Natural resources: the RSPB and energy companies

I thought I'd continue the wind theme and pass on some more statistics.

As I have written previously, we know that we will be unable to achieve our objectives for wildlife and tackling climate change unless we work smarter with others. 

This applies as much to our work with energy companies as it does with farmers to reverse farmland bird declines or with fishermen to reduce seabird bycatch.  We want renewable energy projects which do not harm wildlife.

We will scrutinise windfarm applications across the country, advising developers as to how they can ensure their proposals don’t damage wildlife.

The key issue that determines whether wildlife is damaged or not is where a windfarm is to be located. Sometimes, the site is simply inappropriate, and in these cases the RSPB will object to the proposal and even campaign against it. I said on Monday that  from 2006-2010, we commented on 1288 wind farm applications and upheld objections to about 55 (4.3%).  Well here's another statistic over a longer time period, between 2001 and 2010, we engaged in 2,174 windfarm applications and placed sustained objections on 182 of them.  And here's a map showing the projects we have been consulted on (red dots cases with objections and green dots without objections ).

In recent years we have received money from renewable energy companies, as well as traditional energy companies with renewables divisions, for specific projects. These generally fall into three categories –

• Corporate partnerships which fit with our aims to promote green energy and to reduce our own carbon emissions
• Funding for monitoring and research into the impact of wind farms on wildlife
• Wildlife conservation and public engagement activity on reserves, funded through Corporate Social Responsibility grant schemes

Examples of the latter include a grant of £20k from Welsh Power for interpretation and infrastructure at Newport Wetlands and a £5k grant from Scottish Power Renewables for the production of a white tailed eagle educational DVD.

Monitoring and research funding projects are concentrated in Scotland and include tagging of curlews and red kites and monitoring of waders in areas around wind farms. These are generally the result of legal conditions which we have called for during the planning process. We also have a member of staff on secondment to Scottish Power Renewables helping them to ensure their developments do not impact on the wider environment.

There are two main long term corporate partnerships we have engaged in with energy companies to promote renewable energy and reduce our own carbon emissions. The first, which I highlighted on Monday, is a project with Ecotricity to build a wind turbine at the RSPB’s Lodge headquarters which is a major part of our efforts to reduce the RSPB's own carbon footprint. The only financial benefit we will receive from this partnership is a reduction in our electricity tariff at the Lodge.

The largest sum we have received from a corporate energy partner is through a ten year project with Scottish and Southern Energy (SSE) which ended in 2011. RSPB Energy allowed customers to purchase renewable energy and make a donation to the RSPB at the same time and resulted in a total income for the organisation of around £1million.

Throughout this relationship we never compromised our independence and objected to several SSE wind farm proposals. The most high profile of these was the Waterhead Moor proposal in Ayrshire, Scotland, which would have been built on an entirely inappropriate site which would have harmed local wildlife, including Hen Harriers. Following our objection, SSE abandoned the proposal in 2011.

I am convinced that partnerships with energy companies are essential if they are to understand our concerns, help to provide new data, ensure that projects are implemented in ways that do not cause needless harm to wildlife and ultimately help remove our dependency on fossil fuels to help us tackle climate change.

What do you think about our relationship with energy companies?

It would be great to hear your views.