View Full Version : Any one else find this a bit of an anathema?
Many will be aware of the new Route 500 that has been featured in The Press, Landward and other media outlets including The Tourist Board.
I had understood this to be a promotion of the scenic route through the remote west, north west and north highlands where it passes amongst some of Scotland's most wild and beautiful country from Assynt through Durness, Eribol and east as far as Groats.
I had the good fortune to travel along it earlier in the year and midgies apart, I have to agree that in places it is stunning, at it's least wild if nothing else with some great views of eagles and other iconic wild life.
I was therefore more than a little surprised to read about the latest wind farm application on the slopes of Drumholistan which is an unspoilt area of blanket bog on the western edge of the county and that I had been lead to believe was to be protected by Holyrood as a wild area as it has loch and lochans that are a haven for migrating and indigenous birds.
It's no good promoting the unspoilt nature of the route if development is to allowed ad lib along it.
The North Coast 500 is hardly new, it has basically been there since roads were laid.
There are many other developed areas along the route and I cannot see another wind farm doing anything to prevent someone travelling the most scenic and entertaining roads the country has to offer.
Do you not think that there are enough wind farms in Caithness already? Surely it would be better and more cost efficient to add to the existing ones rather than to start work on a fresh site where they have to put in the infrastructure to support them.
Do you not think that there are enough wind farms in Caithness already? Surely it would be better and more cost efficient to add to the existing ones rather than to start work on a fresh site where they have to put in the infrastructure to support them.
Yes I do think that Caithness has enough wind farms, the one mentioned is not in Caithness though.
I am no expert on the matter but I would have thought that for instance a 50Mw wind farm will only have installed the infrastructure to handle 50Mw, therefore to extend they would need to upgrade what in in place anyway which may involve a costly shutdown to the existing development. Plus it is likely that the proposed development is by another company with no connection to the existing sites.
Bystander1
24-Oct-15, 14:23
Yes I do think that Caithness has enough wind farms, the one mentioned is not in Caithness though.
I am no expert on the matter but I would have thought that for instance a 50Mw wind farm will only have installed the infrastructure to handle 50Mw, therefore to extend they would need to upgrade what in in place anyway which may involve a costly shutdown to the existing development. Plus it is likely that the proposed development is by another company with no connection to the existing sites.
So if not in Caithness where exactly is the location ?. Apparently the developers & Highland Council think its in Caithness but what do they know ?
So if not in Caithness where exactly is the location ?. Apparently the developers & Highland Council think its in Caithness but what do they know ?
Oops my apologies, I was thinking of the WPD-UK development.
But as said earlier, Caithness has a fair number of wind farms already but why should that prevent more being built.
We have plenty houses but wouldn't object to another.
Anyway to get things back on thread topic, this development will in no way affect the popularity of NC500
Just because Caithness has a "fair number of wind farms already" doesn't mean that it's right to put in more. I live near Lybster and Eon are proposing to put in a large number of turbines where the forest is now. They will be directly in my line of sight every time I look through my window and the area and local wildlife will be devastated, and as for property prices, would you want to live next to a wind farm? That's all before the things start turning.
Just because Caithness has a "fair number of wind farms already" doesn't mean that it's right to put in more. I live near Lybster and Eon are proposing to put in a large number of turbines where the forest is now. They will be directly in my line of sight every time I look through my window and the area and local wildlife will be devastated, and as for property prices, would you want to live next to a wind farm? That's all before the things start turning.
1. It doesn't make it wrong to install more either, we have our green commitments to make.
2. You have no right to a view, unless you buy the view.
3. I am sure they will be required to do an assessment on the impact to wildlife.
4. I do live adjacent to a wind farm.
sorry,how green is it to create a moon scape where no vegetation, can grow due to 'best practise' of mulching all trees to form a ground covering,therefore displacing animals such as foxes,birds of prey and deer.camster 1 windfarm is a tital disgrace to nature and a fantastic example of greed over true green issues.yes an evironmental impact assessment will have been done,oooh by they company that is putting up the turbines.honesty how truthful would that report be.with regard to expanding an established wind farm yes you can do it regardless of the initial plans.this is how camster 1 and then extension camster 2 plus the proposed lybster wind farm will all feed into the grid,thro mybster.please don't be brain washed ,think it all thro.what legacy are we leaving to our children.oh yes a scrap heap of useless Chinese steel turbines.
Blanket bog also contains enormous amounts on CO2 , the very greenhouse gas that we are supposed to be cutting back on, that's why there were proposals to prevent any further developments in such areas as the amount being released during construction could well out weigh the amount saved during the short life of a wind farm.
Blanket bog also contains enormous amounts on CO2 , the very greenhouse gas that we are supposed to be cutting back on, that's why there were proposals to prevent any further developments in such areas as the amount being released during construction could well out weigh the amount saved during the short life of a wind farm.
