Earystane & Scards, Sulby & Druidale

Summary

The request sought all information regarding proposed onshore wind farms, including notes and meeting records. The response disclosed internal Manx Utilities Authority documents detailing site selection, capacity targets, and timelines for three potential locations, though the overall FOI complaint was not upheld.

Key Facts

• Three potential onshore wind farm sites were identified: Earystane & Scards, Sulby & Druidale, and West Baldwin & Injebreck.
• The proposed wind turbines will reach 150m in height, making them the tallest infrastructure on the Island.
• Earystane & Scards is projected to generate 105-130 GWh annually with 4-5 turbines.
• Sulby & Druidale is projected to generate 81 GWh annually with 7-12 turbines.
• The Council advised against releasing specific site names until a single site was identified to reduce community disruption.

Data Disclosed

• 30MW total wind capacity
• 150m turbine height
• 95m Pulrose stack height
• 81 GWh annual output (Sulby & Druidale)
• 105-130 GWh annual output (Earystane & Scards)
• 45 kT CO2(e) reduction (Sulby & Druidale)
• 60-74 kT CO2(e) reduction (Earystane & Scards)
• August 2023 announcement date
• January 2026 full manufacturing contract
• 5% financial contingency

Original Request

Please provide copies of all information held pertaining to the proposed onshore wind farms including notes, audio recordings, meetings, diary entries, electronic or paper documents.

Data Tables (1)

Full Response Text

Confidential Page 4 of 5

be delivered by the private sector (contractors, manufacturers, suppliers, consultants (including designers)); the primary differences between a private and public ownership model is the owner of the constructed assets and how the cost may have been funded.

In the short term, funding for Phase 2 design and securing of manufacturing capacity for 2025, still enables the ownership model to be changed further down the line. This option therefore represents the least regret option and increases the likelihood of the Government’s target being delivered on time. This pathway therefore provides the best value for the residents of the Island and still enables a change of course should that be preferred.

1. List of Appendices

Appendix 1: Manx Utilities’ Energy Transition Roadmap

Phil King Manx Utilities 15 Jun 2023

Confidential Page 5 of 5

Appendix 1 – Manx Utilities Energy Transition Roadmap

 Planning has gone in to an emergency Communications response (MUA) should this research prematurely reach the press  The Timescale for delivery is tight and there is little room for error  Some financial deposits will be required prior to Planning Approval being granted; the MUA is working to plan for and mitigate any potential pitfalls or risks as far as possible  MUA plan to follow the Major Applications process  The budgeted 5% financial contingency is tight. However, pending Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Planning Application a more detailed case will be presented ( ) which will aim to reduce the risk  Council advised the MUA to be mindful of client contingency and lay out plans for contingency where possible  Council advised the MUA not to release three possible site names, and instead wait until a single site had been identified in order to reduce potentially unnecessary community disruption and speculation. This announcement is due in August 2023

696/2023 Update on Proposed Sites for Wind Turbines (MUA) Verbal Update and Presentation 11.47am Mr T Crookall MHK, Chair of the Manx Utilities Authority (MUA); Mr P King, Chief Executive, MUA; and Mr A Dobbins, Network Services Executive Director joined the meeting. Mr Crookall MHK advised Council that this presentation was intended to brief Council on the proposed sites for wind turbines prior to a Tynwald Members’ Briefing and later a press update. His Majesty’s Attorney General reminded Council to refrain from site specific discussion. MUA presented a series of slides, outlining:  The site selection process for both solar and onshore wind o Indicative forecasts suggest that the total solar capacity of the proposed sites is 30MW, and the total wind capacity of the proposed site is 30MW o 3 potential onshore wind and 21 potential solar sites have been identified  Stages 1-3 of solar installation, including cumulative power generation and timescales for delivery to the consumer (commencing 2024)  Funding targets for onshore wind, with the aim of commencing a full manufacturing contract in 2026  Consideration will be given to factors such as ecological sensitivity, emissions, access etc.  Indicative illustrations of onshore windfarms were shown to Council; wind turbines will be the tallest infrastructure on the Island  Sites were recommended by external consultants and the proposed sites are being externally audited  All proposed sites are in public sector ownership

