January 2010 - SWLG writes to The Scotsman (with other members of The Beauly Denny Landscape Group), calling for the Planning Inquiry to be reopened

Lasting legacy of power line decision Published Date: 08 January 2010, The Scotsman See other letters on TheScotsman.com All administrations are defined by the big decisions they make that shape the country for years to come. This Scottish Government's legacy could well be its approval of the Beauly-Denny line (your report, 6 January). Future generations will be left with a giant pylon line that scars our landscapes, yet wasn't necessary. Beauly-Denny is yesterday's solution to tomorrow's problem. Scotland could meet its renewable energy targets without the line. The present system can cope with the onshore wind and hydro power in the planning system and the existing east coast route can be upgraded to meet future onshore demand. As marine renewables become a significant power source in the North of Scotland, sub-sea cables will be the preferred means of meeting future demand in the South. The Scottish Government has ignored calls to reopen the planning inquiry in the light of this and other new evidence, reinforcing a sense of democratic deficit and raising disturbing prospects for all our environments. JOHN HUTCHISON, Chairman, John Muir Trust; JOHN MAYHEW, Director, Association for the Protection of Rural Scotland; KATE MAVOR, Chief executive, National Trust for Scotland; CHRIS TOWNSEND, President, Mountaineering Council of Scotland; DENNIS CANAVAN, Convener, Ramblers Scotland; DR ROB MCMORRAN, Co-ordinator, Scottish Wild Land Group

March 2009 - SSE application for a windfarm on the Pairc estate (SE Lewis) -
E-mail to Scottish Government Energy Consents department

5 March 2009 Dear Sir, I am writing to object to the revised (2009) application by Scottish and Southern Energy (SSE) for a 26 turbine, 94MW windfarm on the Pairc estate in the south-east of the island of Lewis. Firstly, I would like to state my qualifications since they relate to all aspects of my objection. I have a first-class honours degree (BSc) in a physical science from the University of Glasgow, I teach mathematics and physics to university level and I am a fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society. I have worked producing travel guidebooks (for tourists) for a large international company and I have written in great detail about Scotland, including Lewis. I have travelled extensively on foot in Pairc, so I am no stranger to the area. I am deeply concerned about the degradation and environmental destruction of wild land by its conversion into a vast industrial area with private profit in mind. Industrialisation on this scale, considering the six quarries, 20km of access roads and the gigantic and un-natural-looking fans, is at odds with our need to experience nature – and nature’s need to live undisturbed. Even reports by SSE themselves state that rare birds, including golden eagles and sea eagles which currently inhabit the area, will become rarer due to collisions with the blades and resultant deaths. My long experience of tourism tells me that tourists rarely visit anywhere to see industrial development and my argument here is that this particular ill-placed development will lead to damage to both the local (Lewis) economy and also the general Scottish economy. Industry-sponsored opinion polls are at odds with reality with ludicrous claims that tourists like windfarms and want to see them. I’ve never seen a tourist guidebook suggesting people visit vast industrial areas and readers’ letters sent to me never asked for inclusion of industrial areas in a book. The scientific justification for construction of windfarms generally avoids or minimises other important issues. The large amount of energy required to construct the Pairc windfarm, given its remote location, partly outweighs some of the supposed benefits. The release of so-called greenhouse gases during construction (such as carbon dioxide due to soil removal and traffic, and methane due to disturbance or removal of peat cover) must be considered. Energy will also be lost due to the high average wind speeds experienced in Lewis and the corresponding high frequency that the turbines will have to be switched off due to the high winds. There’s also the significant amount of energy wasted in the lengthy power lines required to transport the electricity to distant consumers, as fifteen-year-old students of Standard Grade physics can confirm (transmission and distribution losses are around 7% for the UK). This is hardly ‘environmentally friendly’ or efficient. Surely the windfarms should be located closer to the consumer, on wasteland for example, or they should be smaller-scale projects at local level? However, while I understand that small-scale local windfarm projects don’t generate large profits for electricity companies, I profoundly disagree with the implied notion that their profits are more important than the needs of local people, tourists, wildlife, the land itself and the atmosphere that the windfarms supposedly protect. Yours sincerely, Graeme Cornwallis

