No more damaging onshore wind farms on the fragile uplands

Large numbers of built windfarms are causing significant damage to the Scottish Highlands. Building turbines on upland peat sites should be stopped immediately. There is a biodiversity crisis. There is no point rushing to achieve net zero if you destroy your biodiversity in the process.

Why the contribution is important

Because of the huge damage to fragile uplands and carbon storing peat deposits that is being perpetrated. Additionally it is divisive for highland communities who are pitted against each other. Small numbers of people are usually in favour, primarily due to bribery and the promise of jobs etc. Many many more people are against them and many communities already have enough. People need to be listened to which we are often told is the case, for example when independence is discussed. All too often the views of local communities are overridden. Small communities rarely have time and resources to take on professional full-time company emloyees.

by tomny on September 01, 2022 at 03:58PM

Current Rating

Average rating: 3.0
Based on: 6 votes

Comments

  • Posted by NeilB1 September 02, 2022 at 08:11

    Totally disagree. Scotland can power the whole country using solar, hydro, tidal, wind and heat pumps several times over and dramatically reduce our dependence on fossil fuels, which has to be priority. Turbines can be dismantled, used second hand or with more advanced technologies recycled too. Landscapes can be restored. We can couple our renewables efforts - and I advocate most strongly a community-owned renewable energy revolution as a matter of urgency - with mass rewilding projects and huge reduction in meat and sheep farming to increase natural carbon sinks.

  • Posted by tomny September 02, 2022 at 10:21

    Whi isn't it? How are heat pumps for example to power the whole country many times over?Turbines use a huge amount of power in their manuacture. Scotland hasn't even achieved its own wind manufacturing industry. Nearly all are imported (on fossil fuel powered ships and driven by diesel powered lorries). All that have gone in to date are non-recyclable. While currently damaged landscape should be restored, it is mad to damage more, and say, oh it is alright we can restore it later. Do you not get what a biodiversity crisis is? it is one side of the same coin (called Climate Change), with net zero as the other. Perhaps you should look at recent research from Aberdeen university which shows that windfarm companies havve been conning the public and that in many cases the carbon cost of windfarms is similar to oil and gas power producing plant. They have simply been ignoring the true cost.

  • Posted by Tony September 03, 2022 at 13:20

    What I was surprised about when looking at this is that there appears to be lots of different standards regarding measuring the damage that turbines cause in terms of depth of peat affected etc.. Different companies use different standards.

    Surely there should be a standard approach?

    Although I am non-committal on whether we should build or not build on peat sites without more information I do agree that care has to be taken to ensure that irreversible damage is not caused and that the loss of the carbon retained in the damaged peat doesn't exceed that saved by the turbines.

  • Posted by carolynburch September 04, 2022 at 10:36

    No solution is harmless, but unless we scale up non-fossil fuel proven tech, we won't achieve any form of transition. I agree there should be better transparency and regulation around new tech, and that jobs within Scotland arising from new renewables tech should be maximised (though we probably need to be able to allow more immigration to achieve this too!). Circular Economy standards should be rigorously applied to new tech developments. But the urgent thing is to optimise use of proven non fossil fuel tech (NOT putting our trust in fantastical unproven tech such as BECCs which are decades from being of any at-scale use.

  • Posted by RichardRaggett September 04, 2022 at 11:12

    We have no perfect solution to the crises of climate and the health of plane earth. There seems to be a great danger that we will end up continuing to drill for new oil and rely on the unproven technologies designed to capture and store carbon emissions or remove them from the air.

    We have to face these compromises. We are playing catch-up with the climate and losing the race at the moment.

    For me it is important to maximise the use of proven technology such as wind power so I'm against a blanket cessation of onshore wind farms. I know peat restoration is essential in Scotland (and globally important as Scotland has one of the largest peat reserves, I think). I suppose to have trust in a decision comes from complete openness in the process leading to it - all citizens affected should be able to understand how a decision has been made and have a voice in that decision.

  • Posted by elliottait September 05, 2022 at 13:55

    I struggle with the concept that peatland cannot be recovered once disturbed. The Scottish Government has made large investments into peatland restoration over the years. The restoration time for peatlands has been well studied and found to be around 10 years, in some cases sooner. I live somewhere in Scotland that is essentially widespread peatland throughout the area. We are in the process of large windfarm developments taking place. This concept that once disturbed, that's it, its ruined is untrue. Vast areas of the peatland in my area are already degraded through natural causes and due to our changing climate will decrease in its ability to become a carbon sink.
    All that being said, it would be better to avoid disturbing peatland due to the vast amounts of methane that are exuded. However Methane's residency time and half life potency is significantly less than CO2 . In a nutshell, you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet.

  • Posted by JC1966 September 05, 2022 at 14:04

    Agree, wind farms should not be built on pristine peatlands or even slightly damaged peatlands. Having been involved in peat restoration in a small way I have seen with my own eyes how hard it is to start to repair damaged peatlands which are Scotland's greatest carbon sink. Tidal power for instance is far less carbon intense in its construction and more reliable in its power production.

  • Posted by tomny September 06, 2022 at 14:37

    This is a reply to all who have made comments on my original post. A few items for clarification. The loss of carbon from peat takes many years to pay for. It takes about 10 years to produce about 1 cm of peat under optimal conditions, 1mm per year! Industrial turbine site owners dig up huge quantities of peat and replace with concrete - a costly CO2 product. There are numerous degraded peatlands, very few of which are being restored. This is good but the Scottish Government in particular is paying millions for this work whilst allowing companies to destroy peatland elsewhere. Crazy.

    I am not against wind power but very much putting turbines in the wrong place. I am not for a blanket ban on onshore wind, but only on the fragile uplands. There is a biodiversity crisis aswell as rising global warming. There is no point trying to fix the latter whilst destroying more biodiversity.

    The UK government put a ban on onshore wind in England under pressure from Tory MPs in the Shires. Places like the plains of East Anglia would be perfect especially in the huge areas of cereal fields where biodiversity is low - as in northern France for example. But no, almost none here. Also the power can be produced much closer to where it is needed. Now we need hundreds of miles of cabling and pylons to mover the power because its not needed where its produced. Crazy. Also the infastructure is still not in place so turbines are simply turned off and the companies still get paid from the public purse, just like when the wind doesn't blow. Many turbine companies are foreign owned so money leaves the UK, just like with north sea oil.

    Additionally, new research from Aberdeen University shows that wind power has a true carbon cost very similar to oil and gas - check it out. The companies have simply been pulling the wool over people's eyes by excluding much of the real cost. Scotland still doesn't even have its own turbine industry. Most are imported from Denmark,the Far East and elsewhere, on diesel powered ships and driven to their destinations by diesel powered lorries. All the blades that have gone up to date are not recyclable, having to be cut up and buried at the end of their life.

    I believe alot of folks have been misled by the headlong rush to 'green' energy. I had been myself until recently. Its worth looking into and doing a bit of research. The situation in the Scottish Highlands is an economic and environmental disaster.

    Challenges are on the way, particularly concerning the anti-democratic way the SNP government has been operating. Local communities have been ignored or left alone to fight large companies with vast resources.

Log in or register to add comments and rate ideas