View Full Version : Yarrows Wind Farm
This hit the planning system on the last working day before Christmas - obviously no-one is going to be able to contact HC about this until after the holidays -
13 huge turbines in the forestry above Yarrows, and on the hill ground at the top of the Yarrows trail - lovely. Oh, roads, construction yard, borrow pit, control buildings and all the other jolly attendant benefits.
If these greedy profiteerers get away with this one, then nowhere in Caithness is safe.
This one is of internationl concern, and a website will be going live on it shortly - watch the 'Groat.
By the way, it is listed as Burn of Whilk - stop me if you have ever heard of that!
Are there not ancient cairns on the hills around Yarrows? Will they be digging them up so they can make a few quid?
And let's hope that anglers keep their lines short.....
j4bberw0ck
25-Dec-06, 14:27
Some interesting wind farm figures which won't comfort you any (http://www.owenpaterson.org.uk/record.jsp?ID=179&type=news)....
j4bberw0ck
25-Dec-06, 15:18
...but >>>this<<< (http://www.windaction.org/news/7056) has some amusement value.... :lol:
I'm sure CWIF will be onto this after Christmas.
Some interesting wind farm figures which won't comfort you any (http://www.owenpaterson.org.uk/record.jsp?ID=179&type=news)....
(IMO - In My Opinion)
it is only discomforting to those people who are (IMO) misguided enough to try and think that we need to produce enough renewably produced electricity to supply the current (IMO) idiotic overconsonsumptive amount we currently use...
this is one aspect of trying to guarantee a supply of power that will not eventually create a problem thats bigger than not having electricity.
unless that is, that your happy to have more nuclear reactors in your garden, but do your neighbours? would you rather deal with radioactive halflife (oh, thats right, you'll be dead and its your kids that will) and have a potential terrorist target? (as our current government is so great at making international friends)
or on the other hand put up with a spoilt view of the landscape?, whilst (IMO)not being able to appreciate mans efforts to cooperate with nature in its incessant need for power to waste...
I do hope you take my comments with a hint humour, i try not to be to diectly aggresive but i really cannot understand people that put short term cost before long term effect, and also analysing its place within the bigger framework.
i am not saying you aren't able to, just that you aren't.
j4bberw0ck
26-Dec-06, 16:20
I grant you that one way of tackling the energy problem is to use less; but the genie is out of the bottle and it's a little difficult to see how it can be persuaded back in.
You talk about bigger problems that having no electricity; some would argue that there IS no bigger problem than the lack of electricity. The economy, your job, your pension, your benefits, your creature comforts, your health and wellbeing all depend on it absolutely, and I'm not sure I can see that going back to a 16th century subsistence farming / barter model of the economy is going to help anyone - and certainly not the world problem with greenhouse gas emissions. The UK's emissions scarcely register besides those of China, India and the U.S.
As for nuclear power, it's cheap and reliable - the technology has improved immensely since Chernobyl and Dounreay were built. Ask the French (have to be careful with the figures here to avoid the corrective pen of Dr Szin :D ). A power station may be a blot on the landscape, but it's a blot smaller by far than a windfarm which might on a good day work at 30% efficiency and spread its presence over hundreds of hectares of land.
Of course we should be looking at renewables and trying to get the cost per kWh generated reduced - that's a no-brainer; but why not more at tide / wave power?
weeboyagee
26-Dec-06, 17:15
I've walked every bit of that hill, burnt it for the grouse, played at the back of it when I was a teenager, paddled in the burns (aye OK, jumped right in!), paddled rafts on the loch, fished (term used lightly) in the three lochs when I was younger, been right up the back to where the Toftgun forest joins the back of the estate. I have worked on the croft at Yarrows when I was younger and waked every bit of the area for the sheep. I have visited all the old cairns, the standing stones, walked round the "fort", nosied about the old croft ruins and sat many a day with a flask and a sandwich with my mates and just admired the view of our village and the expanse of the Thrumster Estate.
Now,...straight away I freely admit that I am prepared to be a NIMBY person here but I'll get my facts right first. Exactly where are these turbines going? Who is behind the project and more to the point who is allowing it? I am all for Nuclear energy and all for Wind power - I don't care which one provides or if they will ALL provide for our future energy. I believe that the future will have it's problems with whichever form of energy we will have and that it in time the future will help us to resolve the problems that either or all of the various resources will give us.
I wouldn't mind the windfarm nor the spectacle from the village - but so long as we don't have a price to pay in terms of the historic value and importance of our village and it's surrounding area - and yes, the interests of Caithness as a whole. Crikey I must be niaive if I live in this village and I haven't heard about this one - or maybe I just go away too many times :rolleyes:
Who has the answers?
WBG :cool:
Who has the answers?
Keep watching here (http://www.highland.gov.uk/yourenvironment/planning/planningapplicationsandbuildingwarrants/weekly-planning-bw-lists.htm) for the answers.
Nothing for last week on the list yet though.
The intended wind farms are to go at the back of South Yarrows farm, if I am correct in thinking. It is in fact Clyth estate which borders on Thrumster estate which intend for this to happen. Been in pipeline for a couple of years but all has been quiet until this came to light at the end of last week. Don't think I will name people who are behind this in case I am wrong but I don't think I am. I went to a public hearing about this a couple of years ago in Portlands.
I also went to the public meeting - up to 50 turbines were mentioned there, but the plan submitted is for 13 only. I suspect this is just a first phase effort, as it has to be the most contentious plan in Caithness, attracting worldwide concern, and they are definitely trying not to draw too much attention to begin with - hence the impeccable timing of its appearance in the planning process.
Neighbours had a hand-delivered notification at approx. 4:45 on Friday afternoon, accompanied by a map that was so fuzzy, not a single place-name was legible etc etc.
Tourists from all over the world come to enjoy the trail, and the peace and beautiful vistas from the top are always mentioned as being spectacular. Imagine arriving at the top of the trail, to find a forest of horrible noisy whirling things laid out in front of you.
The amount of money these will churn out for the developer is mainly through EU grants, and has absolutely nothing to do with combatting global warming.
No amount of community goodies would make up for despoiling one of the finest archaeological landscapes in Britain.
weeboyagee
26-Dec-06, 21:13
I have an offer from someone to let me know who is behind this. I need to see the plans and what's behind this - exactly where are the turbines going? Alice, I thought Thrumster was bordered by Camster estate as well?? To the south and south east with Watten estate to the west meeting it at the fence of the Toftgun forest? I take it the turbines are going up more in the direction of Bean Hill, between Yarrows and Oliclate then?
If they are going up at Yarrows Hill itself I can't see how it will not impact on the archaeoligical landscape of the village and the surrounding area?
Is the village really aware of this, do they care or what's the general mood? Is the estate involved????,.......or is this a leading question?
WBG :cool:
weeboyagee
26-Dec-06, 21:28
I've just had a look here (http://leisure.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/leisure/products.jsp?xvalue=329500&yvalue=942500&q=hill+of+yarrows&zoomindex=3®ionkey=GB&minx=0&maxx=0&miny=0&maxy=0&placename=Hill%20of%20Yarrows) (span up and left to see between Toftgun and Achairn) and I bet my bottom dollar it is indeed between the two wooded areas where the burn activity seems to be - I can't find burn of whilk on the ordinary ordnance maps.
WBG :cool:
I've just had a look here (http://leisure.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/leisure/products.jsp?xvalue=329500&yvalue=942500&q=hill+of+yarrows&zoomindex=3®ionkey=GB&minx=0&maxx=0&miny=0&maxy=0&placename=Hill%20of%20Yarrows) (span up and left to see between Toftgun and Achairn) and I bet my bottom dollar it is indeed between the two wooded areas where the burn activity seems to be - I can't find burn of whilk on the ordinary ordnance maps.
WBG :cool:
If you go to the map and scan down the Burn of Whilk runs through the words "East Clyth".
I grant you that one way of tackling the energy problem is to use less; but the genie is out of the bottle and it's a little difficult to see how it can be persuaded back in.
Thats just the forward thinking attitude that we need.... (i have no other way of phrasing this so its sounds less patronising, i apologise)
You talk about bigger problems that having no electricity; some would argue that there IS no bigger problem than the lack of electricity. The economy, your job, your pension, your benefits, your creature comforts, your health and wellbeing all depend on it absolutely, and I'm not sure I can see that going back to a 16th century subsistence farming / barter model of the economy is going to help anyone - and certainly not the world problem with greenhouse gas emissions. The UK's emissions scarcely register besides those of China, India and the U.S.
you have answered your own question... and seeing as we sell our old obsolete technology (coal) to some these other countries, i can think of no better other way but to go full steam ahead with renewables so we can then progress and hopefully sell on when the effects of our predicament start to manifest in much more prominent ways and those countries miraculously decide its time to act. (more examples of short term cost analysis instead of long term effect)
if current science is correct our creature comforts are very quickly going to change. and if we have no other safeguards in place when other aspects of global affairs goes POP as i believe they will, 16th century bartering techniques would be a godsend, but somehow i dont think our society is ready for that level of trust and cooperation.
As for nuclear power, it's cheap and reliable - the technology has improved immensely since Chernobyl and Dounreay were built. Ask the French (have to be careful with the figures here to avoid the corrective pen of Dr Szin :D ). A power station may be a blot on the landscape, but it's a blot smaller by far than a windfarm which might on a good day work at 30% efficiency and spread its presence over hundreds of hectares of land.
Of course we should be looking at renewables and trying to get the cost per kWh generated reduced - that's a no-brainer; but why not more at tide / wave power?
well... if you really would prefer a nuclear power plant on your doorstep its your decision, i personally think your mad. :cool:
I love as much as i loathe this debate, but as you can guess, anything renewable and non nuclear gets my vote as i think its a better legacy to leave our offspring, i honestly believe we have done enough damage and future generations are going to pay the price. Self sufficientcy and sacrafice are the way forward for whats in store for us, but thats just my opinion.
weeboyagee
27-Dec-06, 00:41
If you go to the map and scan down the Burn of Whilk runs through the words "East Clyth".
