As far as alternative energy goes, South Africa is lagging. Not only do we not have concrete policies, but our government does no more than pay lip service to the increasingly pressing need to complement our dwindling Eskom supplied energy with the renewable kind. The mission is not helped by certain citizens who object most vociferously to renewable energy projects on the grounds that they don’t look pretty.

Relatively recently, a company called Red Cap, which is dedicated to building up South Africa’s wind power generation, got the go-ahead for its Kouga Wind Farm project. The long-term project will see the creation of 120-odd wind turbines in three clusters in the Eastern Cape: Oyster Bay, north of the Kromme River and bordering the Tsitsikamma, River.

Red Cap’s website boasts testimonials from landowners in the area, praising the project to the heavens:

“We have a crisis situation and we need more electricity, wind can provide that electricity. A project such as this (Red Cap wind farm) in the Kouga region can mean a lot for development in many ways, especially job creation…” Roy Seeney – Welgelen Dairy Trust

“… My father used to say progress is like cycling on a bicycle – if you stop pedalling, you will stop moving.  We need to move towards better means of obtaining electricity as the country needs more energy not just for today but for the future.” Harley Knott – Rag Apple Farming Prop Ltd

“Green energy is the next best thing; it is good for our country. We cannot run away from the fact that we have a crisis with our electricity supply and we need reliable sources of electricity. As a way of preserving our environment, let us use what is freely available to us and that is wind.” Johan Strydom – Welgelee

But, not everyone is happy. In fact, the people of St Francis are distinctly unhappy.

On 7 July, Mark Tanton, Managing Director of Red Cap, met with community members at the St Francis Bowling Club. His intention was to address the community’s concerns and answer some pressing questions. The community said it was a brilliant PR job that left them more frustrated than before.

According to an article on the CACADU District Municipality website, Tanton took pains to assure the community that the project would not have any impact on the untouched land that attracts thousands of tourists every year. He also said that the intention was not to encroach on residential areas. He tried to emphasise the advantages, such as the growth of local industries and income for impoverished settlements in the area. He mentioned that taller wind turbines would be used so that fewer wind turbines would be used, which would have less of an impact on the farming industry and be less of an eyesore.

Homeowners aren’t having any of it though. They don’t believe that they can be an energy hub as well as a tourist hub. They believe the two are mutually exclusive. One particularly outspoken St Francis resident, Bridget Elton, said that the cumulative effect of the project would be devastating. Her biggest objections appear to centre on the impeded view. Another concern is the effect on property values, which, according to another resident, Andre Fouche, have already gone down.

The St Francis Chronicle cites further grievances, which include a violation of the “sense of place”, the lack of a “human element” in the decision making, and, of course, changes to lifestyle. Yet another resident, John Hammond, was quoted as saying, “There’s nothing wrong with financial gain but do it in a way that does not affect the lifestyle of thousands of people.” As if thousands more wouldn’t benefit from it.

The transport of the bits and pieces of the turbines is another worry, because it will impact the roads, commuting and deter tourists.

It all seems rather petty.

One can understand how residents would prefer to maintain the beauty of their neighbourhoods. One can also understand how a community would want to protect its reputation as a tourist “hub”. But is it right to stop the development of a project which would, despite what the naysayers allege, have enormous benefits not only for said community but much further afield?

Once more we look at comments from a resident, Sandra Hardie. Red Cap has promised that 25% of the income generated by the project will go to disadvantaged communities. Hardie claims that the promised 25% would be unlikely to materialise for a number of years. The implication being that it would still materialise. But the townspeople are still willing to deprive these already deprived communities of that.

The only really salient allegation is the one that claims a wind farm consortium will charge Eskom three times the current rate of electricity for all energy generated. These costs would be passed on to consumers.

Where does the greater good lie?

What do you think?

(Image by Harvey McDaniel from Naalehu, HI (South Point_Wind Farm 5_Aug_1_02) [CC-BY-2.0], via Wikimedia Commons)