tourism pursuits. Many foreign visitors come specifically for walking holidays, irrespective of the weather conditions. We must not destroy our natural resources by locating wind farms in inappropriate areas. What would have been regarded as wasteland before, is now part of our natural tourism resource because visitors are climbing mountains in remote areas. The Minister of State will be aware of parts of County Clare which in recent years have begun to attract hill-walkers, especially at weekends. Every year the numbers taking part in hiking and similar pursuits are increasing. Such leisure activities could be compromised by the development of wind turbines.

We must be careful and we do need guidelines. We must also ensure that such guidelines are fair and take into account what we are trying to achieve. Most of all, we must respect the integrity of people's homes. When people buy a home they have certain rights and expectations that it should not be taken away from them. I look forward to having a further, more detailed and comprehensive debate on this particular issue in future.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

Cuirim céad fáilte roimh an Aire. Ba mhaith liom tréaslú leis an Seanadóir Ó Ceallaigh faoin mBille seo a thabhair chun cinn. Is mór an rud é do Sheanadóir ar bith Bille a thabhairt chun cinn agus comhghairdeas leis faoi sin. Ba mhaith liom a dheimhniú dó go bhfuil Sinn Féin ag tabhairt tacaíochta iomlán don mBille, agus is breá an rud an tacaíocht tras-pháirtí seo a fheiceáil. Tá súil agam go dtabharfaidh páirtithe eile an Rialtais tacaíocht don rún tábhachtach seo.

It is important to state that Sinn Féin strongly supports the development of renewable energy and maintaining a clean environment. This Bill is an important addition to the framework of legislation, which we are happy to support. I hope it will be passed by the House and that it will be debated in the Dáil. It is clear that primary legislation is required in this area, as there is no statutory obligatory distance requirement. That means those who propose to erect turbines apply to erect them as close as 200 m from homes. We have had first hand experience of such sitings in Connemara, which I mentioned previously. It probably shows up some of the idiosyncrasies of the different approaches that county councils take to these developments. Galway County Council has adopted a wind strategy which allows for the siting of wind turbines up to 200 m from a dwelling. Planning permission was given for such a development, to which the locals objected and thankfully An Bord Pleanála has overturned that decision.

Another aspect of Galway County Council's policy I find extraordinary is that when the areas that turbines can be built were marked out on the map, all the Special Protection Areas, SPAs, and SSE areas have been excluded. My understanding is that European legislation states that a wind farm, or wind energy is allowable within an SSE area and not much else is allowable within those areas. Donegal County Council has given permission and has included the SSEs and SPAs in the areas where wind turbine and wind farms can be developed in County Donegal. More direction for the different county councils is needed to ensure the country has a cohesive policy. This legislation would add to the cohesion of policy across the State and would ensure that this important development can be done, but in such a way that it fits in with local communities.

I have received an e-mail from a County Clare resident who is awaiting a decision on a proposal to have turbines the height of the Dublin Spire located as close as 430 m from their home. That is clearly unacceptable and will represent an unwarranted aesthetic and environmental intrusion on that community.

There are different regulations at local authority level and Clare County Council refused permission for the proposal to which I referred, which differs from the Galway scenario I mentioned. Generally, in Clare County Council's administrative area, the distance is set at between 400 m and 500 m from the nearest dwelling; however, it has been argued that this is inadequate as it is based on the height of turbines that are now rarely installed and with the average height of modern turbines up to 155 m, developments of that height require to be located a much greater distance from dwellings.

This Bill proposes that turbines should be placed no closer than 2 km from a residential premises. Given the expectation that more investment will go towards the development of wind power to generate electricity, that does not present a problem and developers might argue that it would restrict the placing of turbines, certainly of the greater heights, making the project unviable. Other structural issues must be looked at in siting wind farms. I mentioned that the ESB is developing the electricity grid around the country but in some cases, as in Connemara, where it is developing a new 110 kV line, there is no access for the wind farms to connect into the 110 kV line. In Galway, no more than in Clare, as Senator Conway has announced, where we are full of wind——

Senator Marie Moloney

You said it, Senator.

Senator Trevor Ó Clochartaigh

I knew that the Senator would not disagree with that. It is important that we are able to access this type of energy, but if the grid does not allow for such connections, it seems that the two arms of the policy are fighting against each other.

While there are no statutory distance regulations in the United Kingdom, the guidelines in place in Scotland are that no farms be located within 2 km of a dwelling house. Given that Scotland is a clear leader in this field, I suggest that bolsters the proposals in Senator Kelly's Bill.

On a broader level there is significant potential in renewable energy and that applies to wave power as well as to wind, yet, in spite of our natural advantages, there has been comparatively little done to develop this sector. Given the current economic situation and the potential for job creation as well as addressing our energy needs, would the savings in import substitution that it would represent not suggest it ought to be prioritised?

I was in Canada recently where I saw the great work that is being done on tidal energy but what impressed me was that Canada has taken on a co-operative community model for developing renewable energy, which we should look at here. If a community group or a local co-operative wishes to set up a wind or a tidal turbine, there is grant aid available to set it up and in addition, the electricity is bought from the local community at a preferential rate. This helps the community to pay off the investment and invest any profits made after that into the local community. That is something we should look at in this country.