Island Plan: Onshore Renewables Update 13 JUL 2023 SITE SELECTION – Bureau Veritas, 2022 2 30MW Solar sites 1 – 2 MW Each 32 sites 21 Solar sites <0.5 MW Each 3 Onshore Wind sites Total Solar Capacity Total Wind Capacity 30MW 5 SOLAR PROJECTS 4 LOCATION MAX POSSIBLE CAPACITY CUMULATIVE BENEFITTING CUSTOMERS BY: STAGE 1 2023 NSC NOBLES HOSPITAL SEA TERMINAL 1.3 MWp 1.4 MWp 1.6 MWp 4.3 MWp 2024 STAGE 2 2024 BALLASALLA SITE 2 PORT ST. MARY SITES DOUGLAS SITE 5.7 MWp TOTAL 10 MWp 2025 STAGE 3 2025 2 RAMSEY SITES DOUGLAS SITE 6.2 MWp TOTAL 15 MWp 2026 PROPOSED SOLAR SITES 5 STAGE 1 SITES – DOUGLAS 1.33 MW peak 6 1.44 MW peak 1.6 MW peak STAGE 1 SITES – DOUGLAS ONSHORE WINDFARM PROJECT FUNDING TARGETS Tynwald approval of CLF via Annual Budget Feb 2024 Submission of CLF Treasury bid for full windfarm project Dec 2023 Tynwald approval for full formal windfarm business case By Mar 2025 Manufacturing Tender Issued Sep 2023 Treasury approval Phase 2 funding End Aug 2023 MU Board Approval 1 Jun 2023 Approval from MU Transition Programme Board Phase 2 work starts Sep 2023 Full Manufacturing contract Jan 2026 THREE KEY SITES – PHASE 1 Sulby & Druidale West Baldwin & Injebreck Earystane & Scards SITE LOCATIONS: BALDWIN & INJEBRECK SITE LOCATIONS: SULBY & DRUIDALE SITE LOCATIONS: EARYSTANE & SCARDS 13 INDICATIVE COMPARISON OF SITES Sulby & Druidale: • 7 – 12 turbines • 20MW + • Wind speed 8.5m/s • Annual Output 81 GWh • c. 45 kT CO2(e) Earystane & Scards: • 4 – 5 turbines • 20MW+ • Wind speed >10m/s • Annual Output 105 – 130 GWh • c. 60 – 74 kT CO2(e) Ecological and transport studies still to be finalised 3 MW Max. 14 HEIGHT OF TURBINES 150 m The stack at Pulrose power station is currently the largest structure on Island at 95m By 2026, the tallest structure on Island will be the new onshore windfarm at 150m 95 m Blackpool Tower Pulrose Onshore wind turbine 15 EARYSTANE & SCARDS 2 km South of Site 16 SULBY & DRUIDALE 3 km South of Site 17 EARYSTANE & SCARDS View from nr. Castletown Sub-Station

2 Factors in favour of disclosure

• There is a legitimate public interest in this project and disclosure would allow scrutiny of the costs involved and detail what public money has been budgeted within the project.
• Disclosure would allow scrutiny around the use of public funds, show that those funds are being used effectively and is providing value for money. This would provide a better public understanding and inform public debate.

• Disclosure would build trust between the public and Government Departments and provide transparency.

Factors in favour of withholding

• Disclosure of financial details associated with the project could cause economic and financial instability for the Department undertaking the project, which would in turn affect the public.

• Disclosure of commercially sensitive information to the public would likely provide potential participants within the tender process a commercial advantage. This would undermine the fairness of the transparent and open tendering process which is required to achieve best value of public funds, in turn affecting reputation and trust.

• Disclosure would likely affect the tendering process by deterring future tender participants who may consider estimated costs, budgets and timelines at the time of disclosure to be unachievable, whereas there is a possibility that these factors may change in the future.

