 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Opinion of tools
Name of the case study
Management of wind-farm developments in Wallonia (landscape and use of land)
Name of tool
EiEolienne planning-map
Opinion of tool - argumentation for choosing the tool
New green projects could not wait so long for a new homogeneous procedure so Regional authorities assessing every wind-farm project individually, in a form of emergency procedure. As the Region hadn't any experience in this field, the first steps were difficult: social conflicts, technical problems, etc.
Regional authorities* needed more efficient tool(s) to assess the impacts of wind-farm projects and the granting or not of the license to build. To really promote sustainable projects and help the overall decision-making process, these tools are also expected to provide developers with assistance in the inception of wind-farm projects. The demand was clearly also from public and private developers who were looking forward to a new procedure: for faster decisions, global policy for the whole region, rules clarified, and so on…
* Mainly 3 Ministers (Town Planning, Energy and Agriculture) and 3 Ministries' departments (DGATLP, DGRNE and DGTRE: see tool users' profile for the whole description) are concerned.
Tools discussed here have been developed to assist the environmental impact assessment and the final decision to grant the license. But, as said above other options have been considered and some are still under debate, as in many other countries. For instance, first, a map looking at all the possibilities for location was considered; afterwards a map analysing the different landscape zones and finally it is a map considering constraints that are in force. This last solution is nevertheless still under debate. The optimum process is perhaps not yet found.
Many different sources of knowledge have been used, whether for technical local aspects (noise, shade, stroboscopic effects, etc.) or for management regional aspects (use of land, town-planning, landscapes, etc). For the first aspects, international. For the second aspects, different strategies have been discussed as well as the proper features of the Region.
Opinion of tool - barriers for the tool implementation
The EIEolienne map is difficult to establish, as restricted areas have to be defined. These studies have to go into detail, considering projects at every location, and as a result are consuming in terms of time and money.
The best scale for this analysis is perhaps the local one, because municipalities are involved in the decision-making process, and directly concerned by the economic and social outcomes of wind-farms developments on their territory. Nevertheless, the necessity still remains to coordinate these tools at the regional and national upper scales.
Name of tool
Framework of Guidelines for Wind Energy development
Opinion of tool - argumentation for choosing the tool
New green projects could not wait so long for a new homogeneous procedure so Regional authorities assessing every wind-farm project individually, in a form of emergency procedure. As the Region hadn´t any experience in this field, the first steps were difficult: social conflicts, technical problems, etc.
Regional authorities* needed more efficient tool(s) to assess the impacts of wind-farm projects and the granting or not of the license to build. To really promote sustainable projects and help the overall decision-making process, these tools are also expected to provide developers with assistance in the inception of wind-farm projects. The demand was clearly also from public and private developers who were looking forward to a new procedure: for faster decisions, global policy for the whole region, rules clarified, and so on…
* Mainly 3 Ministers (Town Planning, Energy and Agriculture) and 3 Ministry departments (DGATLP, DGRNE and DGTRE) are concerned.
Tools discussed here have been developed to assist the environmental impact assessment and the final decision to grant the license. But, as said above other options have been considered and some are still under debate, as in many other countries. For instance, first, a map looking at all the possibilities for location was considered; afterwards a map analysing the different landscape zones and finally it is a map considering constraints that are in force. This last solution is nevertheless still under debate. The optimum process is perhaps not yet found.
Many different sources of knowledge have been used, whether for technical local aspects (noise, shade, stroboscopic effects, etc.) or for management regional aspects (use of land, town-planning, landscapes, etc). For the first aspects, international standards and benchmarks have been taken into account. For the second aspects, different strategies have been discussed as well as the proper features of the Region.
Opinion of tool - barriers for the tool implementation
The technical framework is adaptable. The text format (versus a geographical map) allows very interconnected problems as well as general notions to be dealt with easily. Nevertheless, this framework does not really help the assessment of practical situations, as the interpretation of some aspects remains uncertain. One of the problems remains in the definition of landscape quality. Some research studies try to quantify these aspects but until now they are considered inconclusive.
Public awareness and acceptance by the public are also decisive factors.
Opinion of tool - assessment by tool users
There are two expected results following the tools implementation:
• The main purpose of this case is better territorial management improving efficient land-use and quality of landscapes, however these improvements have not been measured.
• The second objective is the enhancement of the decision making process. While limiting social conflicts, extra-expenditure (studies on inappropriate projects, etc), extra-time on decisions, it promotes initiatives. This kind of progress is not measured.
A usual criticism is that these tools don´t enable objective decisions particularly with regard to landscape impacts, but this consequence is not really unexpected. This is a complex problem not solved in many European countries.
The last "tool" that could be developed consists of creating a new public function of "landscape officer". This officer, a sort of landscape referee, is expected to provide comprehensive advice that synthesises the different parameters. The Landscape Officer will filter the large amount of informatio that is available. The shortcomings of this solution have already been identified by municipalities in Wallonia and the inconclusive example of the "guides enquêteurs" (enquiries guides, facilitators that should help the EIA procedure) in France, is mentioned.
Tools are not well known by end-users. The existence of many other external studies, analyses used as sources of references etc. cause confusion.
Stakeholders would recommend the use of these tools mainly because they are at least a common source of information. Many stakeholders are well aware of many other experiences in other countries but remain convinced that the right practical assessment tool does not exist (yet!).
Opinion of tool - reviewer\'s assessment
• The double approach that promotes the use, first of general planning map and afterwards of technical guidelines, is a step towards the continuity of sustainable concerns from strategic level to technical details.
The format of the tools depends on the objectives. For a global management of the territory, a planning-map covering the whole region is developed. For a closer approach, technical guidelines are provided in a text format. Text enables explicit complex links between various ideas; allows expression of very precise details, as well as conceptual ideas.
This approach could help with similar problems concerning the spreading of small built infrastructures through a whole territory to provide necessary resources. The concerns are totally different to a large project that would provide energy for a whole region.
• Another lesson learnt is the difficulty of setting up criteria to determine what kind of environmental impact assessment is required for what kind of development. It is the purpose of the screening and scoping stages of the EIA. Concerning wind-farms, European countries mainly systemise the process, providing thresholds of categories. For instance, in Wallonia, 3 categories are made, depending on the power of the turbine developed. The most demanding EIA must be done when the wind-farm exceeds 3MW. In contrast, in France, criteria are based on the height of the turbine. It could be interesting to gather and compare these different European benchmarks, as well as understand the reasons why they have been set up as such.
What tools were used to assess sustainability?
Framework of Guidelines for Wind Energy development
More information