Norðurþing council divided over Hólaheiði wind farm plans

Norðurþing’s council is split over a proposal for a wind farm on Hólaheiði, a heath east of Kópasker, mbl.is reported. The project, proposed by Hnotasteinn, would involve 34 to 40 turbines standing 150 to 200 metres tall and is estimated to generate 190 to 200 megawatts of electricity.

In January, the council voted to ask that the project be moved from the waiting category to the utilisation category under Iceland’s energy framework plan. Nature conservation groups oppose the move and want the area placed in the protection category, arguing that Hólaheiði is one of the few untouched wilderness areas in the region.

The framework plan’s Group 3 has asked the council for its position. At a meeting last week, the council majority said increased power generation could create opportunities for jobs, economic activity and stronger communities in Norðurþing and northeast Iceland. It supports moving the project into the utilisation category.

The majority said any development should deliver lasting benefits to nearby communities, including jobs, increased municipal revenue, contracts for local businesses and infrastructure improvements. It also called for thorough consultation with the municipality, residents and other stakeholders, and for efforts to limit effects on nature, the landscape and the local environment.

Representatives of the M and V lists criticised how the majority handled the matter, calling the process unprofessional. They objected to a statement being submitted in the council’s name without discussion involving all council members, and proposed a public survey after residents had been informed about the project.

The minority’s proposal said a wind farm would be a significant intervention in a sensitive and extensive landscape, with lasting effects on the scenery, wildlife and the area’s character. It added that development, energy security and employment goals should be pursued alongside nature conservation, caution and a democratic process. The proposal was rejected.

Council members from the D, S and B lists said extensive consultation had already taken place through formal comment processes. They argued a public survey was unnecessary because the matter remained open for comments through another process.