Power struggle
The members of the economy, energy and tourism committee of the Scottish Parliament did their job today.
Big name, minute focus.
They contrived to give Energy Minister Jim Mather a tough time over his granting of consent to the Beauly-Denny replacement power line.
Not, you understand, that they were opposed to the line. It attracts widespread political support on the basis that its importance to the economy outweighs environmental concerns.
All the committee members piled in - but special mention might be made of Wendy Alexander and Lewis Macdonald.
Ms Alexander pursued matters of planning law with the dogged determination and resolve which, no doubt, endeared her to civil servants when she was a minister.
Mr Macdonald spotlighted the "mitigations" which have been announced by the government.
Concentrating minds
These are to the effect that ministers will expect plans from the developers to lessen the visual impact of the new line in a further three areas.
All fine and dandy, said Mr Macdonald - except that the planning inquiry reporter had recommended withholding consent in two of those areas in order to concentrate minds.
The minister had not thought to mention that to MSPs in his parliamentary statement last week.
Mr Mather was obliged to concede that was the case, arguing that he had thought it right, within the limited time available, to set out his own position rather than that of others.
So, close questioning. However, the minister did rally considerably when invited to set out the case for the line.
Its value, he said, would be "monumental", allowing Scotland to take renewable energy to the market and to give a "serious" declaration of intent on climate change targets.
One final thought. No mention, again, today of health worries among communities relatively close to the proposed line.
Such worries have previously been discounted - but, as I heard directly during my Big Debate in Stirling last week, they persist.
I'm 
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~11~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
"Not, you understand, that they were opposed to the line"
This says it all about the opposition: Just opportunists, without a clue.
John
Complain about this comment
In my opinion, people should not be able to object to these vital infrastructure projects without detailing (or at least suggesting) a viable alternative. As long as we allow NIMBY's to control our planning process then progress in this country is going to grind to a halt.
I cannot abide these people who suggest that the line should not be built because it runs through areas of natural beauty. IMHO most of Scotland can be described that way. Do these people want our country to be reduced to a playground for people to walk their dogs in? All right, I would not dig up an area of outstanding natural beauty (or scientific interest), but when we have so many areas that are pretty, then some of them may have to be sacrificed to make way for progress. If people can't be made to agree to that, then I suggest that we find out where the maximum concentration of objectors is and build a nuclear waste disposal site next to their houses.
John
Complain about this comment
"Ms Alexander pursued matters of planning law with the dogged determination and resolve which, no doubt, endeared her to civil servants when she was a minister."
I lost count of the number of time she said "This is not a trick question!". Oh Really!
Complain about this comment
#1 Yes they are opportunists. It's very sad, the opposition act as though they are kids in a playground.
I must express an interest in this power line; I live in Beauly and I'm all for it. True, my home is not adjacent to the power line, just down the road a bit, in the middle of the village, but the Beauly area has hydro dams, the river Beauly is controlled throughout, there is a large sub station just outside the village and existing power lines are all over this countryside.
But it's all for the greater good. I'm not worried about health concerns. There have been industrialised contructions among the environment for decades, i.e what I have just listed in the previous paragraph. No one round here has suffered any ill effects, or I would have heard about it. The various complainers and commenters have been benefiting from the hydro electricity sent to the grid. I canoe on the river Beauly, walk there, fish on it, while aware that it has been altered artificially. I have no complaints.
In addition, think of all the electromagnetic radiation that we pump into the environment, e.g. mobile phone signals, wireless internet in the home. Then we have cars, lorries, trains, railways etc etc. Where do you draw the line (no pun intended). Then there is the block forestry that covers the landscape. In a modern world, yes we should keep one eye on the environment, but we do need to invest in renewables and this power line is a part of this. We will occassionally make a physical and visual impact on the landscape. It's worth it.
And these opposition MSPs.....they should absolutely be challenged for their pathetic grasping at straws. Get back to consensus politics. I haven't heard that phrase used for a long time when commenting on Holyrood and the governance of Scotland. Brian, sort it out!
Complain about this comment
While I accept that lay people do have concerns and worries about emf radiated from power lines there is as yet no evidence to stand behind the concerns. If people wish to object on health grounds fair enough but they also have to have the backing from robust research if they want to be believed.
I'm open to being corrected so if anyone can point me towards published peer reviewed research I'd be most obliged.
Complain about this comment
The people who are making the biggest noise about the pylons, appear to have no particular reason why they object, apart from the old chestnuts of natural beauty special scientific interest or occasionally wildlife habitat. The idea that infertile wilderness suddenly becomes a valuable asset that will be destroyed because a power line crosses it is beyond belief. A mountain is still a mountain , nothing changes that whether a power line passes by it or not. It seems that in Scotland whenever someone wants to build infrastructure, a rash of objectors, not necessarily even permanently resident in the area appear out of the woodwork. It seems the same people protest about wind farms, nuclear power stations, new roads, tesco supermarkets and anything else that springs to mind. Maybe if they lived and worked in the area, they would welcome the development.
Complain about this comment
Labour are squelching in their seats at the prospect of Scotland progressing and wealth and jobs being created.
That would be completely against the the new labour grain.
As regards to the health issues, you would need to spend most of your life right beside the pylons to have to have any chance of doing any damage. BTW I heard today that the transmission lines may be buried underground.
Now that would be a good story for you, Brian. You could write an article on the inevitable labour press release about cruelty to lug worms and demand the resignation of the SNP government over it.
While we're at it perhaps you could ask someone in labour about leukemia clusters around each and every nuclear plant and why are they pushing for more of these to be built.
Complain about this comment
So all politicians were in favour of the line ? Not according to some of the utterances from some of them. Seems as if it is just another attack attack attack scenario.
