Wild Land News no 71, Spring/Summer 2008

COMMENT - Windfarm Expansion Article

The Scottish Government has rejected proposals for Europe's largest windfarm on the Isle of Lewis. The development would have run almost continuously for about 70km. and would have been a dominant landscape feature across much of the northern half of the island. As well as 181 turbines, the scheme would have involved 88 miles of road, 137 pylons, several quarries and both overhead and underground cables. On the mainland an interconnector would have taken the power from Ullapool to Beauly.

In January, the Government had indicated it was "minded to refuse" the scheme. Although there was some subsequent talk of reducing the scale of the project or building it in stages to minimise the impact, the Energy Minister, Jim Mather, announced the decision to refuse it in late April on the grounds of conflict with the EC Birds Directive and EC Habitats Directive that apply to the Lewis Peatlands Special Protection Area. The Government had received almost 11,000 letters of objection to the proposals and less than 100 in support.

Although it is reassuring to see that conservation designations can be upheld in the face of enormous pressure from big business, we need to be realistic in our celebrations. Given the SNP's pro-renewables strategy, this decision was clearly an uncomfortable one for the Minister to have to make and has exposed the Government to derision from Opposition politicians. Supporters of the scheme have accused the Government of "overzealous" interpretation of the regulations, of denying the islands much-needed job opportunities and investment, and of jeopardising its target of generating 50% of Scotland's electricity from renewables by 2020. Jim Mather responded with assurances that the target will be met, and ominously, that this decision "does not mean there cannot be onshore windfarms in the Western Isles". He promised that by autumn there will be an action plan for sustainable development in the islands.

Landscape considerations did not figure specifically in this decision, and as current designations only give patchy protection to our landscapes, we must expect further threats to wild places as the Government presses ahead to achieve its target.