So it's at the back of the Hill of Yarrows from Thrumster on the Warehouse side - there's not much room between the trees and the croft houses of East Clyth there??? And from the map the windfarm would indeed impinge on the archaeological interest of the area.
WBG :cool:
Weeboyagee - Here is a clue - NPower has had a lease over Warehouse Farm for approx. 6 years - their plan has been festering away for all that time at what is called the "scoping stage", in hopes of getting access to the main Yarrows Hill area.
This is no longer an option for them. The fancy fence which cuts across the trail was erected by them - this was not yesterday either.
j4bberw0ck
27-Dec-06, 02:39
Thats just the forward thinking attitude that we need.... (i have no other way of phrasing this so its sounds less patronising, i apologise)
No need to apologise. Can you think of a way to get the genie back into the bottle? If you can, you're right up there with Jesus Christ in the pantheon of the human race.
if current science is correct our creature comforts are very quickly going to change. and if we have no other safeguards in place when other aspects of global affairs goes POP as i believe they will, 16th century bartering techniques would be a godsend, but somehow i dont think our society is ready for that level of trust and cooperation.
And if you believe that, I somehow think you missd my point. Sorry.
well... if you really would prefer a nuclear power plant on your doorstep its your decision, i personally think your mad. :cool:
I don't think anyone would particularly want a nuclear power station on their doorstep, but given that we all seem to want lights, heating, power, jobs, wages, pensions, televisions, X-boxes, computers and the like I'd say it's a given. Compared with living in a 16th century subsistence farming environment with no medical facilities beyond boiled cabbage, a life expectancy of 30, no education to speak of, and seeing 75% of children die before their 5th birthday, I'd say it's a reasonable trade.
Self sufficientcy and sacrafice are the way forward for whats in store for us, but thats just my opinion.
And you are of course welcome to it. You will be leading by example, I trust? Can we visit your self-sufficient compound?
I don't think anyone would particularly want a nuclear power station on their doorstep, but given that we all seem to want lights, heating, power, jobs, wages, pensions, televisions, X-boxes, computers and the like I'd say it's a given. Compared with living in a 16th century subsistence farming environment with no medical facilities beyond boiled cabbage, a life expectancy of 30, no education to speak of, and seeing 75% of children die before their 5th birthday, I'd say it's a reasonable trade.
Nobody is suggesting going back to the old ways.
We could think about going forwards to the old ways though.
There is dogfood on the supermarket shelves in Cardif made in Newcastle and dogfood on the supermarket shelves in Newcastle made in Cardif and the big lorries are passing each other on the M6 every day spewing out poison and greenhouse gasses to deliver it.
We could regain a lot of sanity without descending into the dark ages.
j4bberw0ck
27-Dec-06, 11:57
Yes, I have to agree with the sentiment, but specifically we were looking at electricity....... and of course, for as long as it's cheaper to manufacture in China and bring the goods to the UK, rather than manufacture in the UK, there's a problem. That's why British Coal and British Steel went to the wall.
Curse people for wanting to buy goods for as little money as possible! How unreasonable........
Yes, I have to agree with the sentiment, but specifically we were looking at electricity....... and of course, for as long as it's cheaper to manufacture in China and bring the goods to the UK, rather than manufacture in the UK, there's a problem. That's why British Coal and British Steel went to the wall.
Curse people for wanting to buy goods for as little money as possible! How unreasonable........
Well I think we could find a better solution to electricity generation than putting cabbage poultices on boils.
Caithness can grow trees, trees can be gassified, the gas can run generators and be piped and bottled for use in peoples homes. You are left with charcoal which can easily be transported the short distance to peoples homes to fuel stoves and even the occasional barbq.
On the other hand you could put up loads of windmills which generate too much electricity when the wind blows and nothing when it doesn't, spend a fortune shipping it to where it's needed or create a need for it here.
Meanwhile we have big lorries carting our trees south, spewing out poison and greenhouse gasses and passing the Calor Gas lorry at Dornoch.
Remember when they put up turbines, roads are needed to put the heavy equipment in to build the bases, other roads are needed to put in pylons to carry electricity away as they cannot be near turbines so whole areas destroyed - think hard of the long term, do not be influenced by short term profit.
Are the roads in Caithness capable of taking all the heavy machinery, will the companies repair/replace if destroyed. Who will take them down once they have past their "life" or been superceded - think of the other power source in Caithness that has past its "life".
Think of all the quarrries opening for hard core for roads etc - short term employment for long term damage.
j4bberw0ck
27-Dec-06, 19:14
And while you're at it, think of all the CO2 released to the atmosphere in manufacturing the cement to make concrete for the thousand-tonne slab each turbine sits on. Cement manufacture is the world's leading (man-made) CO2 polluter; each tonne of cement = one tonne of CO2. Total cement manufacturing CO2 release each year is 200 million metric tonnes.
Compared with that, putting up the tax rate on so-called "gas guzzlers", or switchinbg your TV off instead of leaving it on standby, is like trying to bail the Atlantic Ocean with a sieve.
I don't think anyone would particularly want a nuclear power station on their doorstep, but given that we all seem to want lights, heating, power, jobs, wages, pensions, televisions, X-boxes, computers and the like I'd say it's a given. Compared with living in a 16th century subsistence farming environment with no medical facilities beyond boiled cabbage, a life expectancy of 30, no education to speak of, and seeing 75% of children die before their 5th birthday, I'd say it's a reasonable trade.
we are bordering on the ridiculous here, i do agree with the aspect of your thinking that society will be propelled backwards a great distance, completely out of their comfort zone, but we wont lose all the eductaion since the 16th century so its pretty safe to say we wont be back in the same situation.
And you are of course welcome to it. You will be leading by example, I trust? Can we visit your self-sufficient compound?
Are you seriously asking me to outline what factors affect my decision making with regards to life? its already cost me a marriage amongst many other things.
and as for the compound, your not too far from the mark, I moved up here and back with my parent as i am going to be more able to incorporate more aspects of self sufficiency and minimise my carbon footprint than i could at my previous address.
i dont think i am right (i pray i am wrong) or any better than anyone, i have just spent way too long reading and taking an interest in the world and have decided to act according to my beliefs.
And while you're at it, think of all the CO2 released to the atmosphere in manufacturing the cement to make concrete for the thousand-tonne slab each turbine sits on. Cement manufacture is the world's leading (man-made) CO2 polluter; each tonne of cement = one tonne of CO2. Total cement manufacturing CO2 release each year is 200 million metric tonnes.
Compared with that, putting up the tax rate on so-called "gas guzzlers", or switchinbg your TV off instead of leaving it on standby, is like trying to bail the Atlantic Ocean with a sieve.
and nuclear power stations and other power generating options are made out of only the greenest materials available to man are they?
as for your other points, i think its called changing irresponsible behaviour and it will have a much more positive impact than doing nothing.
i do hope that this doesnt descend into a personal slanging match j4bberw0ck, i am not here or doing this to make enemies or create grudges.
Go easy on Jabberwock - he is probably looking out over the fields of windturbines slowly emerging from the soil of Orkney. Before long there'll be no room for people on the Isles Of Orcs....
I don't think anyone doubts that we have to find some other way of keeping the light in our houses or the warmth in our radiators - it's just the totally skewed economics of wind power which is getting stuck in many peoples craws. That and the government no doubt ensuring that retiring politicians get some nice jobs as directors of WindPower Plus PLC or WindyMiller PLC....
North Rhins
27-Dec-06, 20:36
‘Renewable’ energy schemes, at the present time, are not sufficient to supply the demands placed upon the national grid that is an undeniable fact. There is no way to ‘store’ electricity when there’s a gentle breeze coming over the Flo. So what happens when the wind stops blowing, do we then revert to good old fashioned oil/coal fires power stations? These of course are pumping co2 into the atmosphere at a pole melting rate. At present whether we like it or not, nuclear power is the only viable alternative. Times have changed since they built Dunreay. They must have done otherwise they wouldn’t have built one so close to London.
j4bberw0ck
28-Dec-06, 02:19
we are bordering on the ridiculous here, i do agree with the aspect of your thinking that society will be propelled backwards a great distance, completely out of their comfort zone, but we wont lose all the eductaion since the 16th century so its pretty safe to say we wont be back in the same situation.
We surely will if the manufacturing and resources for which we depend on electricity aren't available! Do you really propose that the UK becomes a little 16th century island in the middle of the rest of the world? In the 16th century, the UK population was around 3 million; today, it's 60 million. How do 16th-century-style social and farming practices even begin to feed that lot?
Are you seriously asking me to outline what factors affect my decision making with regards to life? its already cost me a marriage amongst many other things.No, of course not, and fwiw I'm sorry about your marriage, but these things happen when pursuing an unusual agenda. If you're actually living your views it makes you unusual and you have my respect. Most of the chatterers on ecological issues are waiting for someone else to go first.
and nuclear power stations and other power generating options are made out of only the greenest materials available to man are they?
No, of course not. But despite the intervention of people whose views I respect, such as Rheghead, I still think the jury is out on the overall impact of wind turbines when you take into account the short design life (20 years), the carbon footprint of their manufacture (not included in stats relating to how "clean" they are) and the low efficiency of their operation. Wind turbines claim to be green and eco-friendly and like to proclaim how they'll save the planet; nuclear power stations just say they'll generate clean, cheap power. The first is hypocritical, the second, useful.
as for your other points, i think its called changing irresponsible behaviour and it will have a much more positive impact than doing nothing.Good luck to you. All great journeys start with a single step. Hopefully, someone will notice.
i do hope that this doesnt descend into a personal slanging match j4bberw0ck, i am not here or doing this to make enemies or create grudges.Now this one really baffles me. Why on earth would it become slanging match? I think that's a little over-sensitive on your part, and no part of what I want in this at all. I would like to hear something rational about wind farms, though; they're the lowest efficiency generators we have and don't generate nearly enough power to be significant in the UK power generation schema but they get £1 billion a year in subsidies! No wonder they're springing up like mushrooms..........
