Between the Parma and Piacenza Apennines, along the ridges that separate and unite the Taro, Ceno and Arda valleys, it was presented the “Parma A” industrial wind farm project by Duferco Sviluppo SpA 47 wind turbines, over 200 meters high, distributed across over 40 kilometers of Apennine ridges. This is not a small, local plant, but a massive industrial project, destined to profoundly and permanently transform fragile, inhabited mountain regions, rich in biodiversity, landscape, history, culture, and traditions.
These are the valleys where our Association was born, where we document the presence of wolves and many other species, including those of significant community interest, where we monitor the evolution of ecosystems and work to promote true coexistence between human activities and nature. This is why we state it clearly: I'm not afraid of the wolf APS is against the Parma A project and will present its observations.
Our opposition does not arise from a position against renewable energy. A careful, technical and critical analysis of the project has highlighted how one of the most significant elements is the absence of the primary resource for a plant of this type: THE WINDAn industrial wind farm should be built at least where there is a genuine wind energy potential. However, according to the proponent's documentation and reported in the local public debate, the indicated and estimated annual production hours (therefore not supported by a field anemometric study) would be below the threshold established by regional legislation for identifying suitable areas.
According to reports, regional legislation requires at least 2300 equivalent annual hours of production, while the proponent's own documentation indicates 2178 hours: a quantity lower than the established threshold, strongly questioned by the counter-analyses of local committees, which, by cross-referencing satellite, ground station, and pointer data, find an estimate significantly lower than what the principle of prevailing interest would dictate.
In other words: they want to impose a gigantic plant, in a fragile territory, with enormous environmental, landscape, and social impacts, where, moreover, there is a lack of sufficient primary resources to justify its construction.
When the wind isn't enough to explain a project of this scale, it's legitimate to wonder whether the real benefit lies not with the local area, but with those proposing the project. Whether the primary benefit isn't environmental, but economic. Whether the energy transition is once again becoming an opportunity for industrial pressure on inland areas.
The energy transition is necessary, but it must be planned, proportionate, coherent with the local environment, based on solid data, and respectful of ecosystems and local communities. It cannot become a new form of land consumption, transforming mountain ridges, forests, pastures, and inland areas into industrial platforms. The term "sustainability" cannot be used to justify the damage to habitats, landscapes, and common goods. The mountain ridges affected by the project are not empty spaces, but habitats, ecological corridors, passageways, feeding grounds, and breeding grounds for wildlife. They are forests, meadows, pastures, springs, open high-altitude environments, fragile slopes, spontaneous flora, and plant and animal communities that cannot be considered secondary elements in a purely technical assessment. They are places traversed, experienced, and recognized by those who walk, work, graze, farm, accompany people in nature, maintain trails, maintain traditions, and preside over hamlets and villages.
But these ridges are not just nature and landscape: they are also territories inhabited, worked, traversed and protected for generations. They are villages, hamlets, farms, ranches, consortia, trails, tourist activities, family memories, local festivals, practical knowledge, rural culture, and traditions that have kept these mountains alive even in the most difficult times. We're talking about fragile inland areas, which for years have suffered from depopulation, abandonment, declining services, an aging population, and little political attention. Remaining is already a difficult choice, often made by those who continue to work, protect, and care for the land.
A project of this magnitude would not only cause environmental and landscape devastation in an area already deeply affected by hydrogeological instability. It would also cause social and human damage. Because industrialising over 40 kilometres of ridges means changing the perception of these places forever, weaken their tourism, cultural, and identity-building value, further weakening the bond between community and territory. Sustainability cannot be achieved if, in the name of energy production, we jeopardize the very landscapes that represent one of the few remaining resources of inland areas: beauty, nature, silence, biodiversity, quality of life, slow tourism, mountain agriculture, and a sense of belonging.
The energy transition cannot go over the heads of the people who live in these places. It cannot ask the already most fragile territories to pay the highest price once again. A project of this size would involve new roads, excavations, lay-bys, foundations, cable ducts, construction sites, heavy traffic, habitat fragmentation, wildlife disturbance, landscape alteration, and permanent and irreversible transformations of the ridges.
In our regions, renewable energy production already exists, often exceeding local demand. Renewable Energy Community projects, collective self-consumption, efficiency improvements, and distributed generation are also underway. This is a different path: smarter, more proportionate, closer to communities, more respectful, and less destructive to the environment.
The point is not to choose between renewables and nature conservation, but to decide together what energy transition we want. A widespread transition, planned and built with the local communities, or a top-down industrial transition that concentrates profits and unloads environmental, landscape, and social impacts on the most vulnerable areas. The Parma A project, in our opinion, belongs to this second model.
And this is not an isolated case: similar projects are proliferating in many areas of the Apennines and throughout Italy: large industrial plants on ridges, mountains, and inland areas, often in places of high environmental and landscape value, with local communities forced to defend themselves from projects presented as inevitable in the name of energy transition. But not everything that is called “green” is automatically right. Landscapes, mountain ridges, natural habitats, and biodiversity are a common good: they don't belong to those who propose large-scale industrial projects, nor to those who view these territories merely as empty spaces to be filled on a map. They belong to the communities that live there and to all of us.
Protecting these ridges also means choosing which environment, which landscape, and which concept of territory we want to pass on to future generations, which is why it is necessary to talk about it and get people talking about it. We need to inform ourselves, share resources, and engage citizens, associations, technicians, administrators, hikers, farmers, breeders, guides, tour operators, and anyone who cares about the future of the Apennines.
The deadline is extremely short: there are only a few days to submit comments, and the deadline is July 4, 2026. Anyone can submit comments: citizens, associations, groups, entities, even people who do not live in the municipalities directly affected.
It's important to act now, providing concrete support to the local committees working to stop this project. This isn't about being against renewable energy, but about opposing an energy transition model that, in the name of progress, risks compromising already fragile landscapes, habitats, biodiversity, local communities, and territories.
Hands off the ridges.
For information, registration, submission of documents and reports, and to request support in compiling observations:
eolicotaroceno@gmail.com
We have included below the useful links for consulting the submitted project and for submitting comments.
Link to the complete project divided by thematic areas:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1k0fRUQjQ5_comLCwZd1ABCzIct6BWdSU
Official link to the complete project:
https://va.mite.gov.it/it-IT/Oggetti/Info/11772
Link to download the observations form and submit via SPID/CIE:
https://va.mite.gov.it/it-IT/ps/Procedure/InvioOsservazioni
Project identification code:
14050 – WEB-VIA FER-VIAVIAF00000491
Project:
Parma A Wind Farm – Duferco Sviluppo SpA