Beauly-Denny link: Letter to The Scotsman

Dear Sir/Madam, The latest justification from the renewables industry for the Beauly-Denny transmission line upgrade argues that the potential investment involved could help ‘lead Scotland out of recession’ and that the development represents a ‘keystone’ in the Scottish fight against climate change. This is simply wrong. The fight against climate change will not be won by the renewables energy industry or by Holyrood, but by the people and communities of Scotland. It is only through respecting and encouraging Scottish communities that sustainable development can be achieved. ‘Act local, think global’ does not mean we must sacrifice local concerns to deliver on global policies, it implies that we must encourage local action and value small to medium scale initiatives (rural and urban), which have real ‘sustainability’ ambitions. All five Councils potentially affected, the CNPA and 17,000 members of the general public have objected to Beauly Denny. The locals have therefore spoken and any suggestion that this proposed development could be ‘socially’ sustainable is laughable. Beauly-Denny is huge, with the proposals extending to 220km, using some 600 50-65m mega-pylons, potentially affecting rural areas of immense scenic value, such as Corrieyairack, and the Creag Meagaidh and Ben Alder approaches. The economic benefits of these proposals will remain, primarily, in the pockets of the energy industry, rather than being returned to the residents and user groups (which includes our tourism market) of the affected areas. The proposal would, no doubt, allow for greater transmission of energy from the multiple windfarms being proposed in the Highlands. However, if B-D is granted are we to assume than that many of these windfarms will also be approved in wild areas? This, despite a growing public aversion to large-scale turbine developments, their poor economic viability, potential impacts on our carbon stores through damage to blanket bog and the lack of a coherent Scottish strategy on energy? There are alternatives, not least the development of the woodfuel sector, the encouragement of community based ‘local’ renewables initiatives and district heating schemes and the use of sub-sea cables to support larger-scale off-shore energy developments. Perhaps it is also time to really seriously grasp the nuclear nettle? Or perhaps we should spend the money on a new Forth Road Bridge so that the public can rush north to see the last of Scotland’s truly wild and beautiful landscapes before they are gone forever? Yours sincerely, Rob Mc Morran Coordinator Scottish Wild Land Group

February 2009 - SWLG letter to The Sunday Herald calling for a national strategy for protecting Scotland’s wild areas

Letter published 1 February 2009 Dear Sunday Herald, Can we recommend your readers visit the huge Whitelee wind factory (p. 10 Sunday Herald, 18/1/09), to see for themselves the brave new way our society’s dependency on electricity will be met? Set amidst miles of bleak moorland, blighted years ago by commercial forestry, the consumer can be grateful to have this development in his own backyard, where the polluter (Glasgow) pays the price for its desires- or “needs”, if you prefer.  Then imagine just how bad such an industrial intrusion would look in more scenic parts of the Highlands, say the Pairc peninsula in Lewis (soon to be violated- go there soon, it’s amazing), or the hills around Lochluichart, at Garve junction on the Ullapool road, where a windfarm has been forced on a reluctant local populace, despite windy government rhetoric on “community led projects” and “working with the people of Scotland” (Jim Mather, Energy Minister, 23/5/07). If we don’t reduce consumption, Scotland’s landscape will be pillaged again, and we’ll get new nuclear power stations anyway. These large wind developments should only be sited near major centres of population. At what stage will the Scottish Government take the initiative and develop legislation regarding the location of windfarms across Scotland? The Scottish Forestry Strategy was a welcome addition to Scotland’s policy framework and it seems we are now past the era of insensitively located and economically disastrous forestry developments (we hope!). However, are we now to replace this form of landscape degradation with an even more unnatural form? Clearly, we require a national strategy to protect our vanishing wild country, which recognises the critical role of small-scale, localised energy development and the importance of locating large-scale developments in previously degraded landscape areas. As the taxpayer- and consumer-funded profits of windfarms are mainly flowing to foreign-owned big businesses, renewable energy developments in Scotland are failing to deliver the benefits to those affected (rural Scottish communities) , or even recognising their views. Perhaps we should nationalise this goldrush, as Tom Johnston chose to do with hydropower in the 1940s?  After all, we will need more than a few low-status construction jobs to get us out of the financial mess we are in. Yours aye, Dr. Rob McMorran Co-Ordinator, Scottish Wild Land Group,