wind farms - Scotland
William Starkey
number of wind farm applications taking place in Scotland. Wind farm
proposals now approach two hundred, and will undoubtedly increase
significantly in the future. A single wind farm may contain many
turbines each roughly the same height as the towers supporting the
Forth rail-bridge. Wind farms will greatly alter the unique Scottish
landscape. I suspect that many members of this newsgroup will be
saddened to read about these industrial scale wind farms proposed for
the Scottish countryside. Areas potentially affected include
Ardnamurchan, Skye, Mull, Islay, the Monadhliath, and the Birnam and
Ochil hills in Perthshire. Those concerned about these developments
may wish to complain to their MP, MEP, etc. Apologies if this is an
inappropriate posting.
The locations of current proposals and background information can be
found on the Views of Scotland website: (impact maps version 4)
http://www.viewsofscotland.org
Other websites covering the situation in Scotland:
http://www.saveourhills.org
http://www.oepg.org.uk
Peter Clinch
> Those concerned about these developments
> may wish to complain to their MP, MEP, etc. Apologies if this is an
> inappropriate posting.
Not inappropriate, though I'd suggest a case by case basis, also bearing
in mind that the Scottish countryside is already highly altered by human
hands: personally I'd sooner see a couple of windmills around the bottom
of Glen Etive than the acres of rhododendrons and conifer plantations
already buggering up the landscape there, though there are some places
I'd say "not here!". It's very difficult to draw consistent lines,
unfortunately :-(
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.c...@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
Chris Malcolm
>I am writing to advise uk-rec-walking members about the increasing
>number of wind farm applications taking place in Scotland. Wind farm
>proposals now approach two hundred, and will undoubtedly increase
>significantly in the future.
Undoubtedly. After all, although Scotland already has surplus
electricity generating power, and sells the extra to England which is
a bit short, we don't want to mess up England with anything unsightly
or hazardous we can stuff into the Celtic fringes of the UK.
--
Chris Malcolm c...@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
NC
> william...@care4free.net (William Starkey) writes:
>
>> I am writing to advise uk-rec-walking members about the increasing
>> number of wind farm applications taking place in Scotland. Wind farm
>> proposals now approach two hundred, and will undoubtedly increase
>> significantly in the future.
>
> Undoubtedly. After all, although Scotland already has surplus
> electricity generating power, and sells the extra to England which is
> a bit short, we don't want to mess up England with anything unsightly
> or hazardous we can stuff into the Celtic fringes of the UK.
Err... Objection M'lud. I draw my learned friend's attention to the debate
over the Sheildaig hydro scheme, and the comments of one of the local
councillors in favour of the scheme.
There are lots of new inappropriate windfarm proposals south of the border.
There appears to be lots of subsidies flying around, and therefore planning
applications left, right and centre. The result is that a small windfarm
appears somewhere as a blot on the landscape generating bugger all power.
As the existing power stations have to remain on standby incase the wind
drops, it makes very little difference to the total greenhouse output - a
situation which will remain until we work out how to store wind electricity.
--
NC - Webmaster for http://www.2mm.org.uk/
Replies to newsgroup postings to the newsgroup please.
KRO
"Chris Malcolm" <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:c6tnpn$5d4$1...@scotsman.ed.ac.uk...
Well said, they are ugly and inefficient.
KRO
Martin Richardson
writes
--
Martin Richardson
227/284 Munros - 20% to go 34/34 'Furths' & 439/439 Nuttalls - 0% to go
42/89 Donalds - 53% to go 0/? Himalayans - 100% to go
422/1552 Marilyns - 73% to go
oldman
> william...@care4free.net (William Starkey) writes:
>
>> I am writing to advise uk-rec-walking members about the increasing
>> number of wind farm applications taking place in Scotland. Wind
farm
>> proposals now approach two hundred, and will undoubtedly increase
>> significantly in the future.
>
> Undoubtedly. After all, although Scotland already has surplus
> electricity generating power, and sells the extra to England which
is
> a bit short, we don't want to mess up England with anything
unsightly
> or hazardous we can stuff into the Celtic fringes of the UK.