Scotland has set the bar very high on wind energy and I recommend that we follow its example. It has set ambitious targets for renewable energy production and is confident of not only becoming 100% self sufficient but exporting €2 billion worth of renewable energy annually by 2020. Given our geography and natural assets in terms of wind and wave — the Scots are concentrating mostly on wind power — we have a realistic target to aim at. We too ought to be aiming not only at becoming self sufficient in renewable energy but in becoming a net exporter within 20 to 25 years. That is an ambitious, and some might say unrealistic target, given that we are importing almost 90% of our energy requirements in the form of expensive and potentially unpredictably sourced fossil fuels. However, I believe it is well worth pursuing.

An méid sin ráite, ba mhaith liom tréaslú arís leis an Seanadóir faoin mBille a thabhairt chun cinn. Beidh muid ag tacú leis an mBille agus tá súil agam go mbeidh tacaíocht iomlán aige ó na comhghleacaithe Rialtais.

Senator Mary Moran

I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan to the Seanad. I add my full support for this Bill. I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on this topic. I urge the Minister of State to listen to the valid points that have been raised by Members from all parties. It is imperative that we introduce restrictions on the siting of wind turbines so close to people's homes. I too, like my colleague Senator John Kelly, have been inundated with e-mails from all across the country on this issue, and specifically from the residents of my own area of Dundalk, where it is proposed to erect five huge wind turbines in Rockmarshall farm.

I must point out, everybody is biased about his or her part of the county, that the Cooley Peninsula and the area around Rockmarshall, where it is proposed to site these wind turbines, is one of the scenic parts of the country. As some of my colleagues have said, firms come along and decide to put in for planning permission but the scenery of the location must be taken into consideration.

The height of the proposed turbines for Rockmarshall farm is 390 ft., which is twice the size of Liberty Hall. Can anyone imagine living 500 m from a development of that height? Under the current legislation, the company would be able to build that close to a dwelling. I have been reliably informed that 120 families in the area would live within 500 m of the proposed development, the distance of the present guidelines. This would have an impact on the value of their houses and would have an effect on people.

I would not like to live that close to a wind farm and I do not think anybody else would. Anybody who has ever stood near a wind turbine will appreciate the noise that emanates from it and I know that just 800 m from the proposed turbines in Rockmarshall lives a family with two autistic children. Anybody who is familiar with autism will realise that sensitivity to noise is a major part of this condition. Such a development, as it stands, is hazardous and its proximity to houses impedes on peoples' human rights. The sheer force of the size of these turbines must be taken into account when planning these wind farms. There is no doubt we will live to regret it if something is not done, just as we regret the erection of ESB pylons and masts so close to residential properties in recent years and learned of the proven health hazard when it was too late. I welcome the argument put forward by Senator Whelan that the Bill be amended to include pylons.

I am not opposed to wind turbines offshore or onshore but we need to take into consideration the vicinity and the fact that they are located so close to people's homes. I appreciate their value as a sustainable energy source but if restrictions are not applied in respect of placing them, they will have a devastating effect not only on the countryside and scenery but on the value of homes.

We need to look at the environmental impact statements. I have seen a number of such statements put forward for some of these farms. There should be rigid compulsion to ensure they are of excellent quality. Sometimes they can be vague or blurred but they should be compelled to be of excellent quality and done to a true scale to show exactly how they will impact on the local area.

I commend the Bill the House.

Acting Chairman (Senator Pat O’Neill)

Before I call Senator Daly, I remind the House that the Minister will be called to reply at 6.05 p.m. There are five other speakers before the Minister who will have ten minutes. There are two speakers after the Minister and Senator Kelly will have the right to conclude at 6.25 p.m. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Senator Mark Daly

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and look forward to hearing her reply on whether she will propose that the Bill move forward to the next Stage.

This is an interesting Bill. While we are not opposing it we seek more study of the issue. This whole area needs to be regulated. Unfortunately, as we have seen from other issues, whether mobile telephone masts, pylons or wind turbines, we have failed to put in place sufficiently powerful guidelines that have an effect on the organisations and companies concerned. I am anxious to know whether provision will be made by way of primary legislation or statutory instrument or, alternatively, by the infamous guidelines which, more often than not, are ignored.

There is no doubt that wind turbines and their siting so close to houses have a detrimental effect on families and communities. As in the case of mobile telephone masts, the guidelines state that they must be located a distance away from residences but they are never used by An Bord Pleanála as a reason for turning down any particular planning application. In Kerry there is a one kilometre rule, which provides that any mobile telephone mast must be located more than a kilometre from a residence, as set out in the county development plan. Given that public representatives include such a provision in the county development plan, I would have thought it would be adhered to but when it goes to An Bord Pleanála that provision is trumped by the Government whereby it wants to roll out broadband and, therefore, planning permissions are granted time and again against the county development plan voted through by elected members. That is why I am interested to hear what the Government proposes to do with the legislation and whether it will move on to the next Stage. There is no doubt that primary legislation would give protection to the citizen above the institutions and the organisations and those who would site wind turbines next door to people.

I have been on wind farms and have visited people's houses located in the middle of wind farms. It is like being at an airport when they are going at maximum capacity and there is nothing anybody can do about it. The previous Government, of which I was a member, failed to regulate the issue. While the legislation is welcome, will the Minister of State support it, or give platitudes to the Senator, say it is a nice idea and kick it back to the Department? Some 75% of the laws in any given year are made by way of statutory instruments. The Bill accounts for only 25% of the laws made in Ireland in any given year. It goes to show that the country is run by the Departments rather than the legislators.