We all know the arguments for and against wind generated power - but the point of this one is that it is in the WRONG place. Most of the Caithness schemes are also in the wrong place, simply because they are not driven by considerations of that sort, but simply to enrich the Power companies and individual landowners, some of whom are displaying a complete disrespect for the ground they own, as well as to those people who have to live with the consequences.
Yarrows is crucial to any understanding of the Neolithic peoples of North West Europe, mainly because of its untouched context.
The similar Orkney monuments are more impressive in many ways, but generally exist within a well-worked agricultural setting.
Yarrows is both immensely rich in visible remains, but the peat between hides its secrets intact, or so we think.
In fact, next month sees a programme of research using leading edge technology, to identify structures and remains below the blanket of peat.
Setting turbines a little distance from what we know is not enough - and what will the visual effect be to those who come from all ovcer the world, and in some numbers, to experience the enigma and charm that is Yarrows.
Here is R.L.S's take on it
Blows the wind today
And the sun and the rain are flying
Blows the wind on the moor and all around the graves of the martyrs
The whaups are crying
My heart remember how...
Grey recumbent tombs of the dead in desert places,
Standing stones on the vacant wine-red moor
Hills of sheep and the howes of the silent vanished races
And winds autere and pure ...
Are we in our generation going to get it so badly wrong? The quality of the Caithness prehistoric heritage is such that no money can compensate for its
destruction.
Well said Spurtle. I would agree, to spoil the surroundings of an absolutely scenic setting would be sad.
ywindythesecond
31-Dec-06, 00:16
Yarrows Archaeological Trail Windfarm has been threatening for some time now, and when it is properly advertised, you will have a chance to register your objection or your support, but there are more pressing concerns to consider first.
Camster Windfarm, just up from the Cairns, is bigger, the Planning Application has been with Highland Council for some time now, could come up for planning decision at any time, and you are too late to register support or objection.
What you can do is contact your Highland Councillor and ask him/her to explain what is involved, and then tell him what you think about it. It is his/her job to reflect the views of the community when he/she finally comes to vote on it.
When you speak to him/her, you could ask him/her to explain current windfarm proposals at Lieurary Windfarm (rejected by HC, appealed, rejected on appeal and resubmitted slightly modified, closing date for objections 12th Jan 07),
and Dunbeath Windfarm ( first advertised over a year ago, but the application was so poor it was sent back. Re-advertised now, technically a better application, but still an environmental disaster) Closing date for support or objection, 5th Jan 2007, but two weeks grace will be allowed, so you can register your comments up to 19th Jan.
Your Councillor cannot form a view on any planning matter until he/she has heard all the evidence, but he/she must listen to your views so he/she can reflect them when he/she votes.
For an on line objection form for Lieurary and Dunbeath windfarms, visit
caithnesswindfarms.co.uk , and keep checking for the Yarrows one in due course.
ywindythesecond
Any fans of the Hitch-hiker's Guide out there - neighbour notification states "application, plans and other documents .... may be inspected at all reasonable hours ... at Market Square Wick during the period of 14 days beginning with the date of this notice ... 21/12/06 - !!!!
Work it out - they open Jan 4th
I am sure HC will be reasonable and extend this - one could be forgiven a cynical slant on this re - the developer and his wily agent, Mr. Miller.
Any fans of the Hitch-hiker's Guide out there - neighbour notification states "application, plans and other documents .... may be inspected at all reasonable hours ... at Market Square Wick during the period of 14 days beginning with the date of this notice ... 21/12/06 - !!!!
Work it out - they open Jan 4th
I am sure HC will be reasonable and extend this - one could be forgiven a cynical slant on this re - the developer and his wily agent, Mr. Miller.
Not like they are trying to sneak this one in under the radar is it ? :rolleyes: ...with as little possible time for anyone to raise objections (or notice) as possible.
Reading the arguments for and against wind turbines, it seems ridiculous that they should only be 'viable' when subsidised so that they only way they 'look good' is on paper - provided you ignore the costs.
I am absolutely for renewable energy sources - I think it is critical to our future, but wind turbines are so very obviously a complete waste of time and money, are an effective hazard in many respects, could be argued without too much difficulty to be a blot on the landscape in some of the most beautiful areas of the country and it is rather unsurprisingly difficult to pretend they aren't there and just see the beauty of nature instead.
IMO it really is past time that 'the powers that be' stopped their self-play fantasies about the facts and figures and stopped the pointless domination of people under them. There are other sources of renewable energy that DO work and that aren't a useless but still humongous blot on the landscape.
Wind turbines couldn't pay for their own construction costs in terms of their output power in decades of use, they are therefore an apalling waste of money. They are a huge and hideous detraction upon the quality of the lives in the areas where they are located (which are invariably otherwise highly attractive areas).
If you are repairing something and your fix doesn't work, if you have the brains you were born with you stop trying something that obviously hasn't worked and try something else instead until you find an approach that does. Brains seem to have been left at home in the meetings approving these things.
Any fans of the Hitch-hiker's Guide out there - neighbour notification states "application, plans and other documents .... may be inspected at all reasonable hours ... at Market Square Wick during the period of 14 days beginning with the date of this notice ... 21/12/06 - !!!!
Work it out - they open Jan 4th
I am sure HC will be reasonable and extend this - one could be forgiven a cynical slant on this re - the developer and his wily agent, Mr. Miller.
I take it that it is placed amongst the "Reading Matter" attached to the back of the door of the broken toilet at he far end of the condemned basement with the bricked up door to enable you to read it at "Your Convenience"!
just to highlight ywindythesecond's post, the councillors have to reflect the views of those who have elected them and the only time people realistically get to make their objections absolutely loud and clear is BEFORE planning permission gets granted (without or without the involvement of backpocket finance).
that link which gives a bit more information is....
http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/index.htm
.
just to highlight ywindythesecond's post, the councillors have to reflect the views of those who have elected them and the only time people realistically get to make their objections absolutely loud and clear is BEFORE planning permission gets granted (without or without the involvement of backpocket finance).
that link which gives a bit more information is....
http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk/index.htm
.
The problem this time is, that a large body of our local councillors is standing down next round. Representation for Caithness is going to be drastically curtailed and Inverness is going to call the shots more emphatically than heretofore (wow! haven't used that word in a whiley)
"contrary to Policy E2 of the Highland Structure Plan as the visual impact of the proposed development would be significantly detrimental" was used as a basis for rejection of the plans to site an ASDA in Thurso.
I wonder on what basis then, is the 'visual impact' of a windfarm a vast improvement over nature's abilities ? :confused:
Oh get real folk- and stop whining about the odd windmill or two on your favourite walk. Caithness is too windy for walks most of the time and look what happens when you go down the street- you get pickpockets!
I love the windmills- they look really cool and they will save the planet in the long run- and I think we should all have one in our back yards to produce the energy our individual little homes need. I'm looking forward to seeing the wee windmills on the roof of Tesco- and on the new houses at Westerseat/IKEA.
Caithness has changed lots over the past couple of decades- I can remember when it took over 4 hours to drive to Inverness- but i bet you're not complaining about the bridges and wishing for the days of having to go the Struie route, are you? It's called progress!!!!!
It's like wishing for the days when Caithness was only full of locals- and all the young things with brains left at 18 and never came back.
The windmills (and I'd love to see a nuclear fusion plant too by the way) and wave power is the future of our planet. I'll be the first up to Yarrows to visit them- so good luck to them
ywindythesecond
31-Dec-06, 21:51
Oh get real folk- and stop whining about the odd windmill or two on your favourite walk. Caithness is too windy for walks most of the time and look what happens when you go down the street- you get pickpockets!
I love the windmills- they look really cool and they will save the planet in the long run- and I think we should all have one in our back yards to produce the energy our individual little homes need. I'm looking forward to seeing the wee windmills on the roof of Tesco- and on the new houses at Westerseat/IKEA.
Caithness has changed lots over the past couple of decades- I can remember when it took over 4 hours to drive to Inverness- but i bet you're not complaining about the bridges and wishing for the days of having to go the Struie route, are you? It's called progress!!!!!
It's like wishing for the days when Caithness was only full of locals- and all the young things with brains left at 18 and never came back.
The windmills (and I'd love to see a nuclear fusion plant too by the way) and wave power is the future of our planet. I'll be the first up to Yarrows to visit them- so good luck to them
Bagpuss
We are not talking about the odd windmill or two, we are looking at the prospect of hundreds of them coming to Caithness,and they are not the size of the ones on Tescos roof, they won't fit in your back yard, back yard size windmills are a great idea and we should all have them. These ones are nearly four times the height of Jock's folly at Janetstown, each one takes the space of more than twenty football fields. The bridges benefit all the people of Caithness, the windfarms benefit the landowners and have a little local spin-off, but it is the shareholders of the energy companies who get the real money, and we are allowed to pay for their good fortune directly through our rising electricity bills. And they don't save the planet.
It is not just Yarrows.
Also in immediate danger are landscapes at Lieurary 2 (new application), Baillie 15 (with the Scottish Executive), Forss Extension 4 (approved), Spittal Hill 31 (application imminent), Durran about 25 (application imminent), Stroupster 14 (appealed), Camster about 20, AKA Camster Cairns Windfarm (with Highland Council), Bilbster 3 (with Highland Council), Scoolary 48 (scoping), Burn of Whilk 11, aka Yarrows Archaeological Trail Windfarm (application just lodged with Highland Council), Shebster 5 (with Highland Council), Nottingham Mains 3?(scoping), Ormlie Community Windfarm at Shebster 2 (lurking), Achairn 3(approved). Melvich is under threat from Achorn Windfarm about 14 (application imminent). Windfarms are proposed at Strathy 100+, Bettyhill Dont know, and the Moine 3.