I suggest you follow the rivers Trent and Ouse along their lengths and
view the
number of 'very picturesque' convential power stations on their
banks,and then travel through
Yorkshire, Lancershire,Cumria, Northumberland,Durham,etc.etc. and see
the increasing number
of wind farms sprouting up on hillsides. I can understand your concern
about what is happening
in Scotland But it's also happening in England as well.
oldman
W. D. Grey
<alwyn_...@hotmail.com> writes
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk
Muzz
Starkey <william...@care4free.net> writes
>I am writing to advise uk-rec-walking members about the increasing
>number of wind farm applications taking place in Scotland.
We can see a windfarm from our house they are roughly between Fyrish and
Ben Wyvis. They look great, why don't you like them ?
--
Muzz
Reply to mu...@hashmash.fsnet.co.uk
Replies to slash will not be read.
W. D. Grey
<mu...@hashmash.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>We can see a windfarm from our house they are roughly between Fyrish
>and Ben Wyvis. They look great, why don't you like them ?
I love 'em as long as you can see them and I can't :-/
Adrian Tupper
news:5xBcBCC3...@graigroad.demon.co.uk:
> In article <0rLA1YCr...@bungdown.freeserve.co.uk>, Muzz
> <mu...@hashmash.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>>We can see a windfarm from our house they are roughly between Fyrish
>>and Ben Wyvis. They look great, why don't you like them ?
>
> I love 'em as long as you can see them and I can't :-/
I can see two from my flat. Just. Frankly I'd rather look at a
wind farm than a coal-fired power station or a nuclear one.
Better still, everyone except me should stop using energy.
--
Adrian
Stewart Robert Hinsley
<adrian...@totalise.co.uk> writes
>"W. D. Grey" <Bi...@graigroad.demon.co.uk> wrote in
>news:5xBcBCC3...@graigroad.demon.co.uk:
>
>> In article <0rLA1YCr...@bungdown.freeserve.co.uk>, Muzz
>> <mu...@hashmash.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>>>We can see a windfarm from our house they are roughly between Fyrish
>>>and Ben Wyvis. They look great, why don't you like them ?
>>
>> I love 'em as long as you can see them and I can't :-/
>
>I can see two from my flat. Just. Frankly I'd rather look at a
>wind farm than a coal-fired power station or a nuclear one.
There's a few visible in the Southern Uplands - one north of Peebles can
be seen from the Manor Hills, and one north of Cairsphairn from the
north end of the Rhins of Kells (and another further east, which I
couldn't place accurately - presumably somewhere north of the Lowther
Hills.) There's also a short row near Whitehaven, and another somewhere
on the North Cumberland Plain.
>
>Better still, everyone except me should stop using energy.
>
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley
Adrian Tupper
5QBAxR...@meden.demon.co.uk:
Dun Law near Soutra (on the A68) and another whose name I forget which
is further west are visible from here. These are both in the Southern
Uplands I suppose. (Lammermuirs and Moorfoots[1] to be precise)
[1] Or should that be Moorfeet?
--
Adrian
Ray
And I would also like to think that hillwalkers will be responsible
enough to realise that wind farms are of positive benefit to the world
which badly needs Green energy.
If the towers are as high as the Forth Road bridge (do you REALLY know
how high that is!!) then its no going to affect people walking on the
hills round about them then!
Here on Skye we have a bad case of NIMBYs when it comes to wind farms.
One thing NW Scotland has in abundance is wind. Some of it however is
hot air...
Peter Clinch
> And I would also like to think that hillwalkers will be responsible
> enough to realise that wind farms are of positive benefit to the world
> which badly needs Green energy.
It's not that cut and dried though... Far greener than putting up a
load of windfarms would be stopping wasting the power we already
produce, and you could save more than you'd generate from wind if it was
done as a serious program backed by real political will.
Which is why I favour a case by case basis, rather than a blanket yes or
a blanket no.