With respect to the Senator, subject to some amendments we would like to support the legislation but I am not sure we will be allowed do so. I do not think anybody in the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources will allow this to happen and will put forward various reasons it should not happen. That is why the Seanad and the other House only account for 25% of the legislation passed in any given year. That in itself is a tragedy but the Minister of State will be told the issue can be dealt with by statutory instrument. The statutory instruments will be lobbied on by the people in the industry, by former members who are being paid to tell the Minister of State it can be done by means of guidelines. Guidelines are useless. Primary legislation means the citizen can be defended. We have guidelines on so many things and they are ignored time and again. There is also no recourse.

We have had a debate on media standards. We have a press council and Senator Norris told the House how ineffective it is, given that there is no recourse. With legislation the issue can be taken to court and one can get a judge to make a decision. That is what primary legislation is about. I am afraid the Minister of State's script will not be as encouraging as we would hope and it will go back to the Department and sink into the mire. The Bill will not be passed but the statutory instruments will continue to come into force. However, we do not examine them because there is no provision to oversee them in an effective manner. I will listen to the Minister of State's reply and the contributions of colleagues. Subject to amendment we will support the legislation but will we be given the opportunity to do so?

Senator Marie Moloney

The Bill should be broadened to include mobile telephone and broadband masts. I wish the initiative had been taken a long time ago by members to protect people who have had mobile telephone and broadband masts erected in their back garden. Senator Daly will be aware that in Kerry, mobile phone masts have been erected all over the county. In Glenbeigh alone——

Senator Mark Daly

Kilcummin.

Senator Marie Moloney

Kilcummin is my home town. They have been practically erected in my back garden.

Senator Mark Daly

They have.

Senator Marie Moloney

I am not opposed to wind turbines and the masts but I am opposed to their location. They are being located too near to people's houses.

The Minister of State will be aware of the precautionary principle which was introduced in Europe to protect people's health but it is never applied. Every time a person appeals against the erection of masts under the precautionary principle, it is never applied. I cannot stand here and claim mobile telephone and broadband masts cause cancer. Equally, I cannot claim they do not cause cancer and neither can any other Member. We should apply the precautionary principle and take the time to investigate planning applications for wind turbines fully. As Senator Daly said, in Kerry we adapted what is known as the 1 km rule into the county development plan. Accordingly, every planning application for a mobile telephone or broadband mast that was within 1 km of a residence was turned down by the county council. Subsequently, these applications went to An Bord Pleanála which overturned every refusal and granted planning permission to the operators.

We need to protect people's homes and health. In a scenic area, An Taisce will protect the environment and its amenities. Who will protect the people? We are elected by the people to present their views here. Their view is they do not want these wind turbines next to their houses. I cannot blame them. Members have outlined various concerns already such as Senator Moran who explained how wind turbines can affect autistic children. I believe the precautionary principle should always be applied. In one area in Kerry a wind farm interfered with the television reception of a local resident. I presume this problem was sorted but how do we know?

County development plans dictate where wind farms can be set up. One only has to check any county development plan to find they already have designated areas for wind farms without the locals getting a say in it. It is at local level at which we must determine whether the land is suitable for wind farms. Once land is designated in the county development plan for a wind farm, an operator can set one up with the people having no say in the matter. It is just imposed on people.

I recommend the Bill to the House. I must apologise because I should have said when I started that I was sharing time with Senator Higgins.

Acting Chairman (Senator Paschal Mooney)

The Senator has two minutes remaining.

Senator Lorraine Higgins

I believe there is a slot for me towards the end of the debate. Can the Acting Chairman check that out?

Senator David Norris

If not, I will share time with Senator Higgins. I only need two minutes.

Senator Marie Moloney

Will the Minister do her best to ensure this Bill goes through so that people are protected? That is what it is all about in this country — people.

Senator Terry Brennan

I support alternative energy sources such as wind and wave power. We recognise the targets that must be met for the percentage of energy provided from alternative sources. I commend Senator Kelly for putting forward this Bill.

I want to bring the Minister's attention to a proposal for a wind farm on the Cooley Peninsula, already referred to by Senator Moran. If the Minister can visualise the beautiful Cooley Peninsula, she will know the site of this proposed wind farm at Rockmarshall Mountain is in a highly scenic area. The mountain itself is only 250 m. The proposal is to build five turbines at a certain distance on that mountain which will protrude over its highest point.

Incidentally, both Senators Kelly and Moran must have been reading my script because I also wanted to draw a comparison with the Spire on O'Connell Street.

Senator John Kelly

We have eyes in the back of our heads

Senator Terry Brennan

The Spire is 121 m high while Liberty Hall, once the tallest building in the country and now the third tallest, is 60 m high. These proposed turbines, as already said, will be twice the height of Liberty Hall. I did not realise how high the proposed turbines at Rockmarshall will be. Can the Minister visualise the impact they will have on the local area, which is highly scenic and a tourist attraction?

While the turbines will be eight miles from my home and so outside the 2 km zone recommended by this Bill, the people in the area have concerns about the noise, health and other implications of these turbines. We must listen to their concerns and protect them. Two private residences will be 502 m from the nearest mast. Up to 120 houses will be within 1,500 m of the said development. My concern is these will be located on a side of mountain forested by Coillte which means it gave its approval for the project. It was not a question of money being paid to a local farmer as was mentioned by Senator Kelly already. The Bill proposes that the turbines planned for this location should be a minimum distance of 2 km from the nearest house. This is unattainable in Rockmarshall unless we shift the residents away from the site.