That is 307 windmills Bagpuss.
Sorry forgot Dunbeath 22, closing date for objections 5th January,revised total 329 windmills and I might have forgotten some.
When the wind blows, the Causeymire Windfarm just about supplies Caithness's domestic electricity requirement. Every new wind development in Caithness will supply consumers further south. They need the electricity, they have wind as well, they should have their own windfarms on their doorstep, not ours. And incidentally, if the windmills come, so will the giant pylons.
Do you want to know how much it costs for free wind energy?
ywindythe second
(sorry about italics, don't know how to get rid of them)
When the wind blows, the Causeymire Windfarm just about supplies Caithness's domestic electricity requirement. Every new wind development in Caithness will supply consumers further south. They need the electricity, they have wind as well, they should have their own windfarms on their doorstep, not ours. And incidentally, if the windmills come, so will the giant pylons.
What makes you think they're going to ship the electricity south?
Even with all those windfarms there will still be room left in Caithness for some heavy industry.
We welcome change- so why not pylons and windmills?
After all, caithness isn't the prettiest place on the planet, and these things liven life up a bit- just like all the other things that come to us as progress. At least this will be clean energy. Come on, folks, cheer up- the future is green (and big and white)
Happy New Year
ywindythesecond
01-Jan-07, 00:10
What makes you think they're going to ship the electricity south?
Even with all those windfarms there will still be room left in Caithness for some heavy industry.
Fred
At the moment, we have all the electricity we need here, and the power cables go South. Also, you may have heard that the pylons from Beauly to Denny are to be uprated. That is to take energy created in the Highlands South to where it is needed.
What heavy industry had you in mind? And there is a small problem here. Heavy industry tends to want its electricity all the time and predictably, not some of the time and at random.
Bagpuss, your logic defeats me.
ywindythesecond
bagpuss - did you check the stats on these windfarms ?
I like the idea too - but not when I realized that they were nothing more than a way of complying with the target for energy derived from renewable sources - paid for by Government subsidy and they actually generate so little energy that they are not remotely cost effective. It's not in their favour that they cause any number of problems quite apart from being an eyesore.
Sure there is a degree of NIMBYism when it comes to windfarms, but when they are just a way of playing with statistics, serve almost no other use whatsoever and are a blot on the landscape to boot, who can blame people if they don't want them in their back yards ?
Wave power as you mention on the other hand is a great idea from what I've read - it does actually work.
It also wouldn't hurt if some major improvements could be made in terms of solar power - the theory is great but the technology is just too inefficient. Another improvement could be in terms of battery development. Lithium Ion batteries are very good for mobile phones but they're still not efficient enough to be really useful for heavy power use, and they're dangerous.
There are whole areas in respect of energy that could do with major improvements if we as a species are to move away from fossil fuels, but huge and ugly, troublesome wind turbines generating little more than candle power in the scheme of things and in comparison to what comes from better ideas just doesn't strike me as the way to go.
It seemed like a good idea when it first came out but reality has shown that they aren't worth the money it costs to build them. There are newer, better ideas around now.
Fred
At the moment, we have all the electricity we need here, and the power cables go South. Also, you may have heard that the pylons from Beauly to Denny are to be uprated. That is to take energy created in the Highlands South to where it is needed.
What heavy industry had you in mind? And there is a small problem here. Heavy industry tends to want its electricity all the time and predictably, not some of the time and at random.
ywindythesecond
Pylons that can take power south can bring it north as well. You listed all the windfarms being built in Caithness but what about those in Orkney and Shetland, that power has to go somewhere along with those being built offshore, the power from the turbines at Beatrice will come in at Dunbeath.
I don't know but in other countries where they have a supply of cheap power in a remote area they tend to build industry, such as an aluminium smelter, close to the power rather than ship the power out which is expensive both in infrastructure and line loss.
Anyhow there's a dram here waiting to be raised, Happy new year to all on caithness.org.
Fred, I hope what you describe comes to pass for the benefit of the people of Caithness.
I've never made any secret of the fact I hate the idea of the scenery of Caithness being ruined by huge Wind Factories.
The Beatrice Site I have no problem with, it certainly doesn't intrude on any views and they can put a whole forest of them there as far as I am concerned.
Provided any industry which comes to Caithness, and I hope some does, is placed sensitively and blended into the landscape it could be of great benefit to the area and help it thrive.
What must not be allowed to happen is that the Highlands are turned into a huge horrific Power Gathering Factory whilst all the benefits gained from that energy is grabbed by others elsewhere which seems to be the present intention.
How long before we are faced with a map that looks like this?
http://img297.imageshack.us/img297/7099/screenshot4copyyx7.gif
Provided any industry which comes to Caithness, and I hope some does, is placed sensitively and blended into the landscape it could be of great benefit to the area and help it thrive.
So if the electricity generated by the wind turbines is used to create new industry rather than replace electricity generated by conventional means what is the benefit to the environment?
Boozeburglar
03-Jan-07, 00:21
After all, caithness isn't the prettiest place on the planet
If you would like to move somewhere that is 'prettier' in your view, I am sure Caithness can bear the loss of people who cannot appreciate the serenity and beauty apparent to anyone with open eyes.
:)
Sometimes we are blase about our own surroundings. There are certainly Caithnessians who feel we are losing out by not having all the trappings of "civilisation" - street lamps everywhere, our fair share of heavy industry, motorways etc - here are some words sent to Highland Council (and obviously copied to me) from someone who has all that already - I am sure he won't mind being quoted
"I live in overpopulated Belgium, where there is hardly clean air, where there is hardly darkness because of lightpollution, where there is no place where you can hide for the noises of cars and industry. I urge you, I beg you, please consider the implantation of windmills on Yarrows Hills. It will destroy a beautiful part of Scotland that stands for pureness and cleanness, for peace and beauty".
Yarrows, Dunbeath and Lieurary are everyone's back yard, and if we do do not care enough to resist the greedy developers, we do not deserve to have such a beautiful back yard. Yarrows in particular is going to send shock waves around the archaeology world, and among ordinary folk who have come to enjoy the peace and wide open beauty of the scenery around. it
Write to the planners as soon as you can - there is not much time left to give your views.
Unfortunately, there are no magical solutions to power generation..............
Every solution is a compromise. Are windfarms too much of a compromise?
Windfarms and wavepower (still in its infancy) are about the only power generation schemes that your sons and daughters can remove with little or no legacy.
Are you that selfish that you won't tollerate the wind turbines during your lifetime?
Fred
At the moment, we have all the electricity we need here, and the power cables go South. Also, you may have heard that the pylons from Beauly to Denny are to be uprated. That is to take energy created in the Highlands South to where it is needed.
ywindythesecond
Were you outside playing in the sandpit when they were teaching electricity at school?
Do you think that Caithness is currently (excuse the pun) a net exporter of electricity????? Err......... where exactly is that getting generated from?
Producing power in Caithness for use in Caithness, would lessen the need for increased capacity cables.
Oh dear!
So if the electricity generated by the wind turbines is used to create new industry rather than replace electricity generated by conventional means what is the benefit to the environment?That takes some working out, with a little thought that is!
ywindythesecond
03-Jan-07, 23:18
Were you outside playing in the sandpit when they were teaching electricity at school?
Do you think that Caithness is currently (excuse the pun) a net exporter of electricity????? Err......... where exactly is that getting generated from?
Producing power in Caithness for use in Caithness, would lessen the need for increased capacity cables.
Oh dear!
Mareng
What I said originally was
"When the wind blows, the Causeymire Windfarm just about supplies Caithness's domestic electricity requirement. Every new wind development in Caithness will supply consumers further south. They need the electricity, they have wind as well, they should have their own windfarms on their doorstep, not ours. And incidentally, if the windmills come, so will the giant pylons."
When the wind blows, Caithness just about does produce enough energy for our own needs between Causeymire, Buolfruich and Forss windfarms. When the wind doesn't blow, our electricity comes up from Beauly, generated in a mix of power stations including coal, oil , nuclear, gas and hydro. As no-one can accurately predict when the wind won't blow, none of these power stations are actually turned off when the wind is blowing in Caithness.
When the wind blows in Caithness, we pay for the wind energy and we also pay for the power station kept up to speed to step in when the wind stops.
The only reason for Caithness to have upgraded pylons would be to export electricity from here to the consumers in the south.
Hope this clears things up
ywindythesecond
Mareng
What I said originally was
"When the wind blows, the Causeymire Windfarm just about supplies Caithness's domestic electricity requirement. Every new wind development in Caithness will supply consumers further south. They need the electricity, they have wind as well, they should have their own windfarms on their doorstep, not ours. And incidentally, if the windmills come, so will the giant pylons."
Yes, you did - I apologise for missing that and basing my response on that omission.
But, if we accept that aproximation as being correct- it should be noted that the word "domestic" has been included (one would have to assume - deliberately in the report that you are quoting)
What of the "commercial" consumption? As Dounreay is no longer self-sufficient and Vulcan is also a considerable consumer, I think it will be a long time before the nett flow south occurs.
Anyone got any figures for the commercial consumptions?
ywindythesecond
04-Jan-07, 01:01
Yes, you did - I apologise for missing that and basing my response on that omission.
But, if we accept that aproximation as being correct- it should be noted that the word "domestic" has been included (one would have to assume - deliberately in the report that you are quoting)
What of the "commercial" consumption? As Dounreay is no longer self-sufficient and Vulcan is also a considerable consumer, I think it will be a long time before the nett flow south occurs.
Anyone got any figures for the commercial consumptions?
