🌬️🍃 Onshore Wind and Solar Generation

Commons Chamber

🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️ 🌶️

The UK Parliament debated and approved the Infrastructure Planning (Onshore Wind and Solar Generation) Order 2025, which aims to boost renewable energy by reintroducing onshore wind projects into the nationally significant infrastructure project regime and raising the solar project threshold from 50 MW to 100 MW. The move was criticized by some Conservative MPs who argued it bypasses local community consent and could harm landscapes and agriculture. Supporters, including Labour and Liberal Democrat MPs, emphasized the necessity of these changes to enhance energy security, reduce reliance on fossil fuels, and meet climate goals. The debate highlighted tensions between advancing renewable energy infrastructure and protecting local interests and environments.

Summary

  • The draft Infrastructure Planning (Onshore Wind and Solar Generation) Order 2025 was approved by the House of Commons, with 307 votes in favor and 100 against.

  • The order aims to support the deployment of onshore wind and solar energy, which are crucial for achieving the government’s goal of clean power by 2030.

  • It reintroduces onshore wind projects with a generating capacity of over 100 MW into the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP) regime, reversing a previous ban by the Conservative government.

  • The threshold for solar projects to be considered nationally significant is raised from 50 MW to 100 MW, aiming to prevent market distortion and encourage more efficient use of sites.

  • The government emphasized the importance of an effective planning system to unlock new infrastructure needed for energy security and resilience.

  • Concerns were raised about the impact of large-scale renewable projects on local communities and landscapes, with some MPs arguing that the government is bypassing local consent.

  • The debate highlighted the need for a balance between developing renewable energy infrastructure and protecting the countryside and agricultural land.

  • Some MPs suggested alternative solutions, such as using motorway and railway embankments for solar farms and mandating solar panels on new homes.

  • The government defended the order, stating that it is necessary to address the climate crisis and deliver energy security, while also promising to consider community benefits and the impact on local infrastructure.

  • The order includes transitional provisions to ensure that projects already in the planning process are not disrupted by the new criteria.

Divisiveness

The session exhibits a high level of disagreement, primarily between the government and the opposition, as well as among members within the same party. The disagreements are evident in several key areas:

  1. Policy on Onshore Wind and Solar: The government’s move to lift the ban on onshore wind and adjust the solar NSIP threshold is met with strong opposition from the Conservative party. The shadow Minister, Andrew Bowie, criticizes the government for bypassing local communities’ consent and imposing large-scale projects, indicating a significant policy disagreement (e.g., “The order provides a route to approval for onshore wind that entirely bypasses the consent of local communities”).

  2. Energy Security and Fossil Fuels: There is a clear divide on the approach to energy security. Lewis Cocking from the Conservative party advocates for issuing new oil and gas licenses, which is directly opposed by the government’s focus on renewables. Michael Shanks responds by emphasizing the transition away from fossil fuels and the need for renewable energy to achieve energy security (e.g., “The reality of the past 10 years under the Conservatives was that more than 70,000 jobs were lost, with no plan for how to deal with it”).

  3. Impact on Local Communities and Landscapes: Several members express concerns about the impact of renewable energy projects on local communities and landscapes. Kit Malthouse raises the issue of protecting national landscapes, while Harriet Cross discusses the holistic impact on local areas, showing disagreement on how these projects should be managed and their effects mitigated (e.g., “Many of my residents are concerned, because the Minister is quite right that the turbines that are now being developed are huge”).

  4. Economic and Environmental Costs: The debate also touches on the economic and environmental costs of the government’s renewable energy policies. Andrew Bowie challenges the government’s claims about the cost-effectiveness of renewables, citing high energy bills and the increasing cost of subsidies (e.g., “We have the second highest on-stream renewables in Europe, yet the UK’s domestic energy bills are among the highest in Europe”).

  5. Legislative and Planning Processes: There is disagreement over the government’s approach to planning and infrastructure legislation. Ben Obese-Jecty criticizes the government for setting the NSIP threshold too low, potentially leading to an influx of large projects, and for not adequately consulting local communities (e.g., “By keeping the threshold artificially low, the Government open the door to huge numbers of solar farms becoming NSIP by the back door”).

The session’s disagreements are not only between parties but also involve nuanced debates within the Conservative party, as seen in the varied perspectives on renewable energy and fossil fuels. The intensity and frequency of these disagreements justify a rating of 4, indicating a high level of contention but not reaching the level of complete breakdown in dialogue.