Fuerteventura paints renewable zones in forbidden areas

Julieta Schallenberg, Vice‑Councillor for Ecological Transition, Climate Fight and Energy, explains the government’s position after the councils of Fuerteventura and Lanzarote withdrew from the Renewable Acceleration Zones (ZAR) proposal.

The vice‑councillor addressed Fuerteventura Digital to clarify why the two island councils have abandoned the ZAR plan. She stresses that the zones are meant to delimit, on each island, the areas where renewable projects can be installed with the highest environmental, territorial and biodiversity safeguards.

• Lanzarote: The council was aware of, and initially agreed to, the zoning. A material error affected part of the printed plans, but the official map in the regional GIS (Grafcan) is correct. Of the 3,000 ha proposed, no more than 10 % is intended for development.
• Fuerteventura: Since October the government has been awaiting the council’s response to a draft zoning similar in size to Lanzarote’s. Schallenberg argues that the council’s own “draft plan” – the one they are “painting” on the map – is unrealistic and insufficient, and that the areas the island government proposes are not suitable for renewable installations.

What changed in Lanzarote that led to the abandonment of the ZAR?

“We have a protocol for Renewable Acceleration Zones that we are signing with all the councils. We have been working on it for two years. With Lanzarote we signed in July last year and have continued working with the other islands. These protocols simply state which zones within the islands would be available for renewable energy installations with the highest guarantees – meaning they meet all environmental, biodiversity and agricultural compatibility conditions.”

Was the published zoning agreed with the council?

“What was published reflects the agreements reached with the council. When we signed the protocol, a material error occurred in the printing of the plans that were taken to the signing ceremony. There were eight plans; four of them were wrong due to errors by the public company that printed them. No one noticed at the time, but the overall map is correct, and the map shown in Grafcan is also correct because those are the zones agreed between the Lanzarote council and the Canary Islands Government.”

The Lanzarote ZAR classify areas as:

• Suitable (orange and light‑blue)
• Mixed (green)
• Conditionally mixed (light‑green)

These are further divided into wind zones (light‑blue) and photovoltaic zones (yellow and orange).

Why do the figures show more than 3,000 ha if only a fraction will be developed?

“When you look at the map, the sum of suitable and conditionally suitable zones exceeds 3,000 ha, but the truly suitable surface is under 300 ha. The conditioned zones exist to accommodate possible constraints—air‑space restrictions, biodiversity reports, etc. We need a ten‑fold buffer: if we need 200 ha, we must have at least 2,000 ha available as a safety margin.”

“We cannot point with a finger to the exact parcels that will be developed, because that would create a speculative framework.”

Schallenberg estimates that about 200 ha would be enough to meet the target of over 50 % renewable electricity on Lanzarote by 2030. The island is currently at 8.5 % renewable penetration, leaving a wide margin to be covered.

“Fuerteventura Is Painting Renewable Zones Where They Cannot Be Developed”

Will the surface figures for Fuerteventura be similar to those of Lanzarote?

“The numbers should be comparable because they depend not on the island’s size but on electricity demand, which is driven by population, tourism and overall consumption. Lanzarote and Fuerteventura should therefore be in the same order of magnitude.”

Does the Canary Islands Government already have a zoning proposal for Fuerteventura?

“We do not have a final proposal yet, even though we have been working with the Fuerteventura council for more than a year and a half. They have the final draft we sent them, but after our last meeting in October we have received no response. We have always worked in parallel, and they do have a territorial plan, but we have told them we need to accelerate the process. We cannot wait until 2029 to publish territorial plans to meet the 2030 objectives.”

“We are already late – it is 2026. The national target is 58 % renewable electricity by 2030; Fuerteventura is currently around 20 %, far below the regional average and the state‑mandated goal. The challenge is huge.”

The council says it will not “paint” renewable zones until the Special Energy Territorial Plan is ready. What is the government’s view?

“We have taken the council’s proposal as a starting point, because we always begin with what they tell us. The council says it has a series of available areas, and when we apply our environmental restrictions those areas shrink. We are trying to make them understand that many of the zones they are ‘painting’ cannot host renewables and are also insufficient to meet decarbonisation targets.”

“We hope to reach an understanding and, after several meetings, receive a response to the proposal we sent in October last year, which does allow renewable development. From there, the council can draft its territorial plan.”

Final assessment of the state‑run generation tender and the relocation of the El Charco thermal plant?

“We have fulfilled Fuerteventura’s historic demand to remove the El Charco plant. The tender, although run by the Ministry, included territorial requirements that support a gradual shutdown of the plant. We now have three alternative sites where projects are already being developed, such as Zurita, which the council itself suggested.”

“In that sense the process has been a success, and we believe we have met 100 % of the council’s and the island’s demands regarding the plant’s relocation.”