Got me Mareng, "domestic" was my escape route.
I don't know what the domestic power consumption is in Caithness. But if every man woman and child in Caithness (27,500 of them)http://www.caithness.org/geography/index.htm
used two one-bar electric fires per hour, (55000kw) they would not use the total capacity of Causewaymire (about 50,000kw,) Buolfruich, (9000kw) and Forss (about 6000 kw) windfarms.
If the wind was blowing at the time.
Simple question.
Where does our electricity come from when the wind doesn't blow?
ywindythesecond
"Simple question.
Where does our electricity come from when the wind doesn't blow?"
This is answered in the piece by Owen Patterson in para 3 of his letter - http://www.owenpaterson.org.uk/record.jsp?ID=179&type=news
3. Unreliability with illusory CO² savings
CO² savings claimed for wind energy are illusory. Because the wind blows sufficiently to generate useful electricity only 30 percent of the time, there must be back-up capacity available to make up the shortfall for when the wind is not blowing.
Up to 90 percent of the capacity must be permanently online to guarantee power supplies at all times and to avoid destabilising the grid. This effect reduces potential savings by the same factor – 90 percent. It also destroys any economic argument.....
So while it appears wind is a way to top up the useage you can't actually reduce the reliance on existing forms of generation because on those long still days where will we get our power from?
"Simple question.
Where does our electricity come from when the wind doesn't blow?"
This is answered in the piece by Owen Patterson in para 3 of his letter - http://www.owenpaterson.org.uk/record.jsp?ID=179&type=news
So while it appears wind is a way to top up the useage you can't actually reduce the reliance on existing forms of generation because on those long still days where will we get our power from?
Pretty much what I was getting at with mention of batteries.
If we had multiple forms of highly efficient renewable energy with an overall excess capacity - wind (if we must), wave, solar and others as newer technologies are developed, with the backup of decent batteries (efficient ones that could cope with terrawatts of power and which didn't lose potential very quickly (the discharging whilst sitting unused on the shelf scenario)) then when the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining and there's even very little wave energy the batteries would come into use, it would buy time to bring conventional power stations back online.
I don't think that having a wind turbine on every roof and every 200 yards throughout the UK is the way to go however :)
Renewable energy supply is in a pediatric stage at the moment - we need a lot better solutions than windmills everywhere.
I think the size and number of batteries you're talking about is just going to add to the pollution levels. Batteries are not clean to make - nor dispose of once they are no longer working....
I think the size and number of batteries you're talking about is just going to add to the pollution levels. Batteries are not clean to make - nor dispose of once they are no longer working....
Reversible turbine hydroelectric plants on the other hand do just the same job without the polution. Cheaper too.
ywindythesecond
09-Jan-07, 23:42
Reversible turbine hydroelectric plants on the other hand do just the same job without the polution. Cheaper too.
Sorry Fred, Never heard of them, how do they work?
Sorry Fred, Never heard of them, how do they work?
There isn't any difference between a generator and a motor except the way it's used. You just have a resevoir and a dam like any normal hydroelectrc scheme but you use the generators as motors to pump water up into the dam when the wind blows and you have surplus electricity. When the wind isn't blowing the motors become generators again as the water flows out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectricity
ywindythesecond
10-Jan-07, 22:11
There isn't any difference between a generator and a motor except the way it's used. You just have a resevoir and a dam like any normal hydroelectrc scheme but you use the generators as motors to pump water up into the dam when the wind blows and you have surplus electricity. When the wind isn't blowing the motors become generators again as the water flows out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pumped-storage_hydroelectricity
Is that what happens at Foyers and Cruachan, only with surplus conventional power?
Is that what happens at Foyers and Cruachan, only with surplus conventional power?
The system has been in use for some time now in various parts of the UK to store conventional power generated at night when there is less demand and release it during the day when it is needed.
ywindythesecond
10-Jan-07, 23:09
The system has been in use for some time now in various parts of the UK to store conventional power generated at night when there is less demand and release it during the day when it is needed.
Thanks Fred
This hit the planning system on the last working day before Christmas - obviously no-one is going to be able to contact HC about this until after the holidays -
13 huge turbines in the forestry above Yarrows, and on the hill ground at the top of the Yarrows trail - lovely. Oh, roads, construction yard, borrow pit, control buildings and all the other jolly attendant benefits.
If these greedy profiteerers get away with this one, then nowhere in Caithness is safe.
This one is of internationl concern, and a website will be going live on it shortly - watch the 'Groat.
By the way, it is listed as Burn of Whilk - stop me if you have ever heard of that!
This has now been returned to the developer, as there were so many anomalies and defective notifications. It will reappear in due course.
Have just looked at the plans for Yarrows/Warehouse - they intend to take a road enough to carry huge loads in at Bruan Lodge, and up through the East Clyth crofts - they haven't notified any of these folk, so have had to go back to the drawing board! Plans can be looked at in the Planning Office but are not on display in library or Post Office.
ywindythesecond
19-Jan-07, 21:27
Have just looked at the plans for Yarrows/Warehouse - they intend to take a road enough to carry huge loads in at Bruan Lodge, and up through the East Clyth crofts - they haven't notified any of these folk, so have had to go back to the drawing board! Plans can be looked at in the Planning Office but are not on display in library or Post Office.
Touch of deja vu there spurtle, just for a moment I thought you meant Forss Extension Windfarm!
Astonishing co-incidence that two windfarmers forgot they needed roads to take the turbines in, but great to see our planners are on the ball!
Hope they look at the Highland Renewable Energy Strategy just to check what they decided before they decide again.
ywindythesecond
Cant be bothered reading 4 pages but is Yarrows loch in the vacinity of where they want to put a wind farm?
ywindythesecond
20-Jan-07, 21:08
Cant be bothered reading 4 pages but is Yarrows loch in the vacinity of where they want to put a wind farm?
Yes Sweetpea
Thats a shame to spoil that place, it's lovely there!:(
Touch of deja vu there spurtle, just for a moment I thought you meant Forss Extension Windfarm!
Astonishing co-incidence that two windfarmers forgot they needed roads to take the turbines in, but great to see our planners are on the ball!
Hope they look at the Highland Renewable Energy Strategy just to check what they decided before they decide again.
ywindythesecond
This is another thing they failed to notice - the Highland Structure Plan says "Certain areas of the Highlands are of exceptional archaeological and historic significance... In recognition of this, key areas of concentration merit appropriate zonation in Local Plans as Archaeological Heritage Areas. Examples of such areas include Hill of Warehouse/Yarrows, Glenelg Lairg, Ledmore, Bracadale/Uillinish and Strathnaver"
Here is the developer's take on it
"The Council have not, so far as we can discover, ever considered designating it as an area of Archaeological Importance"
Didn't look very hard, did they?
ywindythesecond
21-Jan-07, 20:38
This is another thing they failed to notice - the Highland Structure Plan says "Certain areas of the Highlands are of exceptional archaeological and historic significance... In recognition of this, key areas of concentration merit appropriate zonation in Local Plans as Archaeological Heritage Areas. Examples of such areas include Hill of Warehouse/Yarrows, Glenelg Lairg, Ledmore, Bracadale/Uillinish and Strathnaver"
Here is the developer's take on it
"The Council have not, so far as we can discover, ever considered designating it as an area of Archaeological Importance"
Didn't look very hard, did they?
Well spotted spurtle!
How do windfarms interfere with sites of archaeological importance?:confused
How do windfarms interfere with sites of archaeological importance?:confused
We are talking about a ritual landscape of importance, and people's enjoyment and experience of it.
You seem easily confused
We are talking about a ritual landscape of importance, and people's enjoyment and experience of it.
You seem easily confused
A ritual landscape? What is one of those, what rituals are we on aboot, possibly druidical perhaps lol? As a former chairman and founding member of an archaeological society, I am confused to how windfarms can interfere with the archaeological importance of a site.
A ritual landscape? What is one of those, what rituals are we on aboot, possibly druidical perhaps lol? As a former chairman and founding member of an archaeological society, I am confused to how windfarms can interfere with the archaeological importance of a site.
Obviously as confused as a brush
Obviously as confused as a brush
Druidical crypticism as well? :D
ywindythesecond
24-Jan-07, 02:50
[quote=Rheghead;184265]As a former chairman and founding member of an archaeological society, I am confused to how windfarms can interfere with the archaeological importance of a site.[/quote
What archaeological society was that Rheghead? Time to put up or shut up I think.
ywindythesecond
[quote=Rheghead;184265]As a former chairman and founding member of an archaeological society, I am confused to how windfarms can interfere with the archaeological importance of a site.[/quote
What archaeological society was that Rheghead? Time to put up or shut up I think.
ywindythesecond
The Morecambe Bay Archaeological Research Society, we specialised in Palaeolithic and Mesolithic cave archaeology but later moved on to other stuff.
ywindythesecond
25-Jan-07, 01:37
[quote=ywindythesecond;184631]
The Morecambe Bay Archaeological Research Society, we specialised in Palaeolithic and Mesolithic cave archaeology but later moved on to other stuff.
I looked it up and it really exists! But maybe you looked it up first Reggy. Got a list of founder members to prove it? Sorry to be so untrusting, but you generally don't provide facts to back up your statements.
I looked it up and it really exists! But maybe you looked it up first Reggy. Got a list of founder members to prove it? Sorry to be so untrusting, but you generally don't provide facts to back up your statements.
There is an address there of the secretary, go ahead write to him. But what has this got to do with windfarms?
The facts speak for themselves, misinformation doesn't.
If you don't understand well balanced arguements/discussions with lots of technical content then it is not surprising you are so distrusting, perhaps you've been blinded by science??
To get back to what this thread was about -
The Yarrows plan has been returned as invalid, but can still be seen at the Planning Office in Wick.
