National renewable energy policy and local opposition in the UK: The failed development of a biomass electricity plant

Biomass and Bioenergy

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 61-69

  Upreti, Bishnu Raj ^a,c   Van Der Horst, Dan ^b  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SURREY   (United Kingdom)

^c NONE   (Nepal)

Author keywords

Biomass; Planning permission; Public opposition; Renewable energy; Risk communication; Siting controversy

Indexed keywords

ELECTRIC POWER PLANTS; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; FOSSIL FUELS; PLANNING; PUBLIC POLICY;

GASIFICATION PLANTS;

BIOMASS;

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY; BIOMASS; ENERGY POLICY; LOCAL PARTICIPATION; LOCATION DECISION; POPULAR PROTEST; POWER PLANT;

CRICKLADE; ENGLAND; EURASIA; EUROPE; UNITED KINGDOM; WESTERN EUROPE; WILTSHIRE;

EID: 0242625775     PISSN: 09619534     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0961-9534(03)00099-0     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. ETSU. Renewable energy assessment and targets for the South West. Summary of the Final Report. Terence O' Roucke Plc and ETSU 2001.
2. DTI. New and renewable energy: prospects for the 21st Century. The Renewable Obligation Preliminary Consultation, London, DTI 2000.
3. MAF.http://www.maff.gov.uk/farm/acu/Acuren-2.htm #UKREN 2000.
4. Upreti BR, van der Horst D. Public perception on biomass energy in the UK: results from five case studies in England and Wales. A CES Working paper: Centre for Environmental Strategy, University of Surrey, Guildford, 2002.
5. ETSU/DTI. Development and delivery of a workshop methodology: planning for biomass power plant projects, ETSU/DTI, London, 2001.
6. Hargreaves D. An investigation into risk communication issues surrounding a proposal to site a 20 MW straw-burning electricity generating plant at calne, Wiltshire in 1994. M.Sc. thesis, University of Surrey, Guildford, 1996.
7. Sinclair P, Löfstedt RE. The influence of trust in a biomass application: the case study of Sutton, UK. Biomass and Bioenergy 2001;21:177-84.
8. Jackson T, Löfstedt R. Renewable energy sources: A background paper for the royal commission on environmental pollution. Centre for Environmental Strategy, University of Surrey, Guildford, 1998.
9. Siting OS. Sustainable development and social priorities. Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, 2001.
10. Miller C, editor. Planning and environmental protection. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2001.
11. Löfstedt R. Risk communication: the barsebäck nuclear plant case. Energy Policy 1996;24(8):689-96.
12. Devine-Wright P, McAlpine G, Batley-White S. Wind turbines in the landscape: an evaluation of local community involvement and other considerations in UK wind farm development. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the Environmental Design Research Association, Edinburgh, Scotland, July 3-6, 2001. pp. 133-7.
13. Howes PS, Howlett L. Energy from waste and biomass residues: the decision-making process. UK National Report, AEA Technology, London, 2000.
14. Upreti BR. Conflict over biomass energy development in the United Kingdom: some observations and lessons from England and Wales. Journal of Energy Policy 2003, in press.
15. Kasperson RE, Renn O, Solvic P, Bram JE, Goble R, Kasperson J, Ratick S. Social amplification of risk: a conceptual framework. In: Lofstedt R, Frewer L, editors. Risk and modern society. London: Earthscan, 1998. p. 149-62.
16. Petts J. Barriers to participation and deliberation in risk decision: evidences from waste management. Centre for Environmental Research and Training, Birmingham, 2001.
17. Macnaghten P, Urry J. Contested nature. London: Sage Publications, 1998.
18. Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. The landscape of qualitative research: theories and issues. London: Sage Publications, 1998.
19. Chambers R. Relaxed and participatory appraisal: notes on practical approaches and methods. Institute of Development Studies, Sussex, 1999.
20. Patt G. Practitioners' critical reflection on PRA and participation in Nepal. IDS Working Paper No. 122, Institute of Development Studies, Sussex, 2001.
21. Ambient Energy Limited: http://www.ambientenergy.com/ biomass/factsNWilts.htm, 2000.
22. Oxford Scientific Services Ltd. Letter (Ref.APPROACH/ J3910/A/00/1056129) to BLOT on 9th April 2001.
23. Groove-White R, Macnaghten P, Wynne B. Wising up: the public and new technologies. Lancaster: IEPPP, 2000.
24. North Wiltshire District Council (NWDC). Letter issued by the Head of Development Control, North Wiltshire District Council, 26th September 2000.
25. North Wiltshire District Council (NWDC). Summary of the application file held by development control department of NWDC, 2001.
26. North Wiltshire District Council (NWDC). Report of the Appeal decision by Mr. R.H. Baker, an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Transport. Local Government and the Regions 11 September 2001. p. 6.
27. Renn O. The challenge of integrating deliberation and expertise: participation and discourse in risk management. Centre for Technology Assessment, Stuttgart, 2001.
28. Wynne B. Misunderstood misunderstandings: social identities and the public uptake of science. Public Understanding of Science 1992;1:281-304.
29. Williams NC, Limbrick AJ. A scoping study to review obstacles to the growth of UK renewable energy industry. Report for Association of Electricity Producers, 1995.
30. Löfstedt R. The role of trust in the north blackforest: an evaluation of a citizen panel project. Risk: Health, Safety and Environment 1999;10(7):7-30.
31. Department for Transport, Local government and the Regions (DTLR). Planning Green Paper. London, 2001.
32. Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (RCEP). Environmental planning. RCEP 23rd Report, London, 2002.