Spittal Hill - Dumbest Place Ever for a Windfarm

[spurtle]

Comments by Eugene Walter, editor of "Animal Kingdom" in 1988, talking of the flow country and forestry, but he could just as well have been talking about turbines (see this week's Courier Archive for 1988)

"Should plantations fail to live up to foresters' predictions, the tree people can depart, having lost little ... but they will leave behind a mutilated landscape, unattractive to both tourists and birds, offering even fewer employment opportunities than before"

History teaches us that we do not learn from history.

[Rheghead]

History teaches us that we do not learn from history.

A point that can apply to renewable energy far too appropriately. 20 years ago environmentalists have been warning of the dangers of Global Warming due to us relying on fossils. Since then most years have been the warmest in the last 100.

They are now talking about desertification of some parts of Europe. Every geography student knows that there is transition of flora from desert through to temperate rain forests which in includes savannah, mediterranean and temperate grassland. If deserts are coming to Europe then savannahs are coming as well.

This April/May (not to mention the whole year) has been one of the driest I've seen. Our flow country relies on rain and more rain and is one of the most rarest and sensitive types of ecosystems in the world.

If I was in power then I'd introduce a carbon points system which includes a yearly allowance for each of us. The limit would be set by Government in conjunction with scientific rather than fiscal advice. Small users can freely sell to large users thus making money for themselves thus providing an incentive to cut down their carbon footprint.

[MadPict]

Our flow country relies on rain and more rain and is one of the most rarest and sensitive types of ecosystems in the world.

Yet you're quite happy to see it smothered and destroyed by forests of wind turbines?......

[Rheghead]

Yet you're quite happy to see it smothered and destroyed by forests of wind turbines?......

I can't see how windfarms can destroy the flow country when fossil fuels are doing a much more efficient job. The bogland plants can still grow between the pylons and insect life will not be affected.

[MadPict]

The damage to boglands by the introduction of the pylon bases, access roads, maintenance infrastructure, site drainage, is not going to affect them? Where is your evidence tht they will not be affected in the long term?

"is one of the most rarest and sensitive types of ecosystems in the world."

So plough it all up, just as they did to plant the "tax break forests", plant great number of turbines to feed the electricity hungry south with a token benefit to the local communities but with huge wads of cash for the landowners who don't give a flying duck about what goes on in the county as long as their bank balance is healthy?

Hidden Costs of Wind Turbines

[Rheghead]

The damage to boglands by the introduction of the pylon bases, access roads, maintenance infrastructure, site drainage, is not going to affect them? Where is your evidence tht they will not be affected in the long term?

"is one of the most rarest and sensitive types of ecosystems in the world."

So plough it all up, just as they did to plant the "tax break forests", plant great number of turbines to feed the electricity hungry south with a token benefit to the local communities but with huge wads of cash for the landowners who don't give a flying duck about what goes on in the county as long as their bank balance is healthy?

The area of the pylon bases, access roads etc don't even compare with the area of a forest. Yet windfarms like Causeymire mitigate 85,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide per year. Bogland grows by 1mm per year which means that the area taken up by 21 causeymire pylons will prevent 0.5 tonnes of peat growing per year for the benefit of the 85,000 tonnes of CO2 being mitigated. That is a good trade off eh?

Mind you, I don't advocate placing windfarms actually on bog, there are other areas such as heathland and arable farm that can be better.

[MadPict]

So you have no evidence that long term damage will be done?

Sounds like a good system. Let's just build them, use them and if the peat bogs get damaged it was worth the pathetic amount it will take off the UK's carbon emissions......

[Rheghead]

So you have no evidence that long term damage will be done?

Where is the long term damage going to come from? I've already pointed out the long term damage posed by excessive reliance on fossil fuels.

By the way, did you know that the biggest single contribution that you can seriously do to preserve the countryside (and regain lost ecosystem types) and to reduce carbon emissions is simply achieved by changing to a meatfree diet?

Are you willing to make the change?

Afterall energy useage is a symptom of 1st world greed.

[MadPict]

I followed a meat free diet for about five years. The smell of BBQing burgers got to much in the end......

And I may eat meat once or twice a week now.

Trouble is, following a meat free diet is all well and good - but unless you also follow a "UK sourced food" only diet you are still adding to global warming.

I try to pick only UK veg and fruit when I shop. Luckily my local shop stocks "East Anglian Grown" veg so I know it has only travelled a few miles instead of the 1000's that many others have.

Where does your fruit and veg come from Rheghead?

I'm sorry that I do not subscribe to your green energy at any costs mantra - I see a place for wind energy but not in the last few remaining areas of wilderness in this country. just because no-one lives there or it is flat barren landscape does not mean it is OK to stick 100's of wind turbines on it.
Once you decide that the countryside is just a place to stick things you don't want in your back yard then the countryside is lost.

[KittyMay]

I'm sorry that I do not subscribe to your green energy at any costs mantra - I see a place for wind energy but not in the last few remaining areas of wilderness in this country. just because no-one lives there or it is flat barren landscape does not mean it is OK to stick 100's of wind turbines on it.
Once you decide that the countryside is just a place to stick things you don't want in your back yard then the countryside is lost.

Hear, hear, Madpict.

[rupert]

By the way, did you know that the biggest single contribution that you can seriously do to preserve the countryside (and regain lost ecosystem types) and to reduce carbon emissions is simply achieved by changing to a meatfree diet?