If all politicians agreed it was necessary, if the SG are restricted because they were acting in their role in the planning process, if the line is an upgrade to the existing one, if it is required to upgrade our infrastructure to support/allow the development of more renewables. Then what the heck is all the who ha about?
Over at the Times (London not Evening) the have a very interesting article on the Beauly-Denny replacement line, basically they are pointing out that rather than being down on this we should be taking pride in this massive infrastructure project, pride in its engineering, pride about the potential it stands to unlock.
http://tinyurl.com/yc7pn4u
Complain about this comment
2. john
I live close to a Nuclear waste store. It is a lot less obtrusive than the pylons and a great deal more is known about its safety than that of the transmission lines you so favour.
One reason the line has to be built is to secure the investment in wind power that is expected in the North. Good says everyone living in the central belt. However it is surely more sensible to build power generation as close as possible to demand. Minimise losses and costs.
However this then gets close to the real issue. Okay to build wind-farms in the north half of Scotland, where those in the central belt don't see them.
Surely sense would prevail here, the north should build the required amount of windfarms for our needs and only more when all the suitable sites in the central belt are used up. Generate power as close as possible to the point of use.
The developer at one public meeting in the Highlands clearly said that good sites did exist in the central belt but the planning issues were "just too difficult".
Another case of NIMBYism on a very large scale. More inclusive government.
Complain about this comment
Correct me if I'm wrong, but did I hear on some TV programme that a very large amount objectors to the line don't live in Scotland?
Complain about this comment
Northhighlander:
"Okay to build wind-farms in the north half of Scotland, where those in the central belt don't see them."
I think you completely wrong there.
Where I live (in the central belt) I can see at least 3 (maybe 4 on a good day) wind farms on the hills around me and I have NEVER heard anything from ANY of my neighbors about them disliking the sight of them. Quite the reverse actually.
Complain about this comment
Brian,
Without making an effort to make use of renewable power, then no doubt according to the climate change brigade, a lot of the landscape may end up under water or ice, or be destroyed by hurricanes, or anything else that may come our way.
The best way to help to preserve the scenery is therefore surely to upgrade this power line to allow greater use of renewables.
It makes sense.
Once again I say I've never heard about so many "grillings" of MSPs in the past. I suppose Labour never got any grillings because they didn't do anything at Holyrood.
And another thing, if the opposition are blocking minimum pricing on alcohol because it "may be illegal", surely they have had enough time to determine whether or not it is illegal or not, so they don't therefore have any reasonable grounds for blocking it.
Oh, sorry, I forgot that Labour tend not to have much knowledge of the law of this land, or indeed of any other land.
Complain about this comment
North Highlander:
#9.
I disagree, the more employment opportunites created elsewhere besides from the central belt, population levels can change accordingly.
Complain about this comment
Having watched the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee of the Scottish Parliament I have a great problem with your blog Brian.
Your take on it really makes me wonder how as a wordsmith and even as a graduate you appear to get lost at times.
Lewis MacDonald has no clue regarding this project what so ever. His nit picking and jumping from one site at one end then right down to the other trying to trip up Jim Mather made Lewis MacDonald look what he really is thick.
Then we were entertained by Wendy Alexander whose entire questioning was irrelevant to the entire case.
Oh! My did the little lady really get here knickers in a twist, requiring statistics that had no effect on the fact that this line was required to assist Scotland in becoming the green powerhouse and assisting her friend’s down south. Then gets her precedent kick in at the officials, as for her inability to understand how pitiful she sounds in trying to swallow the microphone.
At this time I find that Scotland is providing 898m/watts to the national grid for export to the South and along with Northern Ireland and France, it seems that energy wise the South East of England is a drain on all our resources.
Complain about this comment
Off subject I know but....
Just watched Mr Murphy appear in front of the Scottish Affairs Commitee.
In essence he said it was the big bad SNP whit did it!
Complain about this comment
#9 northhighlander
There are many sites in the central belt, with the largest in europe being close to Eastkilbride. With others around Edinburgh and Stirling it doesnt take one long to find a vantage point to see them. Whislt i am not disagreeing with your contention that we should generate power hwere it is needed the sites need to be open to the elements hence the prevalence of sites in the north.
Complain about this comment
#9 Northhighlander
"However it is surely more sensible to build power generation as close as possible to demand. Minimise losses and costs."
Indeed........ so lets repopulate the North and encourage people out of the Central Belt.
Complain about this comment
What gets me is how some folk think that all this new power generation belongs to Scotland or the Scots. It does not.
Power generation is the business of private companies, most foreign owned. Scottish Power is a subsidiary of the Spanish company Iberdroia.
Having even more electricity generated here need not directly benefit anyone in Scotland, except, perhaps some landowners and it need not result in a lower price for the consumer either.
Unless you are a shareholder in a company like Iberdroia Scotland can generate all the power in the world, or, import it all from England and it will matter little.
Complain about this comment
11.
Me too. I see them where I am an I strangly like the look of them. There is something about them that just makes me a bit proud of the way we are heading with renewables. I've lost count of the amount of times i've visited pitlochry dam on my way up north, it just fasinates me. When i stayed at loch rannoch I never thought about the big pipes running down the side of the hill as something bad but thought about the good they were doing and that was as a 10 year old kid.
North higlander. now I maybe way wide of the mark here but if the demand is all down here and and the scottish government then invest all that money down here you will be up in arms that they are concentrating all efforts into the central belt. Apologies if I am wrong with that but it does seem like a good and very sustainable to bring some prosperity to the northern reaches of our country and to help spread some wealth rather than having it all concentrated down here.
