Prioritise community generation schemes over corporations

There are a large number of onshore windfarm schemes in the pipeline which are in community owned land.

Although community schemes are often presented they often lose out to large supplier schemes even though the community schemes often ask for a lower subsidy rate and offer better returns to the local community.

Changes to planning legislation to ensure that community schemes are considered as the default preferred scheme would mean that communities affected by these schemes reap the benefit.

Setting up a government owned company (similar to how Scottish Water is run) to help manage these schemes, help arrange funding etc. could empower local communities and help with local poverty, depopulation etc.

Why the contribution is important

The wildest areas in Scotland are suffering from issues ranging from fuel poverty, depopulation, access to services. These areas are also the most useful for power generation.

Schemes are often proposed that will affect the local environment for 25 years or more.
Community schemes are often knocked back in favour of large corporate schemes which means that these areas will suffer the blight of large developments but not gain the financial rewards from these schemes.

Shetland built a wealth fund based on oil revenue. Other remote areas should be given the same ability when moving to renewable resources. This would be just and fair.

by Tony on August 24, 2022 at 10:47AM

Current Rating

Average rating: 4.7
Based on: 24 votes

Comments

  • Posted by ELMiller August 25, 2022 at 14:23

    Sounds like a good idea keep the big corporations out their only drive is profit.

  • Posted by IdeLW August 27, 2022 at 16:22

    An excellent idea - control is returned to the community.

  • Posted by ErikDalhuijsen August 29, 2022 at 17:23

    Good idea, and while large commercial schemes have other benefits, the cash-extraction of large corporates runs the risk of undermining the development of a just nation.

    Creating a "government owned" or otherwise non-commercial coordination and support organisation to develop these plans would really help to stop wasting the time of all these well-intended community folks and get serious projects off the ground. This organisation could also start to develop the mentioned "wealth-fund" to use for additional schemes, decarbonisation and reduction of energy use.

    There needs to be some policy developed to ensure such a scheme does not simply replace government funding of necessary community infrastructure.

  • Posted by LauraBennitt August 31, 2022 at 06:55

    A system of community-generated energy, combined with a national system as "backup" would allow those in more rural and remote areas to gain from the transition, and help them move away from their current, often expensive, reliance on oil and electricity for heating.

    There should be support offered to help community schemes ensure any proposals they put forward for development of renewable energy meet the planning criteria, and are therefore likely to be successful.

  • Posted by JeanPhilips August 31, 2022 at 14:10

    Couldn't agree more. All good ideas do not belong to people in one place. Sharing ideas, developing new initiatives can bring about innumerable benefits, including to disparate areas and mixes of people, cultures, skills. Sounds great.

  • Posted by AngelaMLAnderson September 01, 2022 at 15:07

    Community benifits from local generation schemes are doing a lot of good. It also increases understaning of climate change ans sustainability. Local schemes are often hampered by the current GRID set up. Local generation used locally could bring benifits to local communities. Renewal
     or waste (Biocarb) generation of power supporting greenhouse food production for example.

    Community water sorce heating. etc

  • Posted by ThursoCDT September 03, 2022 at 10:12

    Community benefit funds have greatly improved some remote and rural areas but in some there are large amounts of unspent funds as policies towards funding do not include development and social enterprises. Community renewables should be the priority and if that cannot happen due to the infastructure required then there should always be an option for communities of shared ownership of any large schemes, not just community benefit this would enable community anchor organisations to become sustainable and provide greater benefit in terms of development in their communities.

  • Posted by RichardRaggett September 04, 2022 at 10:51

    Community schemes could add greatly to community resilience; I would support strong government support of initiatives if that would enable more viable community energy schemes.

  • Posted by mb828590 September 07, 2022 at 18:13

    Removing dependance on the national grid can only be a good thing, considering the current cost of energy. Removing co-operations from the energy system is a win for people their communities.

  • Posted by BarbaraE September 08, 2022 at 11:18

    Access to support and capacity will enable communities to capitalise on their own assets and widen benefits. Trying to leverage information from SPEN about capacity, usage, investment and the myriad of answers needed to make informed decisions is challenging. A one-stop shop to help communities make informed decisions will lessen risk and open opportunity.

  • Posted by Eoghann September 08, 2022 at 14:47

Log in or register to add comments and rate ideas