Meeting Europe's renewable energy targets in harmony with - RSPB

106 MEETING EUROPE’S RENEWABLE ENERGY TARGETS IN HARMONY WITH NATURE
5.1.3 MINIMISING OVERALL
INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS
Leaders: Germany, Belgium (Wallonia)
Laggards: Ireland, Italy, UK (England), Spain
Very few countries were considered by Partners to
have positive policies in place for energy system
planning. Italy and Slovenia were considered to
have very negative frameworks in this respect.
Policies to encourage decentralised energy, which
should reduce the need for large renewable energy
installations and new power lines, were seen to be
positive in many countries, but very negative in
others such as Spain and Ireland. Undergrounding
power lines was seen to be used in a positive way
in France, Romania and Wales. Many Partners
commented that undergrounding is often not the
best solution for birds, and therefore they would
not wish to suggest that failure to promote it
further is “negative”. Others, such as Italy,
Montenegro and Poland considered current
policies to be very negative. Repowering existing
renewables facilities was not an issue in many
countries, or was seen to be generally adequately
addressed by policy frameworks. Slovenia (hydro)
and Scotland (wind) were seen to have a positive
policy approach to repowering.
5.1.4 SPATIAL PLANNING
Leaders: UK (Scotland), Belgium (Wallonia), France
Laggards: Bulgaria, Italy, Romania, Spain, Poland,
UK (England, N. Ireland), Greece, Montenegro
National level spatial planning for renewable
energy is an area in which many BirdLife Partners
consider current policy frameworks are negative or
very negative. Many commented that the
renewables industries are well subsidised by public
funds, but that governments were doing too little to
steer development towards suitable locations in the
public interest. “Very negative” assessments were
made by Partners in Bulgaria, France, Italy, Ireland,
Poland, England and Northern Ireland. In some
countries this is seen to be ameliorated by
relatively positive regional and/or local planning,
such as France and Ireland. In general, however,
regional and local planning frameworks for
renewables are an area of weakness across much
of Europe in the opinion of BirdLife Partners. Use of
bird sensitivity maps and SEA depends on there
being an adequate planning system in place at
national or sub-national levels. Use of sensitivity
maps was seen to be positive in France and
Scotland, and neutral or mixed in several other
countries including Wallonia, Bulgaria, Germany,
Spain and Wales. Half of the Partners surveyed felt
use of sensitivity maps was a negative or very
negative element of their countries’ policy
frameworks, usually because no maps are
available. Use of SEA is another area of policy
weakness across Europe, with only France and
Scotland seen to have a positive framework.
Application of the “Habitats Directives tests”,
which only permit development in Natura 2000
sites under strict conditions, was seen to be
positive or very positive in many countries
(Wallonia, Croatia, France, Germany, England,
Scotland). It was considered negative in many
southern European countries and very negative
in Bulgaria.
5.1.5 MINIMISING PROJECT IMPACTS
Leaders: UK (England, Scotland), France, Germany
Laggards: Croatia, Romania, Bulgaria, Italy, Ireland,
Montenegro, Slovenia, Spain
BirdLife Partners considered that planning control
is one of the more positive elements of the policy
framework in many countries. Only five of the 18
Partners found this to be a negative or very
negative aspect. Most Partners felt that the most
damaging project proposals are usually refused
planning consent in their country. However, there
was a less positive overall evaluation of policies
relating to post-project follow-up, ie, ensuring that
mitigation measures agreed at the EIA stage are
actually implemented, and impacts monitored.
Only France, Portugal and England felt this aspect
was a positive element of their policy frameworks.
Finally, the adequacy of guidance and training is
very mixed across Partners’ countries.
5.1.6 COMMON STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES
ACROSS EUROPEAN COUNTRIES
In general, the most positive aspects of the policy
frameworks are stimulating investment in
renewables, designation and protection of areas of
European, national and local importance for
biodiversity and their protection, and use of
planning control to refuse consent to the most
damaging proposals. Areas where policy