We all require plastics but we shouldn't say glasgow cant have any cause they don't produce any oil, only aberdeen get it. We all require banking (i know this is shakey ground here) but we dont deny inverness banks just because the "head quarters" are in edinburgh. We are a brilliant, beautiful, forward thinking and great bunch of people us scots and we should all be pulling together for the good of everyone in the country, giving and taking where we can with what we can all contribute.
Complain about this comment
Politicians are only really tested, when in Government. Jim Mather failed the test. I favour the upgrade to the power line, but Mather has done a poor job of justifying it.
Meanwhile, doon sooth -
Populus poll (E&W only)
Con 44.2% : Lab 26.4% : LD 19% : Oth 8.9% - 17.8% Tory lead over Labour there.
Complain about this comment
18.
Surely it's more than just the power they produce. It's the jobs created in construction, the running of the plants, the maintenence of sites and all that jazz. I'd have thought there is more to the whole venture than just the stuff that comes down the line into the hooses.
Complain about this comment
#18.
It does not matter if it's foreign owned, exporting or importing certain resources can benefit the country through taxation. Foreign-owned businesses are not immune from tax man.
Complain about this comment
21
If we are talking wind turbines, they will be imported and erected by a itinerant crew and then run for decades by a man at a console at head office, there are no staff on a wind farm.
Complain about this comment
As I see it SSE wanted to upgrade the line and wanted planning permission,less pylons although much bigger,permission has been granted for this with the possibility that they look at maybe part of the line can go underground what is it with Lewis MacDonald that he can't grasp this.All we have heard from BBC is grilling.quizzed etc when will this public company start reporting on a fair bases,news-night with Bru.last night kept interrupting the SNP member but let the Lab man carry on I suppose we will get the same tomorrow with FM questions when you Brian end the programme with another reporter winding up.
Complain about this comment
9. northhighlander
"I live close to a Nuclear waste store. It is a lot less obtrusive than the pylons and a great deal more is known about its safety than that of the transmission lines you so favour."
Revealed: the safety ‘failures’ at Dounreay
"THE nuclear complex at Dounreay has suffered more than 250 safety “failures” in the past six years, according to documents released by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa)."
Complain about this comment
Again, I must be missing something, so please explain it to me if I have.
Apparently Fergus Ewing has given evidence to the justice committee stating that Scots law firms could be disadvantaged compared to their cousins around the UK if unable to enter into business with 'outside' bodies such as banks or supermarkets, prompting a mass exodus of 'big' firms from Scotland.
http://news.scotsman.com/politics/Ewing39s-fears-for-Scots-law.5976401.jp
Who is he kidding, even if they did there would be plenty queueing up to take over the vacted legal business, we'll always need a lawyer (well some more than others!).
#18 rochcharlie
Surely even if the companies are foreign they would employ Scots here to look after their interests and also be liable to pay appropriate taxes, unfortunately that means Westminster at present, but then we are playing for the long game with this project.
Complain about this comment
22
Scotland has no power to tax.
Complain about this comment
Scottish Questions is designed to let Murphy do some grandstanding as the House assembles for PM questions. Most of the SNP questions and questions designed to damage the SNP are allowed in that few minutes between the end of Scottish Questions and PM Questions. As far as the SNP are concerned Scottish Questions is a waste of time as is Murphy and The Scotland Office.
Complain about this comment
Boundary alterations could help Labour to beat SNP
No doubt to save them filling in all those postal forms.
Complain about this comment
Jim Murphy to ignore vote on devolved powers
More Murphy's law.
Complain about this comment
13. Tom
Windfarms don't create many jobs. There are some welcome construction jobs, but few long term jobs.
I would have agreed with your statement had we been able to give low cost energy to business wanting to relocate to the Highlands from our vast renewable resource. We can't. our electric bills go up the same as everyone elses.
The turbines aren't built in Scotland, the vast majority are imported from the continent, usually Denmark or Germany. So no jobs boom here.
The only people who really benefit economically from wind-farms are landowners. To date most of them are absentee landowners who live in the central belt.
So if you think we are enjoying economic benefits form these wind-farms then you are sadly mistaken.
Complain about this comment
25. cynicalHighlander
As usual you are presenting a slanted view of the facts. Dounreay as with all parts of the nuclear industry is extremely good at reporting defects. The safety record of the nuclear industry is exemplary. Compare fatalities to other forms of power generation. There is no question nuclear is the safest. How many miners, oil operatives are killed each year to provide power for us?
In Caithness the only fatal accident that has occurred recently was at a wind farm. Unfortunately a technician was killed while maintaining a wind turbine.
It is also worth noting that the rail indusrty and many large petrochemical plants use safety systems perfected in the nuclear industry as best practice.
Complain about this comment
31. northhighlander
Thats why they need to be community owned and then part of that income is reinvested locally but that will never happen until governence and land ownership changes.
Complain about this comment
Rochcarlie #27.
Scotland does have tax powers... although I do understand, Scotland has no relevant powers. However that should not suggest Scotland will not benefit from this tomorro, in a year or even a decades time.
Complain about this comment
18 & 27 rochcarlie wrote: "Scotland has no power to tax."
I felt the need to respond to this post: You state that Scotland cannot benefit from the generati of renewable energy. This is absolutely incorrect for a number of reasons.
1. It will create employment in Scotland, not simply those directly involved in the renewables industry, but support across the economy. eg house builders for the workers, shops, infrastructure (roads etc), leisure activities. Indeed everything across the economy.
2. Expertise. as someone else has said, the renewables industry in in its' infancy, but we will rely on this industry for centuries to come and the expertise of those who become involved in the industry will grow and new companies will grow from this expertise over time.
3. An independant Scotland WILL have tax raising powers, whic is the jist of the earlier responses you got.
In conclusion, it is absolutely not as simple as your misunderstanding of the situation implies. I think it time we Scots had a can-do attitude instead of the 'oh but this' and 'oh but that' of previous times.