I support this Bill and believe it is important it applies uniform standards to wind turbines. County councils have different guidelines which vary from county to county. We should establish uniform criteria on building distances and so forth for all local authorities.

Senator David Norris

I wish to share time with Senator Higgins.

Acting Chairman (Senator Paschal Mooney)

Senator Higgins has a full slot if she wishes to take it.

Senator Lorraine Higgins

I do not mind.

Senator David Norris

I will only take one minute. The Senator has my permission if she wishes to take my time.

I congratulate Senator Kelly, a new Senator, on his excellent Bill. I am not sure if he had the assistance of the drafting service but I want to take the opportunity to welcome the fact that for the first time we now have the assistance of a drafting service in this House. It is a very important service of which I am availing currently.

I am all in favour of wind turbines and we are moving to 16% of our energy needs being created by them. It is a new and welcome phenomenon, as is wave power.

I am not sure if it has been mentioned by previous speakers but I was greatly moved recently by the story of a woman with an autistic child whose neighbour erected a wind turbine right beside their boundary. This neighbour had a field an acre away which could have been used as an alternative location. The noise from the turbine activated the most severe problems for her autistic child. As I said this morning, there is under the Constitution the right to the proper enjoyment of one's home. I accept wind turbines are very beneficial and it is great to generate electricity in these difficult times, saving money for oneself while feeding surpluses to the grid along with getting back some payment. That is wonderful, but could we please have respect for neighbours? That is the only thing I wish to say. If Senator Higgins wishes to take the time that is left, that is fine. If she wants to take her own time, that is equally fine. I have made the point I wanted to make.

Senator Lorraine Higgins

I welcome the Minister to the House to hear our views on the proposed introduction of legislation for wind turbines. This is an issue which has concerned both my Labour Party colleagues and I to the extent that we felt strongly about rectifying the current situation. I commend them on showing unequivocal foresight and unanimity on progressing the matter.

As we are all aware, the erection of wind turbines is a cost-effective way of generating electricity in households. Wind is free and, arguably, there is a lot of it in this country. Once one pays for the initial installation of a turbine, electricity costs are significantly reduced. Not only that, there is a potential for proprietors of turbines to export any excess electricity to their local grid and get paid for it. However, as I understand it this country is somewhat behind in terms of capitalising on this resource and we must rectify the situation as soon as possible.

Colleagues have referred to a number of negative attributes attaching to the erection of wind turbines. That is why as a group we consider it necessary for further regulation of them. The noise of the blades rotating can be akin to bass notes from loud music or the sound of a helicopter at a distance. A group of turbines rotating together can produce sounds of greater effect when they synchronise. There is no doubt that residents in surrounding areas can be disturbed and distressed by such. To date, without targeted regulation there has been no success in reducing the noise, which can continue largely unabated day and night for extended periods and can sometimes travel several miles. A well-established body of evidence has been collected worldwide that demonstrates the harmful effect of turbines for at least some of those who live close to them. In the United Kingdom, UK, in particular, complaints are made continuously to the environmental health officers of local authorities such that in February 2009 the renewable energy foundation produced a roll of 27 out of 133 wind farms in the UK which had given rise to noise complaints. The number subsequently rose to 46 out of 217 complaints relating to wind farms in April 2010, with 285 complaints in total having been recorded. This must be of concern to us given that there are recognised health problems arising from such, for example, pulse irregularity and sleep disturbance.

Not only does the erection of wind turbines or wind farms affect people's health but they also affect the geography of an area and its flora and fauna. We only have to look at the situation in Derrybrien in County Galway where there was a landslide in 2008 as a result of a failure to carry out an environmental impact assessment prior to granting permission for a wind farm there. Approximately 450,000 cu. m of peat became dislodged over a 32 km area which led to the pollution of a river in the area killing 50,000 fish. At the very least we need to legislate for this finding by the European Court of Justice in order that a disaster of this magnitude will never affect any part of this country again.

However, while we debate the regulation of wind turbines we must be mindful that debate over governmental regulations should be more broad based and focus more on engineering issues and robust scientific evidence and less on politics. We must call for more research into aerodynamic modulation which is the swishing noise made by turbine blades. Currently, the causes and treatment of the problem needs further research. Turbines are designed in all shapes and sizes and we must take that into account when framing legislation. We must also go further than the current Bill and look at the situation in Scotland whereby it is not permissible for anyone to erect a wind turbine farm within 2 km of the edge of cities, towns and villages. We should look at that as being a standard bearer for all wind farm developments in this country in the future. It is essential that we retain such a separation distance in order to curtail visual impact. While impacts vary considerably depending on the scale of projects and the proposed location it is imperative that we ensure that we do not allow for significant long-term detrimental impact on the amenity of people living nearby. I commend the Bill to the House.

Senator Tony Mulcahy

The Minister is welcome to the House. I wish to preface my contribution by saying that I got this brief only six or seven months ago and it is an acquired knowledge at this stage. There are few jobs in wind energy. There is the job of bringing in the turbine and erecting it and then it only requires to be maintained once a year, which means that few jobs are created in the management and maintenance of wind turbines. The work is predominantly done by German and Danish companies. We have a terrible habit in this country of getting an idea and going for it bald-headed. We must look more broadly at alternative energy and consider combined heat and power plants which would burn timber and biomass as they would create much farm income. We must be careful that we do not put all our eggs in the wind basket because it will not produce the jobs we need.