Tried to find it on NPower's web-site, tapping in Burn of Whilk, which is the name it hides behind, and got "do you mean whelk"!.
They had managed to include ground which was not available to them, and failed to notify anyone through whose ground the roadway had to pass - not bad. Don't suppose it will come back too quickly, but the Council are accepting people's views at this stage.
Here is HC's Primary Policy par. 29 in the Caithness Local Plan (page 23 of written statements) :
"The Council will encourage appropriate tourism and educational intiatives that derive local economic and community benefit from the many archaeological and historic features throughout Caithness.
More specifically Hill of Warehouse/Yarrows, Camster Strath and Dunbeath Strath have potential in this regard for interpretation facilities which are sympathetic to the protection of cultural and historic interests.
Measures to derive economic benefit , including interpretation facilities, should respect that the integrity and sympathetic protection of the archaeological resource is of paramount importance".
Nice to see HC knows what is important.
This plan is now on display in Wick Library but, as yet, not officially advertised in the press
j4bberw0ck
30-Jan-07, 17:28
It's peripherally connected so I don't feel too bad about diving slightly off-topic..... with a Lib Dem MP in Caithness, and discussion of windfarms saving CO2 emissions.
>>>you have to see the funny side<<< (http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=157552007)
Or the incompetent one?
ywindythesecond
15-Feb-07, 19:18
This plan is now on display in Wick Library but, as yet, not officially advertised in the press
The Yarrows Archaeological Trail Windfarm planning application has now been successfully lodged with the Planners.
This is the one they tried to sneak in under the pseudonym of "Burn of Whilk Windfarm" on the last working day before Christmas.
Our planners were not impressed by either the tactics or the quality of the content, and it has taken the developers since then to make the paper and procedural work acceptable.
As if it isn't arrogant enough for them to want to foist their cashcow abominations on us, in an area which should never be considered for industrial development, they don't even bother to do it professionally.
Just picking up on the topic of energy storage, yes, the only current way to do this is by pump storage using surplus power to push water back up a hill into a resevoir the let it all run out again when demand is heavy. As I think Einstein said "You don't create energy you just move it around"
Cruachan and Foyers are the only two examples in Scotland where you have a high loch with sufficient fall to do this. Interestingly the current Glendoe scheme currently being built above Loch Ness with an approx. 2000 foot drop is not going to reverse pump and this is probably down to the complex accounting exercise involving purchase of surplus power and additional constuction costs. Caithness just doesn't have a suitable site and I suspect you'd have to go a long way into Sutherland to find one that isn't festooned with designations from S.N.H.
So Richard Branson is offering a big reward for anyone who can come up with a metheod of pulling carbon out of the atmosphere (sequestering I think it's called) and sticking it away somewhere else but the other holy grail quest must be how on earth do you effectively store surplus electricity?
Answers on a post card please to.....
As I think Einstein said "You don't create energy you just move it around"
Very true.
There is also one aspect of wind energy that no one has really thought about. And that is the long term or wider ecological impact of of turning kinetic energy of the wind into heat energy.
There have been studies that show that the area that surround windfarms are detectably higher in temperature than areas neighbouring them.
All this will probably be insignificant to burning fossil fuels in the atmosphere though.
The Yarrows Archaeological Trail Windfarm planning application has now been successfully lodged with the Planners.
This is the one they tried to sneak in under the pseudonym of "Burn of Whilk Windfarm" on the last working day before Christmas.
Our planners were not impressed by either the tactics or the quality of the content, and it has taken the developers since then to make the paper and procedural work acceptable.
As if it isn't arrogant enough for them to want to foist their cashcow abominations on us, in an area which should never be considered for industrial development, they don't even bother to do it professionally.
They have also issued CDs to the planners, library and other points where the plans can be viewed, but none of these work.
Nice one
ywindythesecond
16-Feb-07, 08:48
[quote=Rheghead;191221]Very true.
There have been studies that show that the area that surround windfarms are detectably higher in temperature than areas neighbouring them.
quote]
That is interesting. Can you give me a link to one please.
That is interesting. Can you give me a link to one please.
Weather hots up under the turbines
WIND farms can change the weather, according to a model of how these forests of giant turbines interact with the local atmosphere. And the idea is backed up by observations from real wind farms.
Somnath Baidya Roy from Princeton University, and his colleagues modelled a hypothetical wind farm consisting of a 100 by 100 array of wind turbines, each 100 metres tall and set 1 kilometre apart. They placed the farm in the Great Plains region of the US, an area suitable for large wind farms, and modelled the climate using data from Oklahoma.
During the day, the model suggests that wind farms have very little effect on the climate because the warmth of the sun mixes the lower layers of the atmosphere. But at night, when the atmosphere is stiller, the wind turbines have a significant effect. "At hub height the turbine gives an extra input of turbulence to the wind, which increases the vertical mixing," explains Baidya Roy. This brings down to ground level the warm night air and higher wind speeds that are normally found at 100 metres.
At 3 am the average wind speed in Oklahoma is 3.5 metres per second, but it increased to around 5 m/s in the model wind farm. The model also suggested that the temperature would increase by around 2 °C underneath the 10,000 turbines. Over the course of a day this averages out to an increase in ground-level wind speed of around 0.6 m/s and a rise in temperature of around 0.7 °C (Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres, DOI: 10.1029/2004 JD004763). How such a change might effect local wildlife and agriculture is not clear.
The findings are backed by real observations. Neil Kelley, a meteorologist at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado, has gathered data from a wind farm in California. "Although the wind farm was more dense and the turbines smaller we still found that the turbines tended to pull down heat and momentum from above, particularly during the night-time hours," he says. Meanwhile, Gustave Corten from the Energy Research Centre in Petten in the Netherlands is carrying out experiments with a model wind farm inside a wind tunnel. "I think the study is of much interest and I can confirm that large wind farms will affect the microclimate," says Corten.
Baidya Roy says it may be possible to modify the wind turbines so that their effect on the weather is not so extreme. "If engineers can reduce turbulence then the turbine would become more efficient and the environmental impact would be reduced," he says.
But no amount of engineering will change the fact that energy is being removed from the wind. "People tend to think that renewable energy is for free, but it isn't. There is a price to pay for all kinds of consumption, including renewable energy," says Baidya Roy.
From issue 2472 of New Scientist magazine, 06 November 2004, page 19
I could give a link but you need to be a subscriber to NS to view it.
ywindythesecond
16-Feb-07, 22:34
I could give a link but you need to be a subscriber to NS to view it.
First class reply Reggy.
So Richard Branson is offering a big reward for anyone who can come up with a metheod of pulling carbon out of the atmosphere (sequestering I think it's called) and sticking it away somewhere else but the other holy grail quest must be how on earth do you effectively store surplus electricity?
Answers on a post card please to.....
How much is the reward? trees, plants, grass? Stop paving over our yards, more grass and pants mean less carbon in the atmosphere.
Less paving also means less runoff and less flooding.
I think he has put up a reward of something like 25 million pounds.
OK, my simple unscientific brain can visualise a ton of sand, a ton of wood, even a ton of water but how on earth do you estimate a ton of gas (CO2)? If you put say a fishing net or some other container/boundary around it how big would it be? How many football pitches and to what depth would a ton of gas cover as presumably it would be much bulkier than substances you can weigh in your hand, or is the unit of measurement somehow compressed and then how many tons of coal or oil does it take to release a ton of CO2?
Can someone rewind the clock and give me a simple explanation of the measurement process and how these figures are produced and cheerfully bandied about by all and sundry?
OK, my simple unscientific brain can visualise a ton of sand, a ton of wood, even a ton of water but how on earth do you estimate a ton of gas (CO2)?
Quite easily.
There are standard charts that tell you by previous experimentation that so much gas(CH4) will create so many units of gas (CO2)
In terms of energy, it is also just as routine to find out how energy is liberated by such mechanism.
there are so many laws that can predict stuff accurately:Razz
ywindythesecond
18-Feb-07, 02:01
Quote:
Originally Posted by Errogie http://forum.caithness.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://forum.caithness.org/showthread.php?p=191655#post191655)
OK, my simple unscientific brain can visualise a ton of sand, a ton of wood, even a ton of water but how on earth do you estimate a ton of gas (CO2)?
"Quite easily.
There are standard charts that tell you by previous experimentation that so much gas(CH4) will create so many units of gas (CO2)"
Done it again Reggy. Didn't answer the question.
Incidentally, methane doesn't "create" carbon dioxide.
Done it again Reggy. Didn't answer the question.
Incidentally, methane doesn't "create" carbon dioxide.
I won't insult anyone by giving any simple chemistry lessons so unless you went to a different school of chemistry or you are just arguing over semantics then you will have a hard job explaining how methane can't oxidise to liberate carbon dioxide. If this is the level of input that you are only prepared to give then I'm sorry only for myself that I have tried this long to see if you have anything meaningful to add to the debate about wind farms.
I copied and pasted the article regarding the temperature changes about wind farms, you weren't happy about that. Perhaps you don't see an answer when you get one?
I think he has put up a reward of something like 25 million pounds.
OK, my simple unscientific brain can visualise a ton of sand, a ton of wood, even a ton of water but how on earth do you estimate a ton of gas (CO2)? If you put say a fishing net or some other container/boundary around it how big would it be? How many football pitches and to what depth would a ton of gas cover as presumably it would be much bulkier than substances you can weigh in your hand, or is the unit of measurement somehow compressed and then how many tons of coal or oil does it take to release a ton of CO2?
Can someone rewind the clock and give me a simple explanation of the measurement process and how these figures are produced and cheerfully bandied about by all and sundry?
CO2 is half as heavy again as air. A column of air one inch square going to the top of the atmosphere weighs about 14 lb so the same column of CO2 would weigh about 20 lb, 112 of them would weigh a ton. That's a square column of CO2 with sides about 10 inches and 20 miles high.