Complain about this comment
#32 northhighlander
Good to hear that the nucler industry has such a good saftey record as there's no room for leeway now is there. How are you planning on making sure those best practices will be followed for the duration of the used materials half life?
Always gets me with advocates of nuclear power, it's a case of 'I'm alright Jack' with no heed to the lumps of irradiated material that is left around for x thousands of years after processing.
I know, we'll dig a big hole in the ground, line it with concrete, and hope it stays intact for a few millenia, and hope that if humans are still around they know whats in the big concrete lined hole and should steer well clear.
Far simpler than pesky wind turbines, watch out for the blades mind!
Complain about this comment
North Highlander:
The main issue concerning the highlands, I believe, is really the level of links to the rest of the country, United Kingdom and Europe.
However I still see energy being created in the highlands as a benefit, it's one step in the right direction.
If energy does become more of a problem, it may be better being closer to the source, who knows?
Complain about this comment
33. cynicalHighlander
An issue that the Scottish parliament could tackle. If it wasn't concentrating on other matters.
I agree the Highlands would do well with community ownership, but it won't happen when such large subsidy profit is available to landowners.
The other point to bear in mind is the lifespan of these wind-farms. It is 25 years. Given they are uneconomic without subsidy, I am unsure about how robust the planning conditions on removal are. We could be left with a very unsafe and unsightly legacy.
Complain about this comment
32. northhighlander
"As usual you are presenting a slanted view of the facts."
Tese are the facts The High Cost of Uranium in Navajoland what you dont seem to understand is that the fuel supply is harming foreign environments to satisfy your pro stance. Its not affecting you directly so its A OK.
Complain about this comment
A lot of commentators are forgetting that most objectors to these pylons are actually in favour of renewable energy.
It's just the route of the line here that is a problem, when there are more sensible long term alternatives.
The cheap and nasty option won out through at the expense of quality of life for many local people and the bigger tourism industry.
Sure there are still plenty of remote scenic areas, but these huge pylons will be visible right up the centre of Scotland including some of the more popular tourist areas - wallace monument, queens view, etc
It doesn't say much for us as a country that we couldn't at least have had some compromise here.
Maybe if we had a oil fund, something could have been done..
Meanwhile, the East london pylons have been undergrounded in time for the olympics.
Complain about this comment
34
Meanwhile, under the Utilities Act, and its Renewables Obligation (Scotland) Order, consumers are contributing towards these turbines.
Don't sound like a good deal to me.
Complain about this comment
35.
I think it time we Scots had a can-do attitude instead of the 'oh but this' and 'oh but that' of previous times.
I fully agree 200% with this statement. If we had the attitude of others we'd just give up, it wont produce enough jobs, it wont generate enough money, lets just give up on the whole then!!
No!! build on it, stand on the shoulders of giants, it may not be perfect yet but take what we know now and show us better solutions instead of bemaoning the actions others are trying to make things better.
You win no friends being negative.
Complain about this comment
It should also be noted that although the economic benefits of renewable energy have been much trumpeted, the main benefit to my mind is the securing of an environmentally friendly energy supply to meet the countries demands rendering us self-sufficient and not relient on overseas resources in sometimes unstable regions of the world.
Complain about this comment
ScotInNotts,
It does not matter the energy source but every industry still relies on some level of fossil fuels, it's not self-sufficient really...
Complain about this comment
43. ScotInNotts
Common sense.
Complain about this comment
35
Look at the Hydro Dams, they provide no local employment. Even although they were paid for decades ago and the water is free the Highlanders still pay the same as everyone else for their power.
Complain about this comment
46.
My old boy used to take us to pitlochry specifically to see the dam and the salmon ladder when i was a kid. When there we always had something to eat and a wee go at the shows just down from the carpark. Last time i visited it was purely to show my girlfriend where my dad used to take us as kids (aint the most exotic location I know) and while there we got steamin and stayed the night at the hotel. I bought knick knacks for my aunty and my gran and a jumper from one of the shops.
It doesn't just stop at the big power making machine.
The above really is true. Me and my bird then went up to loch rannoch to trace the other dams, sad but true. Ended up staying at rannoch. Awesome place although i think i prefered it as a kid as i didn't have to spend my own money when there.
Complain about this comment
36. ScotInNotts
Glad you can be so flippant when there has been a fatality maintaining wind farms. Very poor taste IMO
Complain about this comment
I also remember going to another hydro station, i forget where it is but it was one of those ones where the water was fed down the pipes from above the station to power the generators. It was a cool location, big rockfaces on one side of the road. Anyway, it's visitors centre was all about how it worked and what hydro was all about. At the time i couldn't quite get my wee head around it but thats by the by. Point again is I no doubt pestered my dad to buy me something when there. I've been back again since but i'll be dammed, wheyy hey, if i can remember where it is.
Now i'm by no stretch of the imagination pretending thats why folk go to pitlochry and such but it must in a few peoples cases. In fact i remember going on a school trip in primary 7. We must've spent a fortune between us.
Complain about this comment
Re hydro
Does anyone seriously think we would be better off without it?
Complain about this comment
35. Alba4eva
With wind power the house builders will need to go to Denmark, that is where the turbines are built. Alternatively they could build caravans for the construction workers.
As for shops, there is no employment to support shops. Leisure facilities you are having a laugh.
That is the problem with this whole issue, the benefits are completely over hyped. We have a chance with tidal power, but are wasting the opportunity every day by not sorting out the permissions.
So instead of wandering around talking big ideas we need people working on the ground making small ideas happen.
Basically we need graft not spin.
Complain about this comment
49. jediirnbru
Try Foyers on Loch Ness side.
Complain about this comment
49
You were at Cruachan, a pump storage scheme, and the pocket money o bairns, just what the Highlands need.