REFIT 3 provided permission to be granted for wind farms around the country that will never be built because they are on special protection areas, SPAs, and special areas of conservation, SAC, there is no planning permission and the people involved do not own the land although they own the quota system for them. Those wind farms cannot be built. I do not understand how we will meet the targets to which we have committed. We should examine that issue given that we are a year in government and perhaps consider district heating and power plants. I can provide the Minister with information in that regard.

I am in favour of the general direction of the Bill. There is a growing fear in certain parts of the country that local communities will be imprisoned by their close proximity to large wind turbines and that the landscape will be blighted by miles and miles of wind turbines. That is the result of bad planning and the conditions that were set down when the Gate 3 process was laid down. Serious lessons must be learned. The Bill must set down standards that will recognise the rights of citizens. It is proposed to erect up to 47 turbines in the beautiful village of Doonbeg, some up to a height of up to 415 ft., only 500 m from some of the local houses. In Moneypoint, which is not too far from the village of Doonbeg, the ESB proposes to erect another seven turbines up to a height of 515 ft.

The Minister is aware that I have spoken in the House previously on the need for this country to move away from a 90% dependence on imported fossil fuels to produce our energy requirements and our need to move to renewables. With some of the best natural resources in the world, namely, wind — which we are using — wave, tidal, hydro and biomass forestry, we can reduce our dependence on imported fossil fuels. We now import approximately €6 billion worth of imported fossil fuels every year.

I fully support the Government policy outlined in the programme for Government:

We will ensure that future wind farms are built in locations where wind regime is best and that they are built in large numbers or in clusters to reduce the cost of connection to the grid under new plan led Gate 4 process as opposed to the existing developer led system.

Planning is key to how this is will be achieved. We have the wind resource and it should be harnessed but we must listen to what people on the ground have to say in areas where wind farms are planned. No one wants to wake up some morning to find that a construction crew has arrived in the next field to erect a large turbine. Local authorities such as Clare County Council can identify areas where the least amount of impact can be achieved on residents. That is already being done. The distances that are listed in the Private Members' Bill make sense but we must be careful about how this would affect our need to reduce the amount of overhead power cables erected. We cannot end up with a situation of single turbines being erected in the countryside miles apart from the next one and a sky line that has a lattice of power lines linking them up. That would not make economic sense and it would destroy the appearance of the countryside. Those who want to build wind farms must consider how they will compensate residents for any loss of value to their homes from the construction of a new wind farm in close proximity. We must ensure a high degree of fairness when these issues are being addressed.

We must bear in mind that this country has binding commitments with the EU on the amount of energy we must produce from renewables by 2020. Wind is only part of the mix. There is the potential for considerable job creation between the construction, maintenance and in certain locations the fabrication of wind turbines for the domestic and export market. C&F are currently constructing turbines. In its 2011 to 2050 wind energy roadmap report the SEAI estimates: "We have the potential to create 20,000 jobs in the installation operation and maintenance of onshore and offshore wind farms in Ireland by 2040." However, I question whether it is possible to deliver the number of jobs specified.

This generation is the guardian of the landscape and, as such, we must protect it but we must also develop it for future generations. That can be done if we consider the environment and come up with ways to have the least possible impact on it. New ways of generating power and heat should be a major element of this plan. Combined heat and power district plants, which use locally grown timber and biomass, are used worldwide. I firmly believe that local authorities should also be considering potential areas in close proximity to industrial estates where these plants would get the green light to go ahead. Currently, in the UK approximately 6 GW of power is generated by combined heat and power plants.

Mr. John Sauven, director of Greenpeace, stated:

Energy technologies like industrial-scale CHP beat nuclear and old-style coal plants on every front. They're cheaper, they're much quicker to construct, they'll cut more carbon emissions, they could halve gas imports and they won't leave behind an expensive radioactive legacy.

It makes sense that we should build clean power plants beside the end user, as this would reduce the need for miles of new power lines criss-crossing the country between existing stations. Areas that are zoned as industrial or commercial could be the sites of the new plants.

If there is one thing that this country can do, it is to grow things. Our temperate climate allows us to grow trees and biomass well. Land that is not suitable for grazing could be used to grow crops that could be converted into energy. Significant low-carbon biomass can supply a significant percentage of our renewable energy. We need to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases we produce annually.

Wind power has one major disadvantage — what happens when the wind is not blowing? One would need a pumped hydro facility — one can store electricity from such a facility, but not from a turbine — in close proximity when wind speeds are low. On the other hand, wood biomass power plants can operate 24 hours per day all year round and are not intrusive on the landscape if they are sited in close proximity to their customers.

I welcome the thrust of the Bill. It should form part of where we go from here in our drive to develop green energy.

Senator Ivana Bacik

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, to the House and thank her for attending throughout the debate. Her presence has been useful. I am glad to be involved in this debate. I wish to pay tribute to Senator Kelly, who has pioneered the Bill on behalf of the Labour group with a bit of help from some of us. To respond to Senator Norris, the Bill would have benefited from greater consultation with more drafters, but we wanted to put the issue on the Seanad's legislative agenda and, importantly, to ensure that the Bill's principles were accepted at governmental level.

As Senator Kelly stated, the Bill is based largely on legislation tabled before the House of Lords by Lord Reay. The concept is the same and quite straightforward, namely, one should incorporate into general planning a rule about the proximity of wind farms and wind turbines to residential houses.

