With regards to energy generation, the Labour Government has certainly acted fast in its first days of being in power.

Firstly, we saw the Ministerial Statement by Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, effectively lifting the ‘de facto’ ban for onshore wind in England (and promoting a doubling of onshore to 35GW by 2030), then Ed Miliband, the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, granted three solar based DCO’s, totaling over 1.3GW of power generation capacity. Aligned with their manifesto pledges, the Government has since progressed its aspirations for its Great British Energy company – a partnership between the Government and the Crown Estate, envisaged to deliver 20-30GW of offshore wind power. Given that the previous Government recently undertook more changes to the NPPF for mansard roofs than it did for climate change and energy generation (although the proposed change to the NPPF retains a now passing reference to mansard roofs), this rapidity of change can only be viewed positively.

Collectively these are very clear statements of intent and arguably leadership, although sustaining this in the long term will be the greater challenge. Nonetheless, the proposed changes to the NPPF are the next logical step, whilst this contains much about getting the country building again, there is further progress for energy generation and the manner in which decision makers should start to consider applications.

Benefits of renewable energy

Aside from a paragraph number change (49 to 50), the proposed NPPF retains the presumption in favour of sustainable development.

The most recent version of the NPPF stated that the ‘planning system should support the transition to a low carbon future in a changing climate, taking full account of flood risk and coastal change. It should help to: shape places in ways that contribute to radical reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, minimise vulnerability and improve resilience; encourage the reuse of existing resources, including the conversion of existing buildings; and support renewable and low carbon energy and associated infrastructure’.

This remains unchanged.

The proposed NPPF does, however, make meaningful changes in terms of the planning balance.

Paragraph 163 now requires that LPA’s should ‘also’ give significant weight to the need to support energy efficiency and low carbon heating improvements to existing buildings, both domestic and non-domestic.

Proposed paragraph 164 now additionally states that ‘local planning authorities should support planning applications for all forms of renewable and low carbon development’. The remainder of the paragraph retains the point that applicants are not required to demonstrate the overall need for renewable or low carbon energy; and most tellingly LPA’s are now told that they are to ‘give significant weight to the proposals contribution to renewable energy generation and a net zero future’.

This is a major step forward, the previous NPPF did not provide such a weighting, leaving decision makers to determine the weight to be given to renewable energy generation (against other matters). This approach broadly follows that within NPF4 in Scotland, where a comparable weighting is set out and has arguably assisted decision making as a result.

Finally, and also of merit, the proposed NPPF at paragraph 164 (b) has removed the word ‘significant’ when recognising that all projects provide a valuable contribution to cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

Onshore Wind

As set out within the speech by Rachel Reeves, the NPPF no longer includes any policy requirements/footnotes that have previously raised the policy bar (in comparison to other forms of development) for onshore wind. Fundamentally, onshore wind is now on the same playing field as other forms of development. However, and not unlike all other forms of development, it is imperative that any application demonstrates its acceptability against the wide range of environmental and technical matters that are applicable to onshore wind. Many local plans are now likely to be out of date, so there will be some unpicking to do there, and we could well see the return of LPA’s dusting off their previous supplementary guidance’s for onshore wind farm developments, although they must note that the technology has moved forward in the intervening years.

Support for the life extension and re-powering of existing wind farms was a comparatively new addition to the NPPF and this has been retained, with the removal of ‘and approve the application if its impacts are (or can be made) acceptable’, which fits with the removal of footnote 60.

Alongside the removal of the de facto ban on onshore wind, the NSIP regime is also proposed to be updated to accommodate large onshore wind proposals and to support quicker determinations. Comparable to other forms of energy generation, which fall within the NSIP regime, onshore wind of an NSIP scale (proposed to become 100MW) will subsequently give it the status of ‘critical national priority’ status.

Solar

The proposed NPPF has removed (from footnote 64) ‘the availability of agricultural land used for food production should be considered, alongside the other policies in this Framework, when deciding what sites are most appropriate for development’. Given the approach from Ed Milliband in recent DCO decisions, the balance of energy security and food security is clearly central to his thinking.

NSIP

Aside from the consultation on the NPPF, the Government has also announced that they are proposing to change the thresholds (presently 50MW) for which solar and onshore wind projects become an NSIP scheme.

Under these proposals, solar schemes shall become an NSIP scheme at 150MW, whilst onshore wind would have a threshold of 100MW.

These changes are cited following analysis and engagement with the solar industry alongside an understanding of each technology and their power generating capacity.

This could potentially raise issues about different technologies having varying thresholds and thus an implied greater or lesser status (i.e. they will or will not be critical national priority). Nonetheless, there is a degree of pragmatism in the consultation.

Approach to Local Plan Policy and Strategic Policy

There is a gear shift in terms of how development plan policies should be brought forward.

In contrast, the proposed NPPF now states via Paragraph 24 that ‘effective strategic planning across Local Planning Authority boundaries will play a vital and increasing role in how sustainable growth is delivered and key spatial issues, including meeting housing needs, delivering strategic infrastructure, and building economic and climate resilience, are addressed’. Energy generation, particularly combatting the effects of climate would seemingly fit into this approach. A point emphasised by the proposed paragraph 27, which further sets out the imperative for collaboration and a consistent approach to the delivery of major infrastructure.

Paragraph 161 of the proposed changes now states that to help increase the use and supply of renewable and low carbon energy and heat, plans should (part b of the paragraph) ‘identify’, as opposed to ‘consider identifying’ suitable areas for renewable and low carbon sources, and supporting infrastructure, where this would help secure their development. Whilst we have seen a removal of the need for onshore wind to be allocated in order to gain consent, the imperative is now upon plan makers to actually identify areas for renewable and low carbon sources, as opposed to it being optional. This is a further lean toward the broader strategic plan making process and collaboration across LPA’s.

Green Belt

As is evident by the number of applications and appeals for renewable energy generation, the Green Belt has an active role to play in the delivery of the Governments ambitions. With there likely to be increased demand for ‘grey belt’ to be used for housing development, greenfield sites within the Green Belt can only continue to become common – particularly when existing grid infrastructure is present in such locations.

Paragraph 154 of the proposed NPPF remains unchanged and continues to state that ‘when located in the Green Belt, elements of many renewable energy projects will comprise inappropriate development. In such cases developers will need to demonstrate very special circumstances if projects are to proceed. Such very special circumstances may include the wider environmental benefits associated with increased production of energy from renewable sources’.

Grid Connection

The proposed NPPF, at paragraph 85 sets out that planning policies should now recognize and address the location requirements for uses such as data centres and grid connections. Such uses clearly need that infrastructure, although it is disappointing that the wider role of grid connection is not highlighted and that proximity to it is a key component to the delivery of energy production.

Where next?

Today marks the start of a busy period of time updating planning statements and alike to ensure that the key themes and content changes in this consultation draft are properly captured and weighed in the planning balance.

Much work needs to be done in respect of onshore wind, whether for TCPA or NSIP regimes. There is a skill set gap in the planning sector and the NPPG could to with a refresh to reflect the key matters applicable to the technology (and arguably other technologies such as solar, for example energy security vs food security and the importance of grid connections in decision making) and the potential for the co-location of technologies. The update to NPS’s to accommodate onshore wind as part of the NSIP regime will need to be carefully thought out, although much of the previous (pre-Pickles) content of NPS’s was in the right ball park.

For more information contact Chris Calvert.