Complain about this comment
#40
Perhaps you don't know this but this is an upgrade of the existing power line.
The hundreds of pylons are already there and have been there for decades. This new scheme will cut away 200 of the pylons but some of the replacements will be bigger.
What exactly was your point?
Or do you just swallow any guff you read in the papers without realising that the aganda is to attack everything the SNP Governemrnt does whether it is right or not.
Complain about this comment
50. oldnat
Of course we are better off with it. The thread here is stop making stupid ridiculous over the top claims about the benefits tot he communities affected.
Complain about this comment
52.
Nah, i've only been to loch ness the once and that was on a wee tour of scotland a few years back. Although, my dad used to drive round in circles for hours and then pretend we were Miles away when we were 20 miles down the road just to kid us on we were somewhere far away from home. I'm starting to think my dad was a lunatic actually. haha
Complain about this comment
41. rochcarlie
"Don't sound like a good deal to me. "
I notice that NOTHING sounds like a good deal to you. =)
Oh, wait. The union does. Anything actually FOR Scotland that you would support?
Complain about this comment
46. rochcarlie
"Look at the Hydro Dams, they provide no local employment. Even although they were paid for decades ago and the water is free the Highlanders still pay the same as everyone else for their power. "
That doesn't answer whether they provided local employment during construction and hence a boost to the economy.
And you are also anti hydro-dams, I take it. Ok, there's another "I hate this, too" on your list.
Again... Is there ANYTHING you are pro?
Complain about this comment
53.
It's a start. gets the kids thinking about renewables, science, building on the foundations already laid out before them, looking to the future whilst looking back at some great ways that we harnessed energy from our environment.
But you win, lets just scrap the lot. No point in trying, tear down the dams, knock down the turbines. If it aint gonna make everyone of us better off in our pockets then whats the use.
Complain about this comment
41. rochcarlie
"Don't sound like a good deal to me."
Your are still subsidising every nuclear site from the year dot and so will generations to come.
Complain about this comment
51. northhighlander
"That is the problem with this whole issue, the benefits are completely over hyped. We have a chance with tidal power, but are wasting the opportunity every day by not sorting out the permissions.
So instead of wandering around talking big ideas we need people working on the ground making small ideas happen."
Does having windfarms (which will have impact on local economies during construction and with maintenance crews on the ground in spite of your protestations) mean that you can't work on other plans? I wouldn't have thought so. How does that waste the opportunity for tidal power--which SHOULD be a major concern in Scotland.
You seem willing enough for other regions to have windfarms, but just object to having them in your own. Why is that?
Complain about this comment
60. cynicalHighlander
Every wind farm is subidised. If not they don't make money.
Complain about this comment
Irksome nit picking and po faced criticism is beginning to remind me of a cut n' paste poster.( whom I found irritating in the extreme ! He was prone to shouting " racism " when losing the argument and was favoured with the praises of one lardy lord)
Complain about this comment
61. JRMacClure
Haven't read the posts properly as usual. I have no problem with us having wind farms at all. I just can't be bothered with all the guff and hype about us becoming world leaders in the field when the Danes are already there.
there are no economic benefits for anyone apart from the fat cat landowners who generally don't live in the area anyway apart form a few weeks of the year.
there is very little maintenance required for a wind farm. Very few people work in field and it is not highly paid. So it is not a huge bonus. You are indulging in spin, how very Nulab.
Many people work in tourism though across the Highlands, this will be affected by the development of wind power.
So no I am not against them but we should have our share so should everyone else. Spread them around.
Complain about this comment
MacClure
You don't sound like a Spaniard so you must be a Unionist.
The proposition is, Scotland currently exporting about one third of its electric generation to England, to the profit of Spanish shareholders, and to increase this, Scottish consumers are to pay (ROC's) for more of the same.
Nuts!
Complain about this comment
"It's Scotland's Wind"...much like this debate
Complain about this comment
To move the dicussion on, I feel we have confirmed that every project that creates energy requires a public boast, however, your all missing the point that everything requires some level of fossil fuels, plus nuclear relies on dwindling stocks of resources.
I don't think there really is a right way.
Complain about this comment
I know it's a bit early in this blog to be off topic but:
From The Times:
'David Cameron was accused of airbrushing his poster campaign photo today as Gordon Brown went personal during Prime Minister's Questions.'
The country is on its knees and the man who aspires to stride across the world stage comes up with a childish jibe worthy of Grayman.
Complain about this comment
62. is that during it's entire 25 year life cycle? or just on set up? Is it a vehicle to encourage the start up of the industry because of it's infancy?
I am not clued up on this
Complain about this comment
61
Turbines are not constructed on site, they are constructed in factories in Europe and speedily erected by a small specialist crew, possibly also from Europe. Its not the same as dam building.
Complain about this comment
67. Tom
Ah but some people haven't learnt that we live on a planet with finite mineable resources until they are left naked.
Complain about this comment
62. northhighlander
Every nuclear power plant gets about 30 times the subsidy of windfarms forever, we are still susidising the electricity I was using in the fifties. One word STUPIDITY.
Complain about this comment
65. rochcarlie
"The proposition is, Scotland currently exporting about one third of its electric generation to England, to the profit of Spanish shareholders, and to increase this, Scottish consumers are to pay (ROC's) for more of the same."
Then come up with solutions instead of your constant theme of: No to this, no to that, and no to everything else!
As for my being a unionist, that's pretty amusing.
Complain about this comment
64. northhighlander
"So it is not a huge bonus. You are indulging in spin, how very Nulab. "
LOL Oh, for heaven's sake. Get off that silliness. You'll accuse me of being English next.
You seem to be big on whining and saying how nothing works and nothing will help. So come up with some IDEAS.