Our Bill is not against wind energy, a point that other Senators have made. We are in favour of developing renewable and sustainable energy sources. As someone who has been involved with Friends of the Earth Ireland since its founding, I am strongly in favour of developing renewable energy sources, including wind and wave energy. Offshore installations in particular possess significant potential. I am also one of those unusual people who find wind turbines quite beautiful to look at, albeit from a distance.

Senator Mark Daly

Would that be in a Don Quixote kind of way?

Senator Ivana Bacik

I accept that I do not live near one. We are not against wind turbines. Far from it, as we are optimistic about wind energy's potential. The programme for Government accepts that, while we want to develop and expand our reliance upon renewable energy sources, we must avoid a detrimental impact upon the people living near them. In this light, the Bill aims to impose a reasonable restriction on the placing of wind turbines in close proximity to houses. It also recognises that there may be serious noise pollution and health issues for people living in close proximity to them, as Senator Kelly mentioned, as well as a visual impact. Others have spoken strongly about the detrimental impact of wind turbines that are located too close to homes.

We hope that the Bill will be accepted and that this principle will be expressed into binding law by the Government. The principle is accepted across the House. We are delighted to see the support coming from both sides of the House and I am grateful to other Senators for their comments.

In introducing the Bill, we also wanted to make a point about the use of the Seanad as a genuine Chamber for proactively introducing legislation on issues such as quality of life as well as other issues on which the Dáil might not be focused. This is the second Bill that the Labour group has introduced in the House. The first was accepted by the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Burton, and had to do with civil registration, in particular the registration of humanist wedding ceremonies. Prior to this term, the Criminal Justice (Female Genital Mutilation) Bill 2011, which is about to conclude in the Dáil, was initiated as a Private Members' Bill and was accepted by the Government. There is a powerful precedent for the use of the Seanad in introducing this sort of legislation and debating it in a collegial and constructive fashion. I look forward to the Minister of State's support in this regard.

Senator Michael Comiskey

I welcome the Minister of State to the House and am delighted to contribute to this debate. I commend the Labour Party on introducing this Bill. I support accelerating the green energy resolution. Renewable energy reduces dependence on fossil fuels, increases security of supply and reduces greenhouse gas emissions, thereby creating environmental benefits, delivering green jobs to the economy and contributing to national competitiveness. As has been stated, we import approximately €6 billion worth of energy derived from fossil fuel. It is important that we put the necessary mechanisms, policies and legislation in place to promote green energy.

According to the Irish Wind Energy Association, IWEA, Ireland's total capacity is 2,031.25 MW, which is generated by 170 wind farms in 27 counties. The west has a predominantly higher capacity for onshore wind energy than the east coast does. This is only natural, given our exposure to the western seaboard.

This Bill will facilitate a system of gaining planning permission for wind turbines. An Bord Pleanála has been identified as the relevant authority in this regard. It is important to set a minimum distance between wind turbine locations and residential properties. Section 4(3) states: "the minimum distance requirement applies to each wind turbine generator individually." This is necessary and will ensure that no erected wind turbine will unduly encroach on residential properties, including farm houses. Section 4(6) adequately addresses this requirement in respect of wind turbines of less than 25 m in height.

Section 5 seeks to safeguard home owners from being unlawfully coerced into agreements to erect wind turbines close to their homes. There must be written agreement in those exceptional circumstances in which a wind turbine's location does not meet the minimum distance requirement. This is a practical proposal. This legislation will minimise the negative effects that wind turbines could have on properties and home owners.

I will address the question of renewable energy. The National Renewable Energy Action Plan, NREAP, sets out the Government's strategic approach and concrete measures for delivering Ireland's 16% target under Directive No. 2009/28/EC on the promotion of energy from renewable sources. The development of renewable energy is central to overall energy policy. While 2020 is rapidly approaching, plans and targets are being devised at EU level for 2030 and beyond. The challenge to promote renewables will not end in 2020. The decisions and actions taken up to that point will pave the way beyond for a resourceful and efficient use of onshore and offshore renewable energy.

The Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, report "Energy Forecasts for Ireland to 2020" estimates that wind energy will account for 85% of our renewable energy by that year. Jobs are directly and inextricably linked with the promotion of renewable energy. Giving projects the green light will create jobs for architects, engineers, suppliers and construction workers. There should be further positive public acceptance campaigns to ensure that communities and interest groups can appreciate the benefits of such projects in their local areas. Wind generating companies are prepared to put a percentage of their profits into communities, for example, GAA and soccer pitches, churches, schools and so on. This is a positive approach.

I commend the Labour Party for introducing these proposals and look forward to their enactment at an early date.

Senator Susan O’Keeffe

I thank the Cathaoirleach for allowing me time at short notice and just prior to the Minister of State, who I thank for attending. I will lend my support to Senator Kelly's Bill on wind turbines. I will also echo Senator Bacik's comments on the use of the Seanad in introducing ideas and concepts that the Dáil cannot take on board, given the number of other issues that it must address. Senator Daly expressed concern that the legislation would be submerged in the Department. It will take time for planning regulations to change in reflection of our changing communities. Five or ten years ago we were not discussing whether wind turbines should be located beside people's homes or farms. As someone who grew up with an understanding of the concept of bungalow blitz and the nightmare of bungalows spreading in an unplanned manner across rural Ireland, I hope the Government will find a way of incorporating this Bill into planning law so that we will not face some kind of turbine terror in 20 years' time.