> If the towers are as high as the Forth Road bridge (do you REALLY know
> how high that is!!) then its no going to affect people walking on the
> hills round about them then!
As far as the views are concerned, yes it will. They don't build
windfarms in sheltered valleys, because they're sheltered!
> Here on Skye we have a bad case of NIMBYs when it comes to wind farms.
> One thing NW Scotland has in abundance is wind.
Not all the time according to the requirement for generated electricity
though. You cannot say that Site X will generate any particular amount
at any particular time, so it can't be used as a true backbone for the
grid. And if you try and solve the issue by just putting in more
generating capacity you fail to address the real issue, which is we
waste far more power than we need to.
KRO
"Ray" <snaz...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:6ac9970d.04051...@posting.google.com...
> And I would also like to think that hillwalkers will be responsible
> enough to realise that wind farms are of positive benefit to the world
> which badly needs Green energy.
>
> If the towers are as high as the Forth Road bridge (do you REALLY know
> how high that is!!) then its no going to affect people walking on the
> hills round about them then!
>
> Here on Skye we have a bad case of NIMBYs when it comes to wind farms.
> One thing NW Scotland has in abundance is wind. Some of it however is
> hot air...
I don't live in Skye so can't be accused of being a NIMBY. Talking of
whic if these windfarms are so harmless why can't they be sighted (pun
intended) in the cities that use the majority of power required?
I don't think any windfarm is the same height as the towers of the Forth
Bridge either, surely not :-)
KRO
RJ Webb
>If the towers are as high as the Forth Road bridge (do you REALLY know
>how high that is!!) then its no going to affect people walking on the
>hills round about them then!
>
>Here on Skye we have a bad case of NIMBYs when it comes to wind farms.
>One thing NW Scotland has in abundance is wind. Some of it however is
>hot air...
There have to be large nogo areas for wind farms, like there was for
the Hydro.. bet you are all glad that Fisherfield was left alone. We
need to keep some areas free of intrusive industrialisation if only
for the tourist industry.
There are vast areas suitable for large scale wind farming, the one on
Skye is a good example.. A lot of land is already blighted with
spruce.. Go there first. Just plan the the things, not go off in a
mad subsidy grabbing rush everywhere.. Leave somewhere free of roads
and towers.
They are still a novely and not too much of a disturbance now,but if
all the current plans come off, its not going to be too good.. And
yes, somebody will still have to look at a coal fired and a nuclear
powerstation.
As so often, the best course here is one of moderation. If either
extreme wins its going to be bad news.
Richard Webb
W. D. Grey
<snaz...@hotmail.com> writes
>Here on Skye we have a bad case of NIMBYs when it comes to wind farms.
>One thing NW Scotland has in abundance is wind. Some of it however is
>hot air...
The NIMBYs are generally the people who approve the erection of wind
Generators in someone else's area other than their own.
Adrian Tupper
@graigroad.demon.co.uk:
Yes that right. They think they're being green then. Peter's right too
of course. We need to look at how to use less not how to generate more.
--
Adrian
Paul Rooney
<adrian...@totalise.co.uk> wrote:
We need to go completely nuclear. Everything else is dirty or
inefficient or both.
--
Paul
My Lake District walking site:
Adrian Tupper
@scotsman.ed.ac.uk:
> Easy, we already have the technology! Turn out all the lights, turn
> off the heating, use head torches with rechargeable batteries while
> wearing your sit-around-the-camp fleeces.
Nice precis but it won't win any elections.
--
Adrian
Adrian Tupper
news:l6b1a0l2h71i6q5sc...@4ax.com:
When I think about the different fuel types, their effect on the
environment, their long term cost, their reliability etc I too
am left thinking that nuclear is the only answer.
I'm not comfortable with that, having always been rather a green
person, but other than what to do with spent fuel I really
don't see the downside. Chernobyl could have been avoided,
by the way.
--
Adrian
Peter Clinch
> I'm not comfortable with that, having always been rather a green
> person, but other than what to do with spent fuel I really
> don't see the downside. Chernobyl could have been avoided,
> by the way.
