So there’s this film, see? A big mining company wants to dump mine tailings in a river. They’re keeping it all hush hush. But a brave and fearless person manages to find out their devious plan. The brave and fearless person finds secret documents which show that the dumping plan will pollute the river and kill the fish. So the brave and fearless person takes photos of all the documents and gives them to the national environmental authority, which cancels the mining licence. Hallelujah!

But . . . there’s this other film, the South African version. It’s all the same as the above except the ending, where the brave and fearless person takes photos of all the documents and gives them to the national environmental authority, which ignores them and grants the mining licence.

Is this possible? Well, it actually happens. It has actually happened with a number of environmental-impact assessments for a number of wind farms, where, despite a number of fundamentally valid objections, the wind farm developments have been approved. Beginning with the proposed Bayview wind farm. This farm proposes 42 turbines, some located within 5 km of the Addo African Elephant Park, South Africa’s third-largest game park.

The Daily Herald reports that scientists have warned that the low-frequency drone of the turbines will interfere with the communication ability of the elephants. Professor Graham Kerley, of the Nelson Mandela Centre for African Ecology, is reported as saying: “The vibration of the turbines causes a low-frequency drone. Elephants communicate using the same low-frequency sound through the air and the ground . . . It is estimated that they can communicate with one another over a distance of 20 km. So, firstly, the concern is that the turbine noise will block the elephants from communicating with one another and, secondly, if the elephants are bombarded with this unnatural sound, that it will cause them to stress and we do not know what their reaction will be.”

There are other matters: air turbulence will affect poacher-spotting aircraft, night sky will be affected. The Department of Environment, Forestry and Fisheries (DEFF) on March 23 authorised the construction of the wind farm. The department has also received appeals against this and was due to respond further on June 14. All very proper. But Are They Out Of their Minds? This country has plenty of elephant-free windy places up the West Coast. Why risk a valuable national park?

Moving on. To Paternoster. A beautiful fishing village up the West Coast. Here the noise-impact assessment (NIA) report contains the following defects: the developer states that there will be 45 turbines, each 3.15 MW, with a blade-tip height of 165 m (taller than any building in Cape Town). But the NIA models the noise of a 2.35 MW turbine which is 800 kW smaller. The NIA has a graph which is meant to show that using the 2.35 MW turbine is a ‘worst case’ scenario. In fact, it is a ‘best case’ scenario. The NIA states that “the projected noise rating levels may be more than 7 dBA higher than the rating level normally associated with a rural noise district”.

The NIA fails to mention that this is in contravention of the Western Cape noise control regulations. It states that there are 15 noise-sensitive locations in the proposed turbine area. But! At only two of them were existing noise levels measured. The two measurements were taken using one make of instrument with the all-weather windshield of another make. The manufacturer of the instrument has confirmed that this renders the measurements incorrect. But no worry! Never fear! The DEFF has authorised the construction of the wind farm. Grief. What to do? Give up? Throw up? Well done, Minister Barbara Creecy! You are stuffing things up. Now to put you in charge of something bigger! Why not a wind farm in the Kruger National Park? A gas-turbine station on Table Mountain? If we want to stuff up the environment, do it properly.