They work out how much CO2 a fuel can produce by experiment but as a rough guide and ignoring a lot of details like impurities and moisture content if you weighed the coal you put on your fire on a night then weighed the ashes you took out in the morning the difference has gone into the atmosphere as CO2.
Thank you very much Fred for those explanations.
The solid fuel fire analogy is an easy to understand picture for a non scientific mind as I operate solid fuel heating, mainly wood and peat. We are told burning wood is carbon nutral as there is a continuous closed cycle of the stuff being locked up and released again. I always replace the turf back in the my peat bank again so it picks up where it left off growing but a few feet lower down so I suppose that the same process runs there albeit more slowly accumulating at the rate of about an inch every 100 years or so.
ywindythesecond
18-Feb-07, 23:59
I won't insult anyone by giving any simple chemistry lessons so unless you went to a different school of chemistry or you are just arguing over semantics then you will have a hard job explaining how methane can't oxidise to liberate carbon dioxide. If this is the level of input that you are only prepared to give then I'm sorry only for myself that I have tried this long to see if you have anything meaningful to add to the debate about wind farms.
I copied and pasted the article regarding the temperature changes about wind farms, you weren't happy about that. Perhaps you don't see an answer when you get one?
Risking a double post here Reggy, but my response to your article on temperature changes was
"First class reply Reggy."
And I was impressed.( Didn't say so though)
No doubt methane can oxidise to liberate carbon dioxide, but I don't think that was what you said. You insist on precision in other peoples posts. You should be at least as precise in your own.
Re windfarm debate, have you read OFGEM's response to the Government Consultation on the future of the Renewables Obligation yet?
www.ofgem.gov.uk/temp/ofgem/cache/cmsattach/18363_ROrespJan.pdf -
I would welcome a discussion on that.
ywindythesecond
You insist on precision in other peoples posts. You should be at least as precise in your own.
Nothing could be further from the truth, I have never (to my memory) picked up on the imprecision of anyone's opinion/arguement/data unless that imprecision was the actual topic for discussion or it may lead to misinterpretation. What I do insist upon is accuracy based on sound evidence.
I would take imprecise accuracy over precise inaccuracy anyday.
BTW I apologise for instantly misinterpreting 'First class reply Reggy' as sarcasm, I am so used to it these days.
I can't open the Ofgem pdf file btw but I read a summary directly from the Ofgem site. Yes, the RO is not perfect, and it is under review in about 2012 I think? I doubt if it will get changed before then.
Are we not going a bit off-subject here, Reghead - surely this particular one - (this would apply to Dunbeath & Camster also) is the area specifically picked out in the Caithness Local Plan where the archaeological landscape is of a quality which needs to be treated with sensitivity and its integrity is apecifically mentioned as being the important factor.
You may not agree, but what is the use of a Local Plan, which is supposed to give local people some sort of confidence in what is to be the blueprint over 10 years, if it is then to be ignored? What was the point of all those "Planning for Real" meetings?
Has anyone considered the effect on tourism - and remember, a lot of people have been working very hard over the last few years, to enhance that aspect of economic activity in Caithness, with archaeology being one of the key aspects - This part of our heritage can never be replaced
Well my thoughts on all this are fairly simple.
There are two very distinct aspects to archaeology to bear in mind that are totally distinct from eachother, one may not even be considered archaeology.
Firstly, you have the archaeology that you get from the digging and the examination of artifacts and the general layout of a site. This is the real archaeology. Unless a windfarm's foundations are being built on the actual site which in the case of Yarrows is not true, then the windfarm nearby will not interfere with it.
Secondly, you have the heritage side of the archaeology. This is archaeology for visitors and mothers with prams. It is of immense value to the local economy but is of very little real archaeological value. The siting of a windfarm may perhaps harm the site in this context and only worse to those who are fundamentally opposed to them, which is of course only a matter of opinion.
BTW, how far away is the proposed wind farm from the Yarrows brochs and cairns?
As for the falconry I couldn't give two hoots about it because if it goes out of business then great I say because it is just a business that relies on acts of cruelty and/or captivity of raptors for the monetary benefit and amusement of humans.
ywindythesecond
20-Feb-07, 20:12
[quote=Rheghead;192468]
A) "Unless a windfarm's foundations are being built on the actual site which in the case of Yarrows is not true, then the windfarm nearby will not interfere with it."
B) "Secondly, you have the heritage side of the archaeology. This is archaeology for visitors and mothers with prams."
C) "BTW, how far away is the proposed wind farm from the Yarrows brochs and cairns?"
D) "the monetary and amusement benefit of humans" quote]
Reggy
Sorry for quoting selectively, but I hope not so it distorts your original meaning.
A) Absolutely right.
B) A bit patronising don't you think?
C) Thought you would have checked, but you might just be asking a trick question.
D) Don't you refer to landowners, windfarm developers, and generating company shareholders "laughing all the way to the bank"?
"laughing all the way to the bank"?
Yeah, just like CWIF (http://www.caithnesswindfarms.co.uk) who whip up fears about the countryside being irretrievably damaged and then advertise that they are now able to accept donations via Paypal on their website from well-meaning members of the Public.;) Pardon me for being cynical, but when money becomes involved it adds a whole new dimension to the debate and people's motives. No guarantee of wind farm planning applications being blocked, mind...
Well my thoughts on all this are fairly simple.
As for the falconry I couldn't give two hoots about it because if it goes out of business then great I say because it is just a business that relies on acts of cruelty and/or captivity of raptors for the monetary benefit and amusement of humans.
Interesting point - don't recall this being mentioned on the forum before - should you get rid of all animals that predate on their fellow creatures, or are humans the only "moral" beings?
Interesting point - don't recall this being mentioned on the forum before - should you get rid of all animals that predate on their fellow creatures, or are humans the only "moral" beings?
I would answer that fairly concisely if it wasn't for the fact that raptors that are kept in captivity can no longer be called 'Birds of Prey', more like 'Birds of Bews' scraps', yes, humans are the only 'moral' creatures in the human sense, most of the time anyway.
ywindythesecond
21-Feb-07, 20:14
I would answer that fairly concisely if it wasn't for the fact that raptors that are kept in captivity can no longer be called 'Birds of Prey', more like 'Birds of Bews' scraps', yes, humans are the only 'moral' creatures in the human sense, most of the time anyway.
Where do cats kept by humans to keep mice and rats in check fit into your vision?
I would answer that fairly concisely if it wasn't for the fact that raptors that are kept in captivity can no longer be called 'Birds of Prey', more like 'Birds of Bews' scraps', yes, humans are the only 'moral' creatures in the human sense, most of the time anyway.
Well, Reggy - you obviously have a good grasp of how falconry works - or any other subject, come to that
Remember the old adage : Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to utter and be known for one"
Well, Reggy - you obviously have a good grasp of how falconry works - or any other subject, come to that
Remember the old adage : Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to utter and be known for one"
I know enough about falconry to know that the birds are caged or tied to posts for a majority of the day. And when they are handled they have hoods put over their heads. Quite a few acts of cruelty there for birds who should be in the wild.
Where do cats kept by humans to keep mice and rats in check fit into your vision?
Hmm, gosh you have me, I don't have an answer for that. No, wait a minute, I have it, I seem to think, no I am sure that cats are domesticated animals, yes they are. They come in breeds. I don't remember seeing a breed of buzzard or a breed of kestrel on my travels. Hmm, I wonder where they get their birds from? Gosh, it wouldn't be from the wild would it? I'd imagine all that illegal egg stealing could be quite lucrative if a rich Arabian guy wants a species of his choice?
And don't tell me it doesn't go on because I know it does. And if the falconry centre takes in an unwanted bird from an illegal source as a mercy gesture then they are still allowing the demand for birds to carry on by creating a convenient disposal path for the birds for the criminal gangs.
ywindythesecond
21-Feb-07, 23:50
Hmm, gosh you have me, I don't have an answer for that. No, wait a minute, I have it, I seem to think, no I am sure that cats are domesticated animals, yes they are. They come in breeds. I don't remember seeing a breed of buzzard or a breed of kestrel on my travels. Hmm, I wonder where they get their birds from? Gosh, it wouldn't be from the wild would it? I'd imagine all that illegal egg stealing could be quite lucrative if a rich Arabian guy wants a species of his choice?
And don't tell me it doesn't go on because I know it does. And if the falconry centre takes in an unwanted bird from an illegal source as a mercy gesture then they are still allowing the demand for birds to carry on by creating a convenient disposal path for the birds for the criminal gangs.
Grateful for the answer about cats being domestic animals.
As regards the rest of your answer, I suggest you keep your imagination in check.
r.rackstraw
25-Feb-07, 16:30
I see there is now a public notice in the Groat that says the Non Tech Summary can be downloaded from www.burnofwhilk.co.uk.
I cannot find this website. Has anyone else had any success?
I have never been able to find this web-site, although I had seen it mentioned over 2 months ago now. They need to be challenged on their "incompetence" here. They also sent a CD out to those who asked for it, and of course to the planners and other locations where the plans could beviewed. The CD is unopenable or blank in every case.
This is the sneakiest scheme so far. Whoi has ever heard of Burn of Whilk?? Near Lybster?? Nearer to Wick, actually.
Everyone knows Yarrows, but it would not do to point out a location like that.
Every major scheme like this should have a title which is obvious.
A quick check of Domain Name Registration shows that the following domains are available:
burnofwhilk.co.uk
burnofwhilk.com
I would expect that this is a red herring to let the scheme go through unopposed...
Npower do not seem to know about Yarrows and if you tap burn of whilk into their search facility it says "Could you mean whelk?), even on their own web-site. their map completely omits any reference. Remarkably reticent for a company who claims transparency and good communication.
ywindythesecond
26-Feb-07, 00:03
I have never been able to find this web-site, although I had seen it mentioned over 2 months ago now. They need to be challenged on their "incompetence" here. They also sent a CD out to those who asked for it, and of course to the planners and other locations where the plans could beviewed. The CD is unopenable or blank in every case.