Surely if these proposals have been proven correct then the application will be knocked back.
But regardless of a persons viewpoint on the topic or if they get the nod or not, to get the thread back on topic AGAIN, they will not affect the NC500 one iota.
It already has, my daughter was horrified to see one of her favourite views destroyed and have heard other visitors also complaining.
I too now choose my route west with care to avoid seeing the things although Strathy South is visible for miles and not only on R500.
This must impact on businesses as I cannot be the only one.
There's just a slight difference in building a house and building a wind farm don't you think ?
There's just a slight difference in building a house and building a wind farm don't you think ?
Yeah, one generates power the other consumes it
views evolve, many years ago folk were up in arms about those unsightly electricity pylons, now we accept they are a required device to supply our electricity needs.
Like all things, it's a matter of perspective. I know of houses that are now derelict because they were unsold due to the pylon next to them.
If there were not the subsidies then the energy companies would not be building the wind farms. They are not doing it to improve the planet, they are doing it to line their pockets. It seems to me to be very short sighted when you concentrate on one type of energy production when there are many others and as you concentrate on the one, the others are then going to cost more as less money is put in to them.
Like all things, it's a matter of perspective. I know of houses that are now derelict because they were unsold due to the pylon next to them.
If there were not the subsidies then the energy companies would not be building the wind farms. They are not doing it to improve the planet, they are doing it to line their pockets. It seems to me to be very short sighted when you concentrate on one type of energy production when there are many others and as you concentrate on the one, the others are then going to cost more as less money is put in to them.
Do you think that the national grid should not have been constructed then, how about the road and rail networks?
Perhaps we should all go back to a less complicated time, get ourselves a small croft and live off the land, off grid of course, fetching water from the well and bathing weekly in a tin bath in front of the fire.
You are correct the energy companies would not be touching wind or tidal energy without the subsidies, however the UK has bought into renewable energy and have made it attractive to companies to build them.
The energy firms have no moral obligation to anyone, they want to make profit as per any other business in the world.
Perhaps the landowner should be blamed after all they are selling / leasing the land to these companies to build the wind farms without a care in the world for their own neighbors, but then again most of the landowners are also businessmen trying to make a profit.
Of course I'm not against the national grid or the road and rail networks and I'm also old enough to remember living in a house with an outside toilet and bathing in a tin bath in front of the fire. I'm not suggesting going back to it. I'm not against progress just not at any cost.
I'm not against businessmen or energy companies making a profit but we all have a moral obligation not to destroy the countryside, what's the point of "green" energy if we destroy the planet to get it?
Of course I'm not against the national grid or the road and rail networks and I'm also old enough to remember living in a house with an outside toilet and bathing in a tin bath in front of the fire. I'm not suggesting going back to it. I'm not against progress just not at any cost.
I'm not against businessmen or energy companies making a profit but we all have a moral obligation not to destroy the countryside, what's the point of "green" energy if we destroy the planet to get it?
No one is suggesting installing turbines on every bit of available space on the planet though are they.
What will really destroy the planet is the continued overuse and dependency of carbon fuels.
I didn't say we should be dependant on carbon fuels, there are other options than wind power. Taken to the extreme, at present it's reported that wind produces 10% of the UK electricity so to go 100% means nine more turbines for every one that's currently in operation. What is the working life of a wind farm? Who is responsible for the removal of "dead" turbines? Will they just be left to rot?
What is so wrong with nuclear? We used to be leaders in the field but now the anti-nuclear brigade seem to have the upper hand. Or there's hydro-electric, we've had more than enough rain to keep the turbines going.
I didn't say we should be dependant on carbon fuels, there are other options than wind power. Taken to the extreme, at present it's reported that wind produces 10% of the UK electricity so to go 100% means nine more turbines for every one that's currently in operation. What is the working life of a wind farm? Who is responsible for the removal of "dead" turbines? Will they just be left to rot?
What is so wrong with nuclear? We used to be leaders in the field but now the anti-nuclear brigade seem to have the upper hand. Or there's hydro-electric, we've had more than enough rain to keep the turbines going.
Correct me if I am wrong but have we not just made an agreement with China to build us some more reactors?
The decommissioning of the wind farms will all be tied up in the contracts, the same as anything else. What makes you think they would be left to rot?
The working life of a windfarm will be open ended I guess, if you change out the turbines as required then they could go on as long as you wanted really, its a case of maintenance isn't it, the wind isn't going anywhere any time soon.
...the wind isn't going anywhere any time soon.
The wind is always going somewhere, otherwise it is not wind... :lol:
The wind is always going somewhere, otherwise it is not wind... :lol:
great point, well made
I asked the same question.
I don't understand this aversion to nuclear power, it may be costly to build a station and there are the problems with the disposal of waste but at the end of the day it's a relatively clean form of energy if it is properly managed and maintained and has a much longer life span than a wind farm and as science progresses there may well be solutions to the problem.