It could have, but you still end up with an awful lot of very nasty
stuff you can't reasonably get rid of, and we've had BNFL proving the
point by failing to be able to do much with it despite successive
governments with blank cheque books. "Other than what to do with spent
fuel I really don't see the downside" is a bit like saying "other than
all the dead people there isn't a problem with pandemics"...
One of my courses at Uni (I did Geophysics) was the geological side of
radioactive waste disposal. There isn't anywhere in the UK to put it
that meets the proper requirements and you also learn what ghastly stuff
it is.
Nuclear, at least as implemented thus far, is dirty and /very/
expensive. It only reached the level it did through misguided political
commitment.
Paul Rooney
<p.j.c...@dundee.ac.uk> wrote:
>"Other than what to do with spent
>fuel I really don't see the downside" is a bit like saying "other than
>all the dead people there isn't a problem with pandemics"...
You put it back where it came from - in the ground.
Peter Clinch
> You put it back where it came from - in the ground.
"The ground" is not a static place, and the fuel isn't in the same state
it came out the ground when you've finished with it in your power plant.
This is not a topic that really befits sweeping simplifications.
For further info, have a Google about the interesting things that have
happened putting it back in the ground at Dounreay, amongst other
places. Adding "explosion" to your search terms might bring up some of
the more interesting examples...
RJ Webb
for products of powerstations...
WHat you going to do with the waste. I'd rather go back to the middle
ages than saddle folk with that shite for the next God knows haow many
thousand years..
For the reason I mentioned flipantly above, there has been no shortage
of money thrown at this industry, and they still cannot sort out the
problems of waste disposal.
And Uranium runs out as well... They may mine it in Orkney and
Caithness.. Oooh look more trashed hills.
Richard Webb
W. D. Grey
<adrian...@totalise.co.uk> writes
>When I think about the different fuel types, their effect on the
>environment, their long term cost, their reliability etc I too
>am left thinking that nuclear is the only answer.
>
>I'm not comfortable with that, having always been rather a green
>person, but other than what to do with spent fuel I really
>don't see the downside. Chernobyl could have been avoided,
>by the way.
Why not chop down all the forestry pines/firs and burn them, they're
nothing but green pollution anyway.
Adrian Tupper
@graigroad.demon.co.uk:
> Why not chop down all the forestry pines/firs and burn them, they're
> nothing but green pollution anyway.
Greenhouse gases (or smokes) come to mind.
Actually fast-growing willow is already being used for power generation.
--
Adrian
Adrian Tupper
@news-text.blueyonder.co.uk:
> Unfortunately the tosspots that run the world have a more pressing use
> for products of powerstations...
>
> WHat you going to do with the waste. I'd rather go back to the middle
> ages than saddle folk with that shite for the next God knows haow many
> thousand years..
>
> For the reason I mentioned flipantly above, there has been no shortage
> of money thrown at this industry, and they still cannot sort out the
> problems of waste disposal.
Well the same can be said for oil and coal burning stations. Lots of
waste. Ok it's inert but it's dirty. Also produces greenhouse gases.
I read today that global power requirements are likely to rise 2/3rds
by 2030. Scary.
>
> And Uranium runs out as well... They may mine it in Orkney and
> Caithness.. Oooh look more trashed hills.
Shouldn't affect any Munros then ;-)
--
Adrian
W. D. Grey
<adrian...@totalise.co.uk> writes
>> Why not chop down all the forestry pines/firs and burn them, they're
>> nothing but green pollution anyway.
>
>Greenhouse gases (or smokes) come to mind.
Yeah, but it would blow away onto SOEBY...:-)
Adrian Tupper
> In article <Xns94E6D...@194.247.47.119>, Adrian Tupper
> <adrian...@totalise.co.uk> writes
>>> Why not chop down all the forestry pines/firs and burn them, they're
>>> nothing but green pollution anyway.
>>
>>Greenhouse gases (or smokes) come to mind.
>
> Yeah, but it would blow away onto SOEBY...:-)
Ha! Norway usually.
--
Adrian
Tam the Ham
in the country.