This is the sneakiest scheme so far. Whoi has ever heard of Burn of Whilk?? Near Lybster?? Nearer to Wick, actually.
Everyone knows Yarrows, but it would not do to point out a location like that.
Every major scheme like this should have a title which is obvious.
Some other obscure names to ponder:
Scoolary
Nottingham Mains
Akron
Durran and Tister
Achairn
Bilbster
Stirkoke
Flex Hill
Ormlie (Sorry, Shebster)
Stroupster
Buolfruich
Well, actually Npower themselves don't seem to know about Burn of Whilk . Try this one - http://www.npower-renewables.com/devsites/windfarms.asp
If you ask to search for this windf arm on their search facility, it poses the question - "Could you mean Whelk?"
I cannot find it anywhere on their site
Well, actually Npower themselves don't seem to know about Burn of Whilk . Try this one - http://www.npower-renewables.com/devsites/windfarms.asp
If you ask to search for this windf arm on their search facility, it poses the question - "Could you mean Whelk?"
I cannot find it anywhere on their site
Give npower a buzz and ask them what they're playing at. You could also ring Planning in Wick and ask them about the website address.
Even Caithness.org don't seem to have picked it up - a new wind farm being advertised in the 'Groat, particularly a spectacularly controversial one as this, surely is newsworthy enough!"
Even Caithness.org don't seem to have picked it up - a new wind farm being advertised in the 'Groat, particularly a spectacularly controversial one as this, surely is newsworthy enough!"
I may very well be wrong but I don't think I've seen planning applications for windfarms making front page news on the org. It seems that Tesco and Asda are of much greater interest to the people of this county than windfarms.
Any luck with npower or planning dept?
I see there is now a public notice in the Groat that says the Non Tech Summary can be downloaded from www.burnofwhilk.co.uk (http://www.burnofwhilk.co.uk).
I cannot find this website. Has anyone else had any success?
Try again - you might just get a surprise. Think there are going to be some red faces in the Council. Wonder what they'll do now?
Try again - you might just get a surprise. Think there are going to be some red faces in the Council. Wonder what they'll do now?
At least CWIF have wasted their money on registering a website that doesn't exist![lol] Talk about scoring an own goal!
Bobinovich
07-Mar-07, 00:44
Look closer - it's not CWIF!!!
Look closer - it's not CWIF!!!
There is a link to CWIF on the page.
Bobinovich
07-Mar-07, 00:55
That means nothing! Many websites have links to sites of similar thought - that doesn't make them part and parcel.
That means nothing! Many websites have links to sites of similar thought - that doesn't make them part and parcel.
OK, the anti wind brigade is a loose organisation like Al Qaeda then! [lol] Still, someone has stumped up the cash for a website that doesn't exist.
At least CWIF have wasted their money on registering a website that doesn't exist![lol] Talk about scoring an own goal!
I don't know what you mean by registering a website, web sites arn't registered, domain names are registered and it can be done for just a few pounds, £7.50 for two years.
As for the website it does exist, I just looked at it, I say "nice one" Mr Macleod.
OK, the anti wind brigade is a loose organisation like Al Qaeda then! [lol] Still, someone has stumped up the cash for a website that doesn't exist.
Me thinks, you had one (possibly more) too many last night!!! What are you on about?
The_man_from_del_monte
07-Mar-07, 14:19
At least CWIF have wasted their money on registering a website that doesn't exist![lol] Talk about scoring an own goal!
It does exist. Was registered on: 13-Aug-2004
Renewal date: 13-Aug-2008
Last updated: 08-Feb-2007
Do a whois at http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/index.jsp for full details.
Bobinovich
07-Mar-07, 14:36
Eh! TMFDM - I think you were looking up the wrong site. I get registered 26-Feb-2007.
Fred - wrong gender LOL!
The_man_from_del_monte
07-Mar-07, 16:08
Eh! TMFDM - I think you were looking up the wrong site. I get registered 26-Feb-2007.
Fred - wrong gender LOL!
If you're refering to caithnesswindfarms.co.uk then:
Domain name:
caithnesswindfarms.co.uk
Registrant:
Susan Munro
Registrant type:
UK Individual
Registrant's address:
The registrant is a non-trading individual who has opted to have their
address omitted from the WHOIS service.
Registrant's agent:
LCN.com Ltd t/a lowcostnames.co.uk [Tag = AI]
URL: http://www.lowcostnames.co.uk
Relevant dates:
Registered on: 13-Aug-2004
Renewal date: 13-Aug-2008
Last updated: 08-Feb-2007
Registration status:
Registered until renewal date.
Name servers:
ns0.lcn.biz
ns1.lcn.biz
WHOIS lookup made at 14:57:02 07-Mar-2007
The_man_from_del_monte
07-Mar-07, 16:13
If the burnofwhilk.co.uk site then, yes:
Relevant dates:
Registered on: 26-Feb-2007
Renewal date: 26-Feb-2009
At least CWIF have wasted their money on registering a website that doesn't exist![lol] Talk about scoring an own goal!
Think you're a bit confused. www.burnofwhilk.co.uk (http://www.burnofwhilk.co.uk) was specified in the planning application advert placed by the Council as an Npower site from where the Non-technical Summary could be downloaded. Several orgers immediately noticed that this site did not exist and it now appears that a local pressure group bought the domain name and used it for their own purposes. So - the site didn't exist when Npower said it did. Someone saw an opportunity and now the site does exist. No wasted money and nothing to do with CWIF.
Think you're a bit confused. www.burnofwhilk.co.uk (http://www.burnofwhilk.co.uk) was specified in the planning application advert placed by the Council as an Npower site from where the Non-technical Summary could be downloaded. Several orgers immediately noticed that this site did not exist and it now appears that a local pressure group bought the domain name and used it for their own purposes. So - the site didn't exist when Npower said it did. Someone saw an opportunity and now the site does exist. No wasted money and nothing to do with CWIF.
Not confused at all. My observations are wholly in keeping with yours except the naive assumption that there is no 'connection' with CWIF! The person who has registered this site has wasted his/her money! :)
People set up websites for all sorts of reasons - some just for fun or to discuss their own interests. Who's to say whether they have wasted their money? Their money, their interest. Maybe once in the dim and distant past people thought Bill was wasting his time and money setting up the .org. Not that I'm comparing the subject under discussion with this august body but people spend money, and time, on all sorts of things. I would consider buying the latest England strip (or whatever it's called) a waste of money but would probably get lynched in some quarters for saying so :roll:
The_man_from_del_monte
07-Mar-07, 17:16
People set up websites for all sorts of reasons - some just for fun or to discuss their own interests. Who's to say whether they have wasted their money? Their money, their interest. Maybe once in the dim and distant past people thought Bill was wasting his time and money setting up the .org. Not that I'm comparing the subject under discussion with this august body but people spend money, and time, on all sorts of things. I would consider buying the latest England strip (or whatever it's called) a waste of money but would probably get lynched in some quarters for saying so :roll:
You can get a domain name with 1 years hosting for as little as £12.99 so it's not exactly an "expensive" exercise. It's getting the joint optimised for the search engines that takes time (and a degreee of expertise) I mean it's all very well having a website in cyberspace but if it doesn't appear on the first few pages of a search (preferably page one number one) then it's as good as invisible........ Certainly not a "waste" of money though, many hours of fun can be had putting a website together. Mighty oaks from little acorns grow and each little candle lights a corner of the dark http://www.rock-grotto.co.uk/smilies/whistling2.gif
Funny you should say that - little acorns and oaks were just what I was thinking. Presumably even the .org was a little acorn once :)
Fred - wrong gender LOL!
Sorry, it was a name I hadn't come across before, well not for a person so I guessed.
Were you named after the place or the drink?
Bobinovich
08-Mar-07, 13:31
Sorry not me either LOL! I made the same mistake until I was put right.
NPower have been told to re-advertise their scheme. Following complaints about their "non-existent" web-site (try it again - www.burnofwhilk.co.uk ! It doesn't look like their work to me!) and the CD that no-one could open.
New deadline for comments will be well into April.
NPower have been told to re-advertise their scheme. Following complaints about their "non-existent" web-site (try it again - www.burnofwhilk.co.uk ! It doesn't look like their work to me!) and the CD that no-one could open.
New deadline for comments will be well into April.
Sorry, but all I get is an anti-windfarm thing, are you peddling misinformation?
Thought we'd sorted this earlier. This address was included in the Council's application advertisement as an NPower website for obtaining further information. Sadly for NPower it appears they omitted to check that the address was available and never got around to creating the promised website. As you say, it belongs to an anti organisation.
r.rackstraw
17-Mar-07, 00:29
I complained to NPower about the nonexisting burnofwhilk.co.uk website (which we now know has been hijacked by others). They phoned me today and directed me to http://www.npower-renewables.com/burnofwhilk/index.asp
The information about Burn of Whilk aka Yarrows can be found there.
Please remember that 23 March is the deadline for comments to be submitted to Highland Council.
ywindythesecond
17-Mar-07, 02:43
I complained to NPower about the nonexisting burnofwhilk.co.uk website (which we now know has been hijacked by others). They phoned me today and directed me to http://www.npower-renewables.com/burnofwhilk/index.asp
The information about Burn of Whilk aka Yarrows can be found there.
Please remember that 23 March is the deadline for comments to be submitted to Highland Council.
Actually its not the deadline. Npower have overstepped the mark.
Look out for next week's Groat when aka Yarrows Windfarm will be advertised again, for objections by Friday 20th April.
Npower have made such a mess of things that they have had to start again. They have no respect or regard for the people they trample over, and full marks to Highland Council for insisting they follow proper procedures.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.