Onshore wind

MARIA: Welcome to our Energise2030 series. Today, I'm delighted to be joined by Mustafa from our infrastructure planning team, and we're going to be looking at some of the trends in onshore wind.

Mustafa, it’s great to be chatting today - and onshore wind, certainly back in the market, lots of chat around onshore wind right now. I thought let’s just step back a little bit because in England and Wales, in particular, there was in effect, a de facto ban for some time which was then lifted day one of the new government.

Could you just take us back to a potted history of onshore wind from a planning perspective, and then we'll look at some current and future trends?

MUSTAFA: So, as you say, Maria, there was an effective ban on onshore wind in England, and that really came in under the previous government, around 2014, and that led to an effective ban on new developments within England.

What you've said is exactly right, which is that the new government on their first day published an updated national planning policy framework which set out that they would be permitting onshore wind back in England. They also confirmed that they would be changing the rules so that for onshore wind development that's above 100 megawatts, it could go down the nationally significant infrastructure planning route.

MARIA: Thank you. Let's just pick up on that. You're absolutely right - schemes have got bigger.

Could you remind us as to the differences, from a planning perspective as to when a project is going through the TCPA, and now, as you say, when it hits a particular threshold under the DCO route?

MUSTAFA: The main criterion is the power output that is being developed. Anything over 100 megawatts is automatically considered to be a nationally significant infrastructure project. Below that threshold it would be an application under the Town and Country Planning Act. But even for those projects, there's the potential to opt in to the DCO regime.

It's also worth saying that the government legislated at the back end of last year that you can also opt out of the DCO regime. So even for those projects over 100 megawatts, there's an ability to come out of the DCO regime if that suits the particular needs for that project.

MARIA: And as with other technologies, we've seen quite a bit of co-location. In the world of solar - solar being co-located with battery and similar trends with onshore wind.

So where there is a scheme, where battery is being co-located with onshore wind, what are the planning considerations there? Again, just touching on that difference between town and country planning regime and DCO.

MUSTAFA: The first question to ask is what regime would you go down if the co-location threshold is based on multiple technologies? And the government has very helpfully said in their updated national policy statement that the starting position is that you effectively count the threshold for each particular technology.

Now, the slight nuance in that is that, as I said, it only says that's the starting position, so you need to consider it quite carefully. What we are seeing is that there are proposals for a number of co-located sites, particularly because some of the criterion for onshore wind are quite limiting in terms of exactly where you can place them, in terms of how close to population centres you can have them. But also, some of the windiest parts of the country are also in particularly sensitive sites.

MARIA: Some of our original wind farms, now probably over 30 years in operation, and there remains a huge market opportunity for repowering. What would be the main planning considerations around those developers looking to repower existing sites?

MUSTAFA: The starting point on repowering is that the national planning policy framework strongly supports repowering. So there's a very firm and strong policy basis for taking forward those kinds of proposals.

One of the key considerations is whether repowering entails any increase in height for onshore wind turbines. That then leads to a consideration of landscape impacts, which has to be considered by a planning authority as part of any proposal. And so that's probably the key consideration.

MARIA: And any words of wisdom for developers currently looking at onshore wind in England? Those top tips that you've got from a planning perspective for those in that early stage.

MUSTAFA: I think I'd say three things. The first is I would say government policy right now has never been stronger for onshore wind. The national policy statements confirm that onshore wind is one of the types of development that benefits from the critical national priority designation. So, you can be assured that in most cases, an adverse impact isn't going to be a reason for refusing consent.

The second thing I'd say is that you need to have a very clear paper trail on your options appraisal and optioneering process. That's because notwithstanding there's strong support, you need a clear record of how you've arrived at a particular site.

And then the third aspect, I'd suggest is other than instructing TLT, is that you keep abreast of impending changes to the DCO regime as well as forthcoming changes in the national planning policy framework.

MARIA: Well, it's certainly exciting times in relation to the world of onshore wind and its potential return. Thank you for a great conversation, and continue to look out for more in our Energise2030 series over the coming weeks. Thank you.

NICK:  Welcome, everybody, to Energise2030. Today we're talking all things onshore wind in Scotland. And to help me do that, I've got my good friend Mustafa here from our infrastructure planning team.

MUSTAFA: Thanks, Nick. It's great to discuss this with you. I was just going to kick things off actually and ask you a question. What factors are driving onshore wind in Scotland?