You always demand those from nationalists, let me remind you. But you aren't good at coming up with them yourself. Solutions.
Complain about this comment
To change subject for a minute and appologies if this has already been posted but just read a good piece by Kenneth Roy in the Scottish Review entiltled The pensioner and the BBC, quite a good read about the bbc bias.
http://www.scottishreview.net/KRoy193.html
Complain about this comment
Can anyone explain to me how to post hyperlinks on this comments page?
Complain about this comment
67. Tom
"your all missing the point that everything requires some level of fossil fuels, plus nuclear relies on dwindling stocks of resources."
This is why conserving fossil fuel is essential. It has a lot less to do with the stuff about global warming, etc., than the fact that we are seriously screwed if and when we really do run out.
Tell me this. How does most of our society function without PLASTICS? And how do we make THOSE without fossil fuels.
There are more important uses for fossil fuels than making energy that can be made other ways.
Complain about this comment
70. rochcarlie
"Turbines are not constructed on site, they are constructed in factories in Europe and speedily erected by a small specialist crew, possibly also from Europe. Its not the same as dam building."
Which still has to be on-site spending money there while doing so as does the maintenance crew later on. A windfarm is not set up in a day. The payment for the land usage goes into the economy in spite of Northhighlander's assertion that NO local landowners exist in the north of Scotland.
But if you object to this form of energy production--SUGGEST ONE YOU DON'T OBJECT TO. OR SUGGEST SOLUTIONS.
Complain about this comment
70.
What does that vesta plant in campbelltown do? do they just put them together and then ship them up to where they are to be erected?
Complain about this comment
69. jediirnbru
Windfarms are eligible for renewable obligations certificates, it is a subsidy paid for by all consumers of electricity, ie a subsidy. Details can be found on the British wind Energy Association site from a simple google search.
This is pushing the cost of energy up, our electric bills. It will go even higher as all wind power requires back up, the percentage estimate varies from 70% to 100%. This means fossil fuelled plants are required to produce power when the wind doesn't blow. These are all getting very old now and will require large scale replacement starting very soon.
So I don't oppose them in principal but I do dislike strongly the way they are presented by the likes of cynical highlander. They are not a cure for our energy problems, yes they have a place but only as part of a balanced power generation plan.
Complain about this comment
76. loveme2times
You did! - and it was a good link. If you mean, how to do the clever ones. I used to, but have given up. I'll leave it to someone else to link you to the procedure.
Complain about this comment
65
I might have a stab at a solution if I knew what the problem was.
Complain about this comment
74. JRMacClure
Simple
Get fingers out of butts and permit companies to get on with developing tidal power before everyone else does and we lose out again. Stop fiddling and arguing with the permitting system and start delivering
Start planning for new base generation power plants. Some of which should be nuclear.
Have an energy policy that doesn't use imported gas for base generation. This will require new plants with other fuel sources. But ultimately will lead to energy security.
Push the potential of carbon capture, not at the current pace but put more effort and resources into it.
Is that simple enough for you to understand?
Complain about this comment
76. loveme2times
http://quirkynats.freeforums.org/greasemonkey-t215.html
Complain about this comment
77. JRMacClure
"There are more important uses for fossil fuels than making energy that can be made other ways."
Quite but getting that across to some people becomes frustrating.
Complain about this comment
OK, forget Brian's blog - if you want to see Wendy Alexander and Lewis Macdonald in action then click here.
Wendy Alexander speaks 45mins 35 secs into the video - it is worth watching if only to see how rude this woman really is [look out for the lawyer treating her with contempt].
Labour's mantra now is PPP - process, procedure and pettiness, they are foresically examining anything looking for a 't' that isn't crossed or an 'i' that isn't dotted, it's pathetic as is the media refusal to report it.
Moody and Alexander appear to be scrabbling for anything with which to attack the SNP, the actual line itself and the renewable energy it will carry appears secondary.
Iain Gray's line [pun intended] of attack tomorrow?
Well, it looks as if the Beauly to Denny line is being set up for him but I think that the weather/council funding might be in with a sniff.
Complain about this comment
Does anyone live on the proposed B2D massive pylon route? I don't suspect John (no.1) does.....and are you aware that the route is destined to travel through an area that has already got Griffin approved (Scotland's 3rd largest on-shore windfarm) and with both Calliacher and Logiealmond in front of the ministers for approval right now the area currently known as the jewel in the highland Perthshire crown will become the backdrop for the next blade runner movie. 400ft high wind turbines mixed in a sweet cocktail of 215ft high pylons....it all sounds a truly attractive tourist destination to me.
Let's not consider the true costs to the local and national economy if it is all allowed to happen.....
Complain about this comment
To the whingers who say we get no benefit it all goes abroad. Why its called a global economy which you wish to be part of and wish to benefit from yet object when another country beats you to it but if you are selling abroad different story. Cakes and eating comes to mind or "me me me".
Complain about this comment
78
That may be so but it's peanuts to the ROC subsidy.
Solution, don't build the turbines, just scatter the subsidy money around the Highlands, for a greater general good.
Complain about this comment
80.
Cheers.
I had a look before asking but didn't really know what i was looking for.
What happens when the wind turbines are up and running and producing electicity and making, hopefully, a profit. I assume no more government money is pumped in. Could those subsidys go to helping the tidal and wave energy get up and running properly since the tides never stop they could plug the gap when energy is required? potentially.
I just think you have to start somewhere from moving from a dependance on fossil fuels and wind seems to be a good place to move to in conjuction with the hydro schemes.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I take groups of visitors from other countries on walking holidays in the Highlands of Scotland. From their comments and reactions it is consistently clear that they share my own feeling that the beautiful and often wild landscape of Scotland is one of our country’s most valuable assets.
