Infrastructure Planning Blog

Today’s entry looks at the grant of development consent for the Helios Energy Park and the Morecambe Offshore Wind projects, the withdrawal of H2Teesside, and contains your chance to quiz your way to a prize.

Helios, is it me you’re looking for?

The Secretary of State has granted development consent for the Helios Energy Park, a solar DCO project. Here are a few things to note from the decision.

The first relates to a non-compliance with the National Policy Statement for Electricity Networks (EN-5). The project included a 132 kilovolt below-ground electricity line to provide a connection to the national transmission system. Both the ExA and the Secretary of State acknowledge that this does not constitute an overhead line NSIP, but nonetheless considered that EN-5 (which applies to overhead lines generally)does have effect. This is because EN-5 sets out that it applies to “underground cables at any voltage,… where that infrastructure becomes subject to the 2008 Act in the following circumstances: if it constitutes associated development for which consent is sought along with an NSIP”.

Why did this matter? EN-5 sets out that except for nationally designated landscapes, “it is the government’s position that overhead lines should be the strong starting presumption for electricity networks developments in general.” The ExA’s view was that the “applicant provided no evidence that it had considered this as a factor in its site selection process which could have enabled it to widen its search area and potentially reduce the use of BMV agricultural land”. In other words, the Examining Authority was suggesting the line should be longer, and the search area for alternatives be widened.

Enter, stage left, the Secretary of State: “[EN-5] is not intended to be relevant to assessing the suitability of associated development within an application for a generating station and cannot be read as encouraging the use of a longer overhead line in place of a shorter underground one”.

On the search area (5km from the point of connection), the Secretary of State was content with the promoter’s explanation that their approach was “proportionate when considered alongside the energy generation capacity of the Proposed Development of 190MW, stating that after this distance, increased electrical transmission losses and increased installation costs would affect the viability of the Proposed Development” and noting “alternative locations within or just outside the 5km search radius area would have required river or railway crossings, adversely impacting the commercial viability and adverse environmental impacts of the Proposed Development”.

Second, there is a word of warning in the decision letter relating to the requirement in the NPS for a whole-life GHG assessment which includes measurement of embodied GHG emissions. In this case, “the Secretary of State is disappointed with the Applicant’s approach in the original application, in which the assessment lacked sufficient detail when compared with those prepared for other solar farm developments. The Secretary of State is also disappointed that the Applicant provided an adequate whole-lifecycle assessment, including embodied carbon, only after this was specifically requested at the decision-making”.

Third, there is a long section in the decision letter relating to aviation safety. The Burn Airfield is in the vicinity of the project, and there was a concern about reducing the areas for emergency landing, as well as potential glint and glare. On the former, one objector wanted to sterilise some of the Order limits so it could be retained for emergency landings. The Secretary of State disagreed, concluding that “it would be unreasonable to require the applicant to reduce its solar panel coverage” and so far as glint and glare were concerned, this could be addressed post-consent (see Requirement 20).

Morecambe and Wise (2)

Earlier this week, the Secretary of State also granted consent for the Morecambe Generating Assets DCO project, an offshore wind project. The project is for a 480MW windfarm in the Irish Sea, due west of Blackpool, rather than Morecambe. Here are a few things to note from that decision.  

Interestingly, paragraph 7.2.46 of the Recommendation Report noted the Applicant's analysis that if the generated electricity replaced fossil fuel generation it would reduce overall emissions but if it replaced the predicted mix of generation types it would actually increase overall emissions slightly.  Nevertheless the SoS concluded that the project would assist with achieving Net Zero.

The SoS concluded that requiring compensation for kittiwake would be disproportionate due to the small contribution to collisions that the project would make (fewer than one a year), unlike what has been concluded on North Sea windfarms.

A large section of the decision letter is devoted to 'wake loss', i.e. where less wind arrives at a windfarm because it is in the wake of another windfarm. The Applicant considered the proposed Mooir Vannin windfarm would be too far away to need assessment for wake loss, but its developer Ørsted submitted its own wake loss assessment that Morecambe could cause up to 1.73% loss to Mooir Vannin. The SoS cited paragraph 2.8.176 of the still draft revised EN-3 that reasonable efforts should be made to address impacts on other infrastructure.

The SoS underlines that the Applicant should have done an assessment and that this is expected for other applicants, but used the Ørsted one as a proxy in this case, having asked the Applicant to do its own or accept the Ørsted one.  A 'wake effects' requirement has been added (13) and other applicants would be well advised to consider including something similar.

In the crowded Irish Sea there are not only other windfarms, existing and proposed, but oil and gas infrastructure and its future repurposing for carbon capture. The SoS considered that after 2029 the prospects of continuing oil and gas usage or repurposing were too vague and so an initial buffer around the infrastructure would be reduced at the start of 2031 (later than the ExA's 2029) from 3.76 nautical miles to 1.9nm.

On protected landscapes, the SoS cited a recent judgment 'Wadhurst Parish Council' that the duty to 'conserve and enhance' such landscapes does not mean both need to be fulfilled. It’s welcome to see the Secretary of State, clearing their throat, and stating “the duty to conserve and enhance does not require minor adverse effects to be offset by enhancement measures”.

War of the Machines

H2Teesside has withdrawn its DCO application. For context, that hydrogen DCO project was at the decision stage. The project was proposed on the Teesworks regeneration site in Teesside, owned and managed by the South Tees Group. South Tees Group objected to the hydrogen DCO development on the basis that they had secured planning permission for data centre development on the same site. They argued their proposals for a new Teesside AI Growth Zone, including one of Europe’s largest data centres, would be adversely impacted by the H2 Teesside project, and that there was a fundamental incompatibility. For that reason, they argued that the AI proposals should be favoured by Government, and the DCO application refused. Despite its initial responses, the promoter has now pulled out, concluding there is an unresolvable conflict, and that the data centre plans are coming forward. Tom Henderson, the machine of this parish, acted for the South Tees Group. 

Christmas competition

The Christmas champagne blog competition is back! This year, please consider the following ten words. Each is an anagram of a word from a nationally significant infrastructure project name that has at least reached acceptance stage (see here). Find those words; their initials spell an anagram of another word from a nationally significant infrastructure project, which is the answer you must send to Angus by the deadline of the end of Tuesday 6 January 2026. After the deadline, I will draw a winning name from the submitters of correct answers from a virtual hat, who will receive a voucher to allow the purchase of a bottle of champagne or another item of your choice. Have fun!

Here are the words:

• Gabrielle
• Repartee
• Senhora
• Eros
• Route
• Gorged
• Telechirs
• Seediest
• Atones
• Wellspring

‍This publication is intended for general guidance and represents our understanding of the relevant law and practice as at December 2025. Specific advice should be sought for specific cases. For more information see our terms & conditions.