We are right to be excited about the potential for green energy and green jobs in this country but we should not lose sight of the need to exercise care with our planning. This proposal is only the beginning of a debate on the many issues that the Government will have to take on board in the context of planning for wind turbines and other sources of green energy.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Jan O’Sullivan)

I thank Senator Kelly for bringing forward the Wind Turbines Bill 2012, as well as speakers on all sides of the House for their constructive remarks on specific issues relating to the Bill and more general issues pertaining to sustainable and renewable energy. My specific remit as Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government is in planning but much of this debate revolved around the more general issue of supply of energy. As Senator Barrett noted, the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government is carrying out a review of this area. The question that arises for me, however, is whether we should use guidelines or primary legislation to govern our planning decisions. I am happy to engage Senators on that question.

The issue of wind energy specifically and the wider related matters of energy security, emissions reduction, economic renewal by harnessing our abundant renewable energy sources and job creation are high on the Government's agenda. We have set challenging international and domestic targets in this area but are preparing to meet them head on.

Under the renewable energy directive to which Senator Comiskey referred, Directive 2009/28/EC, Ireland was set a binding national target by the European Union of ensuring that 16% of all energy consumed will be from renewable sources by 2020. National targets of 40% electricity, 12% heating and cooling and 10% transport are commensurate with our overall target. Renewable energy supplies of approximately 1,800 MW are currently operational, with just over 1,500 MW coming from wind power, 240 MW from hydro-generation and 30 MW from biomass renewable generation. Operators of a further 1,000 MW of new renewable generation from the gate one and gate two group processing series have signed grid connection offers and are awaiting grid connection, mainly in the next year or two. As part of the gate three process, offers amounting to an additional 3,900 MW have issued to renewable generators. This quantum of renewable generation is in line with achieving Ireland's target.

While wind energy development has been taking place in Ireland for some time, ocean technologies are still at the research and development phase and wave energy devices do not operate on a commercial scale anywhere in the world. Nevertheless, our universities and the Marine Institute are pursuing research and other initiatives in the ocean energy sector and a test site for devices has been established in Galway Bay. The eventual intention is to be able to test full scale grid connected pre-commercial wave energy prototypes and to facilitate the achievement of this goal the ocean energy development unit in the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland has been pursuing a strategy of developing a site where this testing could take place.

The importance of planning for this type of development is fully recognized by the Government. The programme for Government states that a future gate four, if required, will be plan-led. In other words, future wind farms are to be built at locations where the wind regime is best and in numbers or clusters to reduce the cost of connection to the grid. Clearly, our ambition in the area of renewable energy requires that our planning system is properly equipped to play its part in a way that achieves the optimal balance between the delivery of key national energy infrastructure and the land use impacts of such development on local communities and the environment.

Senator Kelly is proposing the introduction in primary legislation of binding distance requirements from private homes with the specific distance being determined by reference to turbine height. The Bill is closely modelled on a Private Members' Bill presented to the House of Lords last June, albeit with some lessening of the required distances for each of the four size categories of turbine. I appreciate the concerns that have prompted Senator Kelly to bring this Bill before the Oireachtas and I commend him on his work. I agree with Senators Bacik and O'Keeffe that the Seanad is an appropriate venue for bringing forward this type of legislation. However, we need to consider whether legislation, particularly when legislating in this manner, is the most appropriate way to address those concerns. I advise Senator Daly that I am keeping my mind open on that question.

Senator Mark Daly

I merely have a bad cough.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan

In case Senator Daly is being cynical, I am not opposing the Bill.

Senator Mark Daly

I am too young to be cynical.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan

I previously introduced a Private Members' Bill which was accepted by Senator Daly's party when it was in Government.

Senator Mark Daly

We are an open party. Membership is open to everybody.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan

My Bill specifically dealt with the statute of limitations on the abuse of children.

Senator Mark Daly

That was important legislation.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan

I would not be too cynical about it.

There are at present no specific conditions in the legislation covering the distance from sensitive properties, including houses, at which wind turbines should be sited. I understand that the issue was considered when the existing wind energy guidelines were prepared in 2006 but it was decided that it would be impractical and inappropriate to set a minimum distance because distance alone does not dictate noise levels from wind energy developments. A wide range of other factors can also impact on noise, including background noise levels, topography, local climatic factors and type and height of turbine. A number of Senators raised the issue of valuing the beauty of places like the Cooley Peninsula, north and west County Clare and Connemara. That factor also needs to be considered. If a decision was made to legislate or to impose rigid criteria in respect of one of these factors, it would be necessary to impose binding specifications in respect of all of them. We should consider the practicality of introducing binding legislation rather than guidelines. I refer to guidelines rather than statutory instruments in this context because, as Senator Daly will be aware, guidelines are already in place.

Senator Mark Daly

Statutory instruments are slightly more powerful. Guidelines are only worth the paper on which they are written.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan

The guidelines state, "[i]n general, noise is unlikely to be a significant problem where the distance from the nearest turbine to any noise sensitive property is more than 500 metres." They advise planning authorities to seek evidence that the types of turbine proposed in a particular development will use best engineering practice in terms of noise suppression and provide specific limits to permissible increases in noise above background noise from wind energy developments to protect neighbouring properties. The current system, therefore, provides for a degree of specificity and uniformity across all planning authorities while also leaving the final decision in the hands of local decision makers, who will have the benefit of submissions and observations from third parties. There is a national background but also the guidelines would suggest some provision to listen to arguments at local level.

