It is puzzling to read that farmers are objecting to the application for a wind farm at Wied Rini on the grounds that the proposed development will harm their agricultural production (Farmers object to wind farm application, TMID 26 May). The report states that the farmers were objecting because the land, which they say is their means of livelihood, would be “badly affected by the proposed development and that it would harm their agricultural production”.
One would, of course, sympathise with the farmers’ concerns if there were any basis for them, but it seems that they have not been fully informed. First of all, a rumour that land will need to be expropriated has made the rounds. There is presumably no truth in this because most, if not all, of the land which will be occupied by the wind turbines is not farmland. Even if the wind farm, or part of it, were to occupy an area of farmland, the question of expropriation of such farmland need not arise.
Two points that must be remembered in this context: first of all, wind turbines are placed very far apart from each other and, secondly, each individual pylon has a very small foot print. Therefore, to say that the turbines would take up a substantial part of (farm) land is quite incorrect. If any individual turbines are indeed sited on farmland, and not on unoccupied land – as appears to be the case at Wied Rini, the area of land needed for a turbine foundation does not “take up a substantial part of (farm) land” as reported; the area required is small (about 12 square metres).
The important point is this: if a turbine is sited on farmland it should be possible to reach a financial arrangement to the satisfaction of both the farmer and the builder of the turbine. This is normally the case elsewhere.
Therefore, contrary to what the farmers, or their lawyer, seem to think, the establishment of wind turbines on farmland can become a win-win situation for both parties. This is so for the simple reason that, when setting up a turbine on actual farmland, the usual arrangement is to compensate the farmer for using (or ‘renting’) a small part of his farm to accommodate an individual turbine. In fact, in countries where wind energy is now established, farmers themselves are starting to form cooperatives which invest in turbines to “farm” electricity which they sell to the government at a profit, while continuing to farm as usual beneath them.
It is also astonishing to read that farmers from as far as Rabat, Siggiewi, and Dingli, are objecting to the outline application for a wind farm installation on the excuse that the proposed development would harm their agricultural production. This is a claim which has absolutely no basis. The presence of turbines does not in the least affect life directly beneath it, whether it be farming, cattle raising, recreation or wildlife. Life goes on normally on wind farms.
It will be to the benefit of both farmers and Malta’s renewable energy prospects if everybody approaches the matter in an informed way. Let us hope that reason will prevail and that, rather than obstructing Malta’s progress towards the establishment of clean wind energy, lawyer Gavin Gulia reaches a good deal on behalf of the farmers he represents in the event that a small patch of their farm becomes necessary for a wind turbine foundation. Otherwise, farmers can rest assured that the presence of wind energy will not affect their agricultural production in the least. Farmers should know this from their experience with windmills which were a familiar sight on every farmstead in days gone by.