Attention

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent our advertisers

Tuesday, November 25, 2014

Loch Ness Wind Farm Will Be an Environmental Disaster, Say Conservationists

A giant 67 turbine wind farm planned for the mountains overlooking Loch Ness will be an environmental disaster thanks to the sheer quantity of stone which will need to be quarried to construct it, according to the John Muir Trust. In addition, the Trust has warned that the turbines spell ecological disaster for the wet blanket peat-land which covers the area and acts as a huge carbon sink, the Sunday Times has reported.

Around one million people visit the picturesque Loch Ness, nestled in the highlands of Scotland each year, bringing about £25 million in revenue with them. Most are on the lookout for the infamous monster, but if Scottish and Southern Energy (SSE) get their way the tourists will have something else to look at: the Stronelairg wind farm – 67 turbines, each 443ft high, peppered across the Monadhlaith mountains overlooking the Loch.

According to SSE, the wind farm has the potential to generate enough power for 114,000 homes and bring £30million worth of benefits to the region. But conservation charity The John Muir Trust, named after the Scots-born founder of the modern conservation movement, has raised objections based on the environmental impact of the planned wind farm.

“Our objection to this development is not just to visual impact on the landscape of 67 giant turbines — it is about the ecological destruction of a massive area of upland,” said Stuart Brooks, chief executive of the JMT.

More

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Will probably make the Loch Ness Monster go extinct too!

Anonymous said...

Wind Energy sacrifices the local environment for a very small amount of energy. The homes the electricity will power are based on nameplate capacity. In reality the turbines will produce a very small fraction of what the developer claims while raising electric costs for everyone.

Anonymous said...

It would be so much better to have a big coal burning power plant. Looks so much better and you get a daily dose of carcinogens as a added bonus!

Anonymous said...

How about just leaving it as is?
@26% output on a GOOD day, not worth ruining a world treasure.

Anonymous said...

dittos 4:20. the tree huggers are so deceived. they are members of the EPA church and have been brainwashed; can no longer think for themselves. so sad...