Renewable Energy

Renewable energy is energy produced from sources that can be renewed (such as wind, solar, hydroelectric and bioenergy), as opposed to sources which are finite (limited in quantity), such as coal, oil or gas. Renewable energy development makes an important contribution to measures that reduce carbon emissions and help to tackle climate change. 

In 2023, renewable sources contributed 41.1% of the UK’s total electricity generation: 

• 29.4% - Wind power  
• 5% - Biomass energy (the burning of renewable organic materials) 
• 4.9% - Solar power  
• 1.8% - Hydropower, including tidal 

Source: https://www.neso.energy/news/britains-electricity-explained-2023-review

Domestic or microgeneration renewable energy projects are small-scale (for instance solar panels on the roof of a home) and primarily designed to provide energy to power that home or business. Excess energy might be sold to the grid. Commercial renewable energy is energy produced on a large-scale that goes into the grid to power homes and businesses across the country.  

Commercial renewable energy projects are large scale interventions in the land or sea environment. Both of these environments may also be rich in heritage, whether that’s archaeology below the earth or on the seabed, or heritage assets visible above the ground. 

Historic England believes in maximising the benefits of renewable energy projects, while minimising their adverse effects on our irreplaceable historic sites. We are committed to providing guidance to help those involved in developing commercial renewable energy to manage the careful balance between the two. 

We support measures to reduce fuel consumption, increase energy efficiency and exploit renewable energy sources. Wee also recognise that some renewable energy technologies have the potential to cause serious damage to the nation’s built heritage, which is in itself an integral part of the wider environmental and sustainability agenda. 

A  sustainable approach to renewable energy generation looks to secure a balance between the benefits it delivers and the environmental costs it incurs, including to the historic environment. 

We support an approach to renewable energy generation which: 

• Acknowledges the need for society to invest in a wide range of renewable energy generation technologies; 
• Recognises the potential environmental impacts of different technologies, including their implications for the historic environment; 
• Keeps the balance of environmental benefits and disadvantages of each technology under continual review; 
• Continually seeks to limit and mitigate adverse impacts; 

Determining the balance between harm and benefits is done on a case-by-case basis, informed by evidence and assessment and taking account of a range of factors and relevant policy and guidance. 

We believe that high-quality design can play a key role in minimising any adverse effects. Fundamental to achieving high-quality design is a sound understanding of the character and importance of the historic asset involved, whether at the scale of individual buildings and sites or more extensive historic areas and landscapes. 

Given the speed with which renewable energy technologies are evolving, renewable energy projects and their associated infrastructure should aim to be reversible and/or replaceable where possible.

Between the 2021 and 2025 reports, commercial renewable energy planning applications in England rose by 188%. 

The South West received the most applications, followed by the Eastern region.  

Of the 500 applications analysed, there were geographical concentrations of particular renewable energy types: solar photovoltaics were concentrated in the south, and wind on/offshore concentrated in the north. 

Of the applications analysed, 89.2% were for solar energy projects, with biomass (4.6%) and on/offshore wind energy (4.0%) making up much smaller proportions. EfW made up just 2.2% of applications.

In the 2019–2024 period, 73% of the 500 applications analysed considered heritage as part of their application proposal - an 11% rise compared to the earlier report. 

The report highlights that while heritage assessments are now more common, inconsistencies persist in: 

• the depth of heritage analysis required;  
• the levels of engagement between applicants and heritage advisers;  
• negotiation over mitigation. 

Within the sample of 500 applications, DBAs were present in 50.8% of the applications. Geophysical surveys were present in 37.8% and heritage statements in 20.8% of applications. 24% of applications did not have any form of heritage assessment.

The report found that out of the 500 34% of identifications came from the applicant or consultant, while 33% were raised by LPAs. This suggests that the role of LPA heritage advisers remain vital, but significant identification still rests with the applicant conducting efficient heritage assessments. 

Early engagement is highlighted by heritage advisers as a valued stage of the planning process to identify heritage assets under consideration and help recommend mitigation (although it should not be understood as a guarantor of planning success). 

59% of applications involved pre-application advice, indicating a lack of early heritage input for at least 37% (the remaining 3% is unknown).  

Of the 500 applications analysed, 68% were approved with just 11% rejected. The remaining include applications that may still be under consideration. 

In comparing results from the 2021 Report and the 2025 Report, there was a 7% increase in approved applications and a 6% decrease on rejected applications. 

Out of 500 applications, objections from heritage advisers occurred in 5.2% of the total applications. Objections from advisers are considered but not binding as part of planning decisions.

Of the 500 applications analysed, 143 included heritage as a condition in the Decision Notice. Of these, 57% included mitigation by record (excavation), 7% included Preservation in Situ and 29% included both (the remaining 7% is unknown). 

Out of the 500 applications analysed, refusals based on heritage considerations were recommended in 4.8% of the total applications: 

Heritage was the primary reason for refusal in 0.8% of the applications; 

Heritage was part of a wider set of rationale for refusal in 3.8% applications.  

Of the refused applications analysed (where rationale was available), the heritage rationale for refusal included: 

• Direct impact to archaeology: 3 applications  
• Setting: 20 applications  
• Both setting and direct impact to archaeology: 1 application 

There was a 7% decrease on refused applications and a 6% increase in granted applications between the 2021 and 2025 reports. 

The increased approval rates and reduced refusal rates may suggest pressure to approve applications due to national priorities, or improved historic environment assessments and pragmatic approaches adopted by commercial consultants and LPA heritage teams .

These included the under-resourcing of Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) and varied levels of engagement across regions from heritage-related statutory consultees. 

Issues of setting also remain a challenge with regard to commercial renewable energy developments. 

The sizeable increase in planning applications observed between the 2021 and 2025 reports puts a strain on LPAs, who are often already under resourced across planning and conservation functions.

The report emphasises the importance of integrating historic environment considerations holistically within climate and spatial planning objectives, rather than treating them as obstacles to renewable energy development.  

It also recommends exploration of the further integration of renewable energy development across competing land use interests (such as agriculture, housing, infrastructure and nature recovery) via integrated land use planning strategies

Early engagement with heritage advisers offers valuable opportunities to ensure heritage is addressed appropriately yet remains underused as part of the planning process.  

The report noted a 14% increase in pre-application approval planning consent rates compared to those that did not enter into 'pre-app'. 

These recommendations include: 

• Better resourcing for LPAs; 
• Better sourcing for both statutory and non-statutory consultees; 
• Embedding heritage-led design principles into renewable infrastructure; 
• Clarifying policy guidance between national policies (e.g., NPPF) and local policies (e.g., Local Plans) to reinforce heritage protection as a public benefit within renewable energy development plans