To me it seems wholly inappropriate – on aesthetic and economic grounds - to construct a line of giant pylons along the proposed Beauly Denny route. My clients from abroad would think it some kind of self-destructive madness on Scotland’s part.
Complain about this comment
92 GM
On that logic, the current distributive pylons and power line should be dismantled and removed. Indeed the A9 should be dug up, and restored to its original drove road condition. While we're at it, lets remove all signs of human occupancy in Scotland, and leave it as a pristine Nature Park.
It's a matter of balance, and people will disagree on the balance.
Complain about this comment
83. northhighlander
I will will change my terminology in ~91
RUBBISH
Complain about this comment
Wasn't the former Energy Minister Brian Wilson a paid consultant to the Windfarm Co., Windsave during his tenure at the Ministry? So goodness knows what he was consulting about.
Complain about this comment
75. At 8:40pm on 13 Jan 2010, loveme2times:
Thanks for the link.
Kenneth Roy has hit the nail on the head again and pretty much put into words something I was thinking of when I wrote my article on 'grit shortage' - I would go further though.
The BBC has dropped it's standards in Scotland as far as broadcasting is concerned, however the standards it employs on it's website are appalling.
It has made the mistake of believing it has to produce snappy, dramatic headlines in the form of a tabloid - it should not be doing that.
The BBC must not report news from a perspective, it must take the position of an impartial observer.
Let's take yesterdays example when Salmond and MacAskill appeared before the Scottish Affairs committee. The BBC ran with the headline 'Salmond Defends Megrahi Release'.
Now, the BBC could have chosen at least half a dozen justifiable criticisms levelled at the UK by the First Minister or Mr MacAskill but it didn't, it chose to present Salmond on the defensive.
Of course it should have done neither, the story should have been headlined as 'Salmond and MacAskill attend committee'.
There needed to be no opinion offered by a journalist just a video of the event with a transcript. Not entertaining that's true, but anyone interested in the event would have not been swayed by the prejudices of an editor and all of the facts would be there.
Yes, I realise that a video was eventually made available, but the 'newspaper' article was prominent and did not [because it could not] inform the reader/viewer what had actially taken place. Indeed MacAskills statement was simply cut midway through a sentence leaving the viewer to imagime the point he was about to make.
It transpired that MacAskill was actually acknowledging that there were those who had concerns about the release and others who had concerns about the conviction. How many people were taken in by the very crude editing of that video? - the last five minutes of the session would have been far more revealing!![watch it and you will see what I'm talking about]
The BBC TV news and radio of course could have run with their usual reports but the internet and web technology allows all of the information to be presented in the form of a link to a video and transcript.
The BBC believe that the web means that it should morph into an online newspaper, complete with all of the usual bad habits - BBC controllers are making a fundamental mistake and might even be guilty of damaging the newspaper industry.
Complain about this comment
I don't know if you know this but much of the wild Scottish landscape is the way it is because of human activity over the centuries, unless that big Ettrick Forest is still there
Complain about this comment
the country has been in the deep freeze for the last 4 weeks and wind power will have delivered absolutely 0 in terms of electric energy over this period....
Complain about this comment
83. northhighlander
"
Start planning for new base generation power plants. Some of which should be nuclear.
Have an energy policy that doesn't use imported gas for base generation. This will require new plants with other fuel sources. But ultimately will lead to energy security."
Have you discovered a uranium mine in the UK? Thought not yet you object to importing gas, logic please!
Complain about this comment
If it help Scotland to sustain energy levels then that's a good thing.
Today in Northhampton an eldery couple were found frozen to death in their own home.People are frightened to use their heating because of the high costs.We must do everything we can to deliver sustainable energy needs and drive down those cost's. Carbon capture, tidal and wind will all play there part but our brighter future lays in our technology to extract our potential energy and perhaps become a non nuclear country and almost carbon free.
Complain about this comment
Did anyone see the state of Jim Murphy in the Commons today when he was making his bizarre plea for a game of football between Scotland and England to be re-introduced?
He looked awful but was clearly very excited, wide eyed even, by this masterplan.
Will any Scottish journalist ask him whether such a debate might be an unwelcome distraction as the economic recovery gets underway.
Complain about this comment
Nuclear is about a tenth the cost that wind is.....how much do you really want to pay for your electricity.....esp on a source as unreliable as wind?
Complain about this comment
98. At 9:39pm on 13 Jan 2010, Andrew wrote:
the country has been in the deep freeze for the last 4 weeks and wind power will have delivered absolutely 0 in terms of electric energy over this period....
I can see a wind generator from my home in North Lanarkshire - the thing turns every single day - yes, every single day without fail. Even when there isn't a breeze to be felt this thing still turns.
It is situated on farmland on the road to Glenmavis.
However, I agree with those who say that we need to invest as much as we can in renewables, especially tidal and carbon capture.
The axing of the Peterhead plant in 2007 after the UK government dragged its heals over a decision was the worst case of spite ever. Longannet is miles ahead of it's competitors in the UK governments carbon capture competition but the UK government is still dragging its heals over a decision.
Complain about this comment
90. jediirnbru
Sorry not quite. The renewable Obligation Certificate is garunteed in Law until at least 2027. Typically a wind farm income will be be made up of 1/3 electricity sales and 2/3rd from ROC and Climate Change Levy.
All paid for in our electricity bills.