• In taking these factors into account the Cabinet Office determined that the factors in favour of maintaining the exemption outweigh the factors in favour of disclosing the information.

In taking these factors into account the Cabinet Office determined that the factors in favour of maintaining the exemption outweigh the factors in favour of disclosing the information.

Some of the information requested is exempt from disclosure under section 34(1)(a) and (d) of the Act as it is held by Cabinet Office and it relates to the formulation or development of Government policy and the operation of a Ministerial private office. As section 34, the Formulation of Policy, is a qualified exemption, it is subject to a public interest test. The public interest must be something that is of serious concern and benefit to the public at large. Factors in favour of disclosure

• The information provides detail about the impact of onshore windfarms at proposed locations.

3 • There is significant public interest in onshore windfarms and background to decision making but standard practice is being followed ahead of any development of onshore windfarms.

Factors in favour of withholding

• Withholding the information preserves the ability for officers to comment throughout formal process. The exemption allows Officers to talk freely and possibly amend views throughout process as more details become known.

• The information is largely professional views on particular aspects relating to a potential project and in respect of potential policy formulation.

• Maintaining the exemption preserves a safe space for Ministers to debate live issues and formulate policy.

• Public exposure of the information may compromise candid and robust discussions about the formulation of policy, the exploration of extreme options and the taking of hard choices, where it might prejudice good working relationships, the neutrality of civil servants and ultimately the quality of governmental decisions.

• There is potential for damage to policy making from the content of the specific information being released.

• There is a need to maintain the quality of Government policy making by facilitating free and frank exchanges between civil servants ('the chilling effect') and the thorough consideration of all policy options, however extreme, without inducing the need to defend them, (a 'safe space'). Withholding the information protects the deliberative process and provides a safe space to protect information in the early stages of policy formulation and development.

In taking these factors into account the Cabinet Office determined that the factors in favour of maintaining the exemption outweigh the factors in favour of disclosing the information.

While our aim is to provide information whenever possible, in this instance, some of the information held by Cabinet Office is exempt under section 35(b)(i) & (ii) and 35(c) of the Act, as disclosure would be likely to inhibit the free and frank provision of advice or the free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation and would otherwise prejudice the effective conduct of public business.

As section 35, Conduct of Public Business, is a qualified exemption, it is subject to a public interest test. The public interest must be something that is of serious concern and benefit to the public at large.

Factors in favour of disclosure

• Disclosure of the information would promote transparency to the public and provide confidence in decisions made relating to the project.
4

• There is significant public interest in the costs, timelines, due process and milestones relating to the project.

• Disclosure of the information could serve to dispel rumours and misinformation relating to the project.

• As the project has gained significant public interest, the disclosure of the information relating to costs, timeframes and milestones would inform public debate.

Factors in favour of withholding

• The project is still live and full disclosure of information held at this stage may hinder or have undue effect on decisions made relating to further progression of the project.

• Future aspects of this project are still subject to funding, tender and bidding. Fairness in the tendering and bidding process would be significantly impacted by disclosure and potentially lead to a lack of trust.

• Impact of disclosure will affect core authority functions. Departments require 'safe space' to consider, deliberate and debate throughout the decision making process and due process, ensuring important information is safeguarded and not biased.

• Disclosure of the information would likely adversely affect other Departments in their ability to effectively carry out their activities relating to the project.

• Disclosure would provide only summary points captured at a moment in time without wider context. Disclosure in this instance would not serve a wider public interest.

• Content of the information is an early exchange of information between civil servants undertaking normal business in an unguarded way. Any final advice for specific sites will become available in the future. Efforts to accelerate disclosure would not be appropriate as the information does not provide a full picture or context and is advice given at early stages in the planning process.

In taking these factors into account the Cabinet Office determined that the factors in favour of maintaining the exemption outweigh the factors in favour of disclosing the information.

Please quote the reference number 3264101 in any future communications.

Your right to request a review

If you are unhappy with this response to your freedom of information request, you may ask us to carry out an internal review of the response, by completing a complaint form and submitting it electronically or by delivery/post.