You may have a point here but that would put all the livestock farmers out of business. So we now have no tourist industry because the Highlands is one big windfarm and no livestock farmers either. Oh dear!

But to get back to the original point of this thread - Spittal Hill, the dumbest place ever for a windfarm - if you too think it is the dumbest place for a windfarm go to www.spittalwindfarmopposition.co.uk where there now is an online objection facility. All objections have to be in before the deadline of 1 June 2007

[Tilter]

Ahem,
Back to the point of the original thread, ladies and gents and avatars, I see I can now happily object to said Dumbest Place Ever for Windfarm on Spittal Hill by objecting on-line at http://www.spittalwindfarmopposition.co.uk/ and we must do so before 1st June. You going to object Rheggers? You should, because tomorrow I'm going to list all the stuff you've said I agree with 100 %. Signing off with cliffhanger as time for bed.

[ywindythesecond]

The area of the pylon bases, access roads etc don't even compare with the area of a forest. Yet windfarms like Causeymire mitigate 85,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide per year. Bogland grows by 1mm per year which means that the area taken up by 21 causeymire pylons will prevent 0.5 tonnes of peat growing per year for the benefit of the 85,000 tonnes of CO2 being mitigated. That is a good trade off eh?

Mind you, I don't advocate placing windfarms actually on bog, there are other areas such as heathland and arable farm that can be better.

Hi Reggy
Can you please explain using sums how windfarms like Causeymire mitigate 85,000 tons of carbon dioxide per year.
ywindythesecond

[Rheghead]

Hi Reggy
Can you please explain using sums how windfarms like Causeymire mitigate 85,000 tons of carbon dioxide per year.
ywindythesecond

I took the figure from the CREF website.

[ywindythesecond]

I took the figure from the CREF website.

Must be right then.

[spurtle]

The point about these things is that they are in the wrong place. We have all heard the pros and cons of wind farms, but the locations are decided by who comes forward with an offer of land, in exchange for a whack of money.

There then begins a propaganda offensive on the part of the wind farm company, while the landowner sits there and hopes everyone will be fooled by the misinformation that is disseminated, so tha he can then cash in.

Fake montages, inadequate surveys - they always specify the cheapest and most cursory surveys available (carried out by qualified people, who are generally pulled out at assessment stage, when a "competent person" who can cut and paste, will be employed for a day, to put the company's slant on the findings.

The party that has the most to gain produces the "information" to support his plan.

If we meekly accept the sort of rubbish that comes out, then, as Gordon Campbell would say, they have made asses of us.

Since when were the power companies leading the charge to save the environment??
Filling their pockets at our expense is more the idea they had in mind.

They will leave when the inducements come to an end, which will be sooner than you think, and what then??

A disfigured landscape, no tourism, and so more unemployment. Oh, there's always Tesco, I suppose.

[MadPict]

Seems like my tongue in cheek graphic about the future look for Caithness might be not so far from the truth....

[Rheghead]

I followed a meat free diet for about five years. The smell of BBQing burgers got to much in the end......

And I may eat meat once or twice a week now.

Trouble is, following a meat free diet is all well and good - but unless you also follow a "UK sourced food" only diet you are still adding to global warming.

I try to pick only UK veg and fruit when I shop. Luckily my local shop stocks "East Anglian Grown" veg so I know it has only travelled a few miles instead of the 1000's that many others have.

Where does your fruit and veg come from Rheghead?

I'm sorry that I do not subscribe to your green energy at any costs mantra - I see a place for wind energy but not in the last few remaining areas of wilderness in this country. just because no-one lives there or it is flat barren landscape does not mean it is OK to stick 100's of wind turbines on it.
Once you decide that the countryside is just a place to stick things you don't want in your back yard then the countryside is lost.

So you would be in favor of windfarms if they were financially neutral?

[spurtle]

Seems like my tongue in cheek graphic about the future look for Caithness might be not so far from the truth....



http://www.highland.gov.uk/NR/rdonly...nd_aug2006.pdf

Yup! looks like a nasty rash to me. We'd better do something about us - wouldn't want to get too near anyway

[olivia]

The point about these things is that they are in the wrong place. We have all heard the pros and cons of wind farms, but the locations are decided by who comes forward with an offer of land, in exchange for a whack of money.

There then begins a propaganda offensive on the part of the wind farm company, while the landowner sits there and hopes everyone will be fooled by the misinformation that is disseminated, so tha he can then cash in.

Fake montages, inadequate surveys - they always specify the cheapest and most cursory surveys available (carried out by qualified people, who are generally pulled out at assessment stage, when a "competent person" who can cut and paste, will be employed for a day, to put the company's slant on the findings.

The party that has the most to gain produces the "information" to support his plan.

If we meekly accept the sort of rubbish that comes out, then, as Gordon Campbell would say, they have made asses of us.

Since when were the power companies leading the charge to save the environment??
Filling their pockets at our expense is more the idea they had in mind.

They will leave when the inducements come to an end, which will be sooner than you think, and what then??

A disfigured landscape, no tourism, and so more unemployment. Oh, there's always Tesco, I suppose.

Well said Spurtle!
Come on all you .orgers go to www.spittalwindfarmopposition.co.uk for an online objection form (or downloadable one) that you can use to stop the rot. Object to this 30 turbine windfarm proposed for Spittal Hill in the middle of your county - local opposition is our strongest weapon.