I would also advocate all new builds having solar panels as a matter of course, small hydro systems where there is a suitable water supply.
Most of all I would advocate turning that switch off, using the wind , not the tumble dryer, get every light fitted with energy saving bulbs, shop once a week or even better once every two and leave the car on the drive when the trip is within walking distance.
But I digress from the topic.
great point, well made
I read with great interest about all the wind turbine issues and realise that if we don't have these things, eventually we will run out of power. I don't like them especially when they are placed in areas of outstanding beauty. I am going to have hundreds of them near to me but out to sea. That is not what attracted me to move here 17 years ago. In the early years when somebody sneezed the power went out. Over the years it got better, but now with the storms we have had and probably will continue to have the electricity companies, government bodies should be made to realise that action has to be taken to protect local supplies, hopefully burying cable so that trees being blown over cannot bring down power lines. I am lucky I have a generator but I have heard of people being without power for three to six days during the last big one.
This is not acceptable. Interested to hear everyone's comments. Maybe we should form a pressure group. It is time money was invested in our beautiful county.
Rant over.
I asked the questions because I don't know the answers and I was taught that was the way to find out. As for being left to rot, every other unused building or construction locally seems to be left to rot, why not wind turbines. Is it so expensive here to get buildings repaired that it's cheaper to build a new one ? As for China building us some reactors, why can't we build them, but then, if we did, it would probably be over time and over budget I suppose. I just think that it's so short sighted to concentrate on one form of power generation, wind farms are being used as a quick fix.
I asked the questions because I don't know the answers and I was taught that was the way to find out. As for being left to rot, every other unused building or construction locally seems to be left to rot, why not wind turbines. Is it so expensive here to get buildings repaired that it's cheaper to build a new one ? As for China building us some reactors, why can't we build them, but then, if we did, it would probably be over time and over budget I suppose. I just think that it's so short sighted to concentrate on one form of power generation, wind farms are being used as a quick fix.
We are building Nulcear, Wind and Tidal energy systems at present, how is that one form of power generation?
The Chinese firm will have won the tender to build the Nuclear reactors, its not just a case of handing the contract to a UK bidder, they have to be offered internationally so all can bid and the best tender wins the gig.
The only reason to build windfarms is to make money for the developers and landowners. No-one has ever proved that they reduce carbon emissions, not least due to the back-up required when the wind doesn't blow, which actually happens quite a lot. Then there's the transportation of parts, construction etc. Just because you see blades turning, it doesn't mean the turbines are generating. They could easily be using electricity because the blades can't be left still too long. Caithness does have far too many windfarms. There are some consented along the A9 which are not yet constructed. They are paid millions to switch off when the energy is not needed http://www.ref.org.uk/constraints/indexbywf.php - nearly £157m. in the UK to date, mostly in Scotland. That's one of the problems, they are unpredictable and intermittent. They are allowed to kill protected species which would have others prosecuted. As to Drum Hollistan, the windfarm straddles the road so apart from being unsightly (like Baillie) it will be dangerous due to driver distraction. Interesting that a windfarm near Alex Salmond's home village was refused - wonder why?
Good to see you badger.
I was reading a report today on another forem which at a glance seemed to support wind farms but when looked at in more detail it actually went for solar panels as the most effective and most widely supported alternative energy.
Now if all houses with an appropriate facing roof had said panels and it was compulsory on all new builds it would save many a blot on the landscape.
I live in a house that faces onto route 500 but our solar panels are on the south side and can only been seen from our immediate neighbours (4) so they are not a blot on the landscape and have proved to be a very wise investment.
I do not understand why they keep reducing the feed in tariff especially when I understand that it is now possible to have panels that are part of the roof and not an addition.
Good to see you badger.
I was reading a report today on another forem which at a glance seemed to support wind farms but when looked at in more detail it actually went for solar panels as the most effective and most widely supported alternative energy.
Now if all houses with an appropriate facing roof had said panels and it was compulsory on all new builds it would save many a blot on the landscape.
I live in a house that faces onto route 500 but our solar panels are on the south side and can only been seen from our immediate neighbours (4) so they are not a blot on the landscape and have proved to be a very wise investment.
I do not understand why they keep reducing the feed in tariff especially when I understand that it is now possible to have panels that are part of the roof and not an addition.
The feed in tariff was introduced to encourage the homeowner to invest in solar systems, which they have done.
It is now costing the government a lot in payouts so they have cut it.
Same really as the subsidy for new windfarms
It's no good asking us all to be fuel efficient, use green energy etc if the government is not prepared to put their money where their mouth is.
Okay, wishful thinking on my part NO government EVER puts money where their mouth is .
Hi Lizz ! Looks as if it's going to be a bad winter http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11975069/Power-plant-breakdowns-force-National-Grid-to-issue-alert.html Crazy energy policies of both governments with no thought of the consequences.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.