WITH the Japanese experience of dealing with difficulties in their nuclear plants, the future of nuclear power generation in the UK may well be delayed in order that any lessons learned from the Japanese earthquake are taken into account in the design of the next generation of power plants.

The Government has announced that Mike Weightman, HM Inspector of Nuclear Installations, is to provide an urgent report to the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change on the implications and any lessons to be learned for the UK from the Japanese experience.

In the meantime, other forms of renewable energy are already being exploited, as shown by the number of planning applications being submitted locally, many of which are taking months to process while the necessary public consultation is undertaken.

We have a number of high-profile applications, including those made by Severn Trent on the Stoke Bardolph site for two turbines, which have given rise to a very strong anti-turbine reaction by the residents of Burton Joyce.

Severn Trent also have plans for a wind mast at Cotgrave Reservoir to test the usable wind for a town line, and again at Aslockton. All these proposals are part of a concerted drive from Severn Trent to increase energy generation from wind power in their area of influence.

The University of Nottingham is also considering the construction of three wind turbines alongside Clifton Bridge, and Nottingham Trent University has started a feasibility study for two turbines on the south side of Brackenhurst Campus, near Southwell.

There is, of course, a great deal of opposition to the construction of more turbines by the National Alliance of Wind Farm Action Groups. The criteria for their construction, as viewed by the Government, is being refined to ensure that any nuisance from their use is minimised, although the visual aspect of their location seems to be secondary to their ability to produce cheap energy close to the national grid.

So, how do we overcome this natural abhorrence of a new and unwelcome addition to our neighbourhood?

Naturally, we turn to financial means to overcome some of the opposition.

Certain wind farm operators have agreed to offer an annual sum to local communities for each megawatt of power they generate. When a planning application for an onshore installation is made, a statement of community benefit would form part of the application documents, with the financial gain independently audited from turbines of over five megawatts in size. This has also received approval by the National Association of Local Councils.

At Brackenhurst, the proposal is that the first turbine would belong to the university for use on site and the second would be funded and owned by a community partnership investment - with electricity fed into the national grid, for which the community would receive a beneficial gain, possibly to reduce council tax or for any other community purpose.

The whole problem of living with this new method of energy generation, as with waste and bio mass burning, is understandably giving rise to concern. The onset of localism in planning may produce more refusals for development as councillors feel unable to lead in this matter.

Currently, appeals against refusals on wind turbines are 62 per cent successful, so this gives us a view on how the Planning Inspectorate deals with many local decisions to refuse. If this balance changes to a greater number of refusals, more local incentives may have to be given or more direction from the Infrastructure Planning Commission may be necessary.

The treatment of our onshore turbines is evolving and, we hope, will eventually give rise to a framework where local views are successfully incorporated in a national planning regime.