Powys councillors are calling for windfarm developments to be put on hold while the new Plaid Cymru Welsh Government develops a new national energy strategy.

A cross-party motion calling on the government to live up to manifesto pledges was placed in front of councillors at a council meeting on Thursday, July 9.

This is the second time a motion of this sort has been agreed by the council during the last year.

Cllr Jonathan Wilkinson (Conservative – Meifod and Llangyniew) said: “This is not the first motion I’ve put to council relating to the impact of proposed wind farms on Powys. It’s an indication of the serious threat to our landscape, businesses and way of life that we’re having to consider this again.

“There are many wind farm applications waiting in the wings. I believe there are approximately 26 for Powys alone, and these, together with the associated infrastructure, particularly the steel pylons, would perversely damage the environment rather than enhance it.

“We have a new Welsh Government who have a chance to refresh energy policy and make it fit for purpose.”

The motion was seconded by Liberal Democrat Cllr Glyn Preston (Llanidloes), who said: “Neither of these motions are about being anti-renewable in any way, but simply the concerns we have about the way onshore is being done to us in Powys.”

Cllr Angela Davies (Liberal Democrat – Rhayader) explained the history behind the flooding of the Elan Valley in the late 19th century to create reservoirs to provide water for Birmingham.

Cllr Davies said: “But there was a price to pay. A community was lost and very few were paid any compensation.

“The Elan Valley dams now generate over 3,000 kWh of clean hydropower electricity, too much for the grid to receive, yet local residents are not able to tap into this spare resource and receive no benefit in cheaper utilities and power.

“I do not support the process where large outside organisations can overrule the local voice, take the resource and give nothing back.”

Cllr Bryn Davies (Plaid Cymru – Banwy, Llanfihangel and Llanwddyn) said: “It’s excellent to have so many parties beginning to understand what Plaid Cymru has been trying to explain for 100 years.”

But the motion wasn’t universally supported.

Cllr Jeremy Brignell-Thorp (Green Party – Forden and Montgomery) said: “I would be in favour of putting more of our turbines offshore, but we must be honest with the electorate as this will result in higher electricity bills as it’s more expensive than onshore generation.

“If we don’t start responding more urgently to the climate emergency, the effect on our landscape will be far more devastating than looking at wind turbines.”

He added that scientific modelling suggests the “beautiful Welsh countryside” would suffer from “three frozen months a year and a summer too hot and dry for any crops to be viable”.

Councillors also mulled over the wording of the motion.

Council leader Cllr Jake Berriman (Liberal Democrat – Llandrindod North) wanted to change the phrase “moratorium on new wind farms” to “moratorium on major wind farms”.

Planning development team manager Gemma James was brought in to provide advice and explained that using the phrase “significant infrastructure project” (SIP) in the motion would be best, as it covers proposals for projects over 15MW.

SIP is the new term being used by Welsh Government planners, replacing the “developments of national significance” (DNS) terminology – although all DNS applications already in the system will be processed under that legislation.

A vote on the amendment saw 38 councillors vote in favour, nine against and three abstain – and this became the “substantive” motion before councillors.

Cllr Wilkinson was asked if he agreed to the wording changes to the motion.

He said he was happy to accept the changes but thought they “unnecessarily complicated” the motion.

Cllr Wilkinson said: “I’m pleased with and support, and the critical thing is urgency.

“Wind farm developers realise that the political mood is changing and will be pushing very hard to try and rush applications through.”

Eventually, a vote on the motion was held, which saw 48 councillors vote in favour, one against and one abstain.