NICK: I think a few, I think it's fair to say. I think policy is the obvious one. I mean that's clear and sustained in Scotland, and I think it continues to underpin confidence generally in the sector.

Planning and grid constraints are a clear factor. Planning, I'll leave to more intelligent people to talk about, but I guess it would be remiss not to mention connections reform and grid constraints. Clearly a factor nationally of course, but clearly also acutely felt in Scotland.

And then finally, I would suggest economics. The geopolitical situation, I suppose, is let's go with volatile. That presents opportunities and challenges. Challenges around inflation and the consequence of pricing, et cetera, within the supply chain - but opportunities because I think it makes people focus on the importance of energy security, and renewables has got such a central role to play in that.

MUSTAFA: And getting down into the nitty-gritty, how do some of those factors feed specifically into the issues, opportunities, challenges that you're seeing in the real estate context?

NICK: From a real estate perspective, I think from an issues perspective, would be the Gate 2 process, looking at option agreements and making sure that we align in terms of project timescales.

Closer to your own heart, those projects that have had planning for quite some time, do we now need to look at implementing those to keep them alive? I think there are lots of opportunities around project extension and repowering, particularly in onshore wind.

And then I think one of the other issues that we're seeing more and more, inevitably as these projects proliferate, you're more likely to come across somebody else's adjacent project, and the interface issues that come up with that and helping developers, you know, navigate the contracts to mitigate those risks.

Only fair though to turn to planning, and it's equally fair to say, I think, that after the Wull Muir judgment, there wasn't a day that went by that we didn't have a call from somebody asking for views on the implications. So, what do you think the implications are for Scotland of that judgment?

MUSTAFA: That case was really about a wind farm which hadn't included within its planning application the point of connection or the cable corridor to connect it onto the national transmission system. And what the court said was it was wrong for the decision to grant permission to have been made without a consideration of whether those grid infrastructure aspects were or were not part of the project, and then subsequently if they weren't as determined, in that particular way, whether it was right to decide it without an environmental impact assessment.

I think the implications are relatively muted, and I say that only because in that case, the point of connection was known, and the court's key criticism is really about the decision-maker not turning their mind to actually saying this does or does not form part of the project. In the English context, there have been many decisions where the Secretary of State has decided notwithstanding there's the absence of grid infrastructure or onward transmission infrastructure, that it is proper and appropriate to grant permission. Where I think it does have an impact is making sure that you've explained in your planning application whether any associated grid infrastructure forms part of the project.

The other direct implication is that, the Scottish authorities have actually sent out a letter asking people to comment on what this means for particular planning applications and, how they should be determined. I think it, it goes without saying that there will be a little bit of windy weather, if that's not an inappropriate thing to say-

NICK: Nicely put ...

MUSTAFA: ...just whilst the first couple of decisions are made following that judgment in the Scottish context. But I think you can distinguish that project in circumstances where, for example, you don't know where your point of connection is or where you have clearly explained how the grid infrastructure is going to be developed, or if you don't have that information, at least confirming that it does form part of your project but it's not capable of meaningful assessment.

NICK: Sticking with planning, what's your sense of the overall strength of Scottish planning policy in the context of onshore wind?

MUSTAFA: The policy at the moment in Scotland is not just strongly in favour, but it recognizes the urgent and critical need for renewable energy development, and it's also quite cognisant of the fact that Scotland is a very good place to build onshore wind, and that is very much borne out by the policy documents that have been made.

Just coming back to the outlook for onshore wind in Scotland, what do you think the future looks like? What can we expect?

NICK: I think similarly, probably more, and that's because the environment generally, I think, is overwhelmingly positive for some of the reasons that we've touched on already. But actually if you take a step back and look at what's in the pipeline, what's already been delivered, and what proportion of onshore wind in Scotland, what that contributes to the overall national position when you look at in the context of 2030, you realize what a central role Scottish onshore wind really plays in all of that.

I think there are opportunities, as we mentioned before. I think in repowering, I think there's project augmentation, project extension, and I think also increasingly there's a sense that some of the onshore wind targets in England are punchy and that there may be a gap in there to plug.

I’m increasingly hearing of opportunities to use some parts of Scotland as a sort of sensible locational hedge for that. So, I think there are opportunities there as well. I think I'll stick with my original summary, more.

NICK: Thanks, Mustafa, and on that note thank you to everybody watching also, and if you're interested in reading or seeing or hearing more, please visit the Energise2030 hub on the TLT website.