The Bill would effectively take away the scope a planning authority has to apply its knowledge of the local factors and circumstances that might make a site especially suitable for wind energy. For example, a site might have such other factors as topography or the presence of other buildings mitigating noise impacts. By introducing mandatory minimum distances we would effectively prohibit a planning authority from considering these thereby ruling out development that may otherwise be acceptable or even desirable from a broader energy policy perspective.

While planning legislation, both primary and secondary, is highly detailed and process driven, the forward planning process must provide an enabling framework for planning authorities to take the right decisions locally. Generally speaking, matters of technical detail such as noise or electromagnetic interference are dealt with under planning guidelines or in the development management sections of development plans thereby allowing for these issues to be properly addressed in the local context. While the task of reviewing or producing planning guidelines is not a simple one, it is generally less complex and onerous than amending or preparing primary legislation. Guidelines therefore allow for the establishment of flexible parameters within which developments can take place taking account of changing circumstances and technical advances. One of the Senators made the point that technical advances are constantly being made in these areas.

I also have a concern over the degree to which the proposed approach could impact on our ability nationally to meet the targets we have set for renewable energy and on the capacity of the sector to create and sustain jobs. The imposition of the distance limits set out in the Bill would inevitably limit the number of sites where wind energy developments could be located.

I compliment Senator Kelly on bringing this very important issue to the House and on all the positive contributions made. The issue for me is whether primary legislation is appropriate. Residential amenity is a key consideration in the planning system regardless of development class. I welcome the Bill and the way in which Senator Kelly and other Senators have addressed some of the concerns being articulated on the impact of wind energy development on residential amenity and other factors such as health. I will consider all the points made here and I look forward to engaging with the Seanad further on these issues. I am not opposing the Bill.

Senator Mark Daly

Did the House of Lords pass the relevant Bill presented it to it?

Senator John Kelly

The Minister of State's final words were that she was not opposing the Bill, which I appreciate. I was getting worried that she was complimenting me so much that she might have been killing me with kindness. One way or another we need to legislate for this issue. The debate focused on whether we were so concerned about meeting our green energy targets that we might disregard the rights of the ordinary citizens. I do not want their rights to be forgotten. All the Senators in the House supported the Bill, for which I thank them. At times the debate turned into a discussion on renewable energy which is not the remit of the Minister of State, for which I apologise. However, as the matters are intertwined it is hard to get away from it.

I reiterate that we do not oppose green energy and are very much in favour of it. Senator Leyden mentioned some wind farm developments in my county. Sliabh Bán is the most beautiful mountain in County Roscommon and a developer wants to destroy it with dozens of wind turbines. There is an attempt to force windmills on the residential community of Dysart — they have no rights. Senator Ó Clochartaigh said that when we discuss green energy and windmills, we are no longer interested in habitats, birds and bats, and that special areas of conservation no longer matter. However, we are banned from cutting turf because of the special areas of conservation. A few years ago when I was a member of Roscommon County Council, a developer wanted to build a hotel in Boyle, a town that badly needed one. That development was blocked because of a lesser horseshoe bat and a pine marten.

Senator Mark Daly

Who was the Martin who blocked it?

Senator John Kelly

A pine marten.

I agree with Senator O'Keeffe that if we do not play our cards right we could end up with ghost wind farms unless we review the green energy policy as a matter of urgency. On the importance of the Seanad, I agree with Senators Bacik and O'Keeffe that this is the kind of thing we should be doing here. One Deputy recently said to me when we were discussing the future of the Seanad that if it was not for the Seanad the elderly people in nursing homes today who are long-term smokers would have to go outside the building to smoke. These were things that the Seanad found to be flawed — things that the Dáil simply does not have the time to discuss and trawl through.

Much is written about wind farms and I do not want to make too much noise about wind farm development. However, noise and vibration coming from large wind turbines result in an increase in heart attacks, migraines, panic attacks and other health problems according to research by an American, Dr. Nina Pierpont. Kevin Myers has written many articles on it. The Daily Telegraph in Britain stated: “Denmark has long been a role model for green activists, but now it has become one of the first countries to turn against the turbines”. Another headline in a British newspaper stated: “101 Tories revolt over wind farms”. On 13 February The Daily Telegraph stated: “The National Trust [the equivalent of An Taisce here] comes out against the public menace of wind farms”. We need a debate on wind energy so that we do not lose the run of ourselves.

I agree with Senator Conway's suggestion that 2 km should be the distance from residential premises. I reduced what was proposed in the UK to try to get people to meet us halfway. My approach was not that because the UK wanted 2 km or 3 km we should go with 4 km. I reduced the distance considerably to try to get the Government to buy into this.

It is very important that anybody who has not done so should stand beside a wind turbine. While it is grand looking at them from a car window, I can tell Senators what it is like standing beside them. If Senators look out the window they will see a big tree but it is possible to see the big building behind it approximately 200 m away. If a wind turbine were placed there and I looked out the window all I would see would be the wind turbine and would no longer see the building. That indicates the scale of these huge wind turbines, beside some of which I have stood.

I am amused by the suggestion of Senators Daly and Leyden that this is dead in the water. I know a councillor who keeps reminding me that governments come and go, but the real government is still there — meaning the Civil Service. I would be delighted to see where this goes from here. Along with other Senators we will keep our eye on this issue and will push it because it is important to respect people's human rights.

Seanad Éireann debate - Wednesday, 22 Feb 2012

Wind Turbines Bill 2012: Second Stage

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 22 Feb 2012