Complain about this comment
The language used by Mr Mather in justifying his decision to approve this electric-line, Beauly-Denny suggests a fudge and/or illogical thinking. He has not said, "there will be modification to meet the concerns of Scotland's population", only suggestions to mitigate. There is no instruction to the developers to address our concerns in detail. Further, what is momentous about a power-line which is already obsolescent? How much will it contribute to changing Scotland's weather? Nothing. What will it do for "Global Climate Change" measurably nothing. Any cudos for politicians will be minimal and forgotten in a few months or years. This is a waste of money and an insult to John Muir's memory. As a senior citizen with a wide experience of our countyside, a strong supporter of renewable sources of electricity, and an SNP voter, I am extremely disappointed. There has to be a continuing campaign for underground transport, or another less obvious, less precious route, and a change in planning proceedure! padre.
Complain about this comment
102. At 9:53pm on 13 Jan 2010, Andrew wrote:
Nuclear is about a tenth the cost that wind is.....how much do you really want to pay for your electricity.....esp on a source as unreliable as wind?
When you say unreliable I think you mean intermittent and not as predictable as tidal. Wind is no more predictable then hydro which relies in rainfall, tidal of course is indeed predictable - as pridictable as the cycle of the moon.
I'm not so sure that you are correct when you say that nuclear is a tenth the cost of wind - unless you are speaking of the hot air emanating from George Foulkes, now that really is expensive wind.
Complain about this comment
99. cynicalHighlander
Note you don't offer positive comment, or address any of the subsidy shortcomings of wind power, I wonder why...
Anyway the UK has significant stocks of Uranium and it is usually purchased in small quantities from stable sources, not gas from unpredictable unstable sources that is required 24 hours a day every day.
Quite an obvious difference to most people.
Complain about this comment
100 kered
Does Scotland need to sustain energy levels?
There is an excess of generating capacity in Scotland, that is why so much is exported.
Conversely, a similar quantity of electricity could be imported.
Most of our generating capacity could disappear overnight and it would not make a blind bit of difference, except to the shareholders of the global power companies.
Complain about this comment
102. Andrew
Can you show the links to back up that assertion.
Complain about this comment
83. northhighlander
"Have an energy policy that doesn't use imported gas for base generation. "
Scotland IMPORTS gas?
It does? I have read many times that Scotland produces substantially more than it needs so this has me baffled.
Complain about this comment
110. JRMacClure
I am British, Scottish and proud of both. In the UK we import gas.
Perhaps you could assist us a little in clraifying the debate on Wind Power. The US has a wind power industry, how is it funded and what level of subsidy is paid to the US wind generators?
Complain about this comment
80. northhighlander
"They are not a cure for our energy problems, yes they have a place but only as part of a balanced power generation plan. "
Who on this forum said they were the whole picture? I have yet to see anyone (except you in making a strawman argument) suggest such a thing.
Of course, they are part of an overall picture including a number of factors. But we have to face the fact tha oil is a finite resource and has important uses for things OTHER than energy which can be produced in other ways.
Combining wind and tidal power is one important way to go about it. I am very suspicious of nuclear power because the rare accidents are SO serious (Chernobyl? Three Mile Island?). Yes, they ARE rare. But when they happen they are vastly serious.
Even more of a problem is the waste disposal which NO ONE who supports this form of energy production is willing to address honestly as the serious problem it is. Nuclear waaste does not go away. It still might be part of the picture but has to be looked at honestly and openly and not shoved down people's throats.
We MUST stop depending on oil to produce our energy.
Complain about this comment
104.
What happens come 2027? What is the long term gain that the ROC and Climate Change Levy hope to get out of it by giving out these subsidys now? Is it just to get a reduction in our carbon footprint or is it to do with a long term economic strategy that renewables must be seen as a way of making money or just for ego to show off at look at us? Bit of all of them maybe, i dont know. I don't believe wind is the be all and end all but a big turbine spinning under the power of the wind with what sounds like minimal input from humans seems like a cheap, in the long run, clean way to produce electricity once it's up and going and just spinning away quite the thing. The more companies involved in the business surely drives up competition and speeds up innovation and you'd hope bring down cost, possibly too simplistic a view.
Complain about this comment
110 JRMacClure
Your right Mac, Scotland could be self sufficient for years to come.
But, gas is another scam on the consumer.
The price is determined by a market influenced by oil. That is whatever you can get away with. The cost of production is irrelevant. The infrastructure in and offshore Scotland was established years ago and the price to consumers is probably now several times the cost.
Complain about this comment
107. northhighlander
"Note you don't offer positive comment, or address any of the subsidy shortcomings of wind power, I wonder why...
Such as, the wind is not a static entity it varies in intensity across these Isles and can be very deceptive that the airstream is stronger the higher the elevation which you will be aware of if you have ever been up in a cherry picker. The UK has subsidised various industries for decades to justify there establishment so susidising an indusry which is vital to all its citizens rather than a select few in a single area can not be criticised in any form.
Anyway the UK has significant stocks of Uranium and it is usually purchased in small quantities from stable sources, not gas from unpredictable unstable sources that is required 24 hours a day every day."
Oh I see nuclear doesn't work 24 hours a day! How do you wish to replenish those dwindling stocks, import as we do not have mineable uranium and even France has run out. Nuclear is not self sustaining as it needs a fossil fueled power source to keep it running or shutting down, sensible I think not.
Complain about this comment
#44 Tom
"It does not matter the energy source but every industry still relies on some level of fossil fuels, it's not self-sufficient really..."
Luckily we have access to those too at the moment and would be able to conserve stocks until we weren't so heavily reliant on fossil fuels. I stand by my point though, that our electricity demands would know longer be reliant on fossilor nuclear sources.
#48 northhighlander
It certainly is your opinion. Not being familiar with the details of the incident you refer to then it would indeed if the turbine blades were involved. However, in relation to your assertion that nuclear was safer I don't think it was flippant or in poor taste, if turbine blades are the worst to fear from wind power as opposed to the risks of nuclear power then I know which I would choose.
I see no-one that advocates nuclear power has bothered to address the issues of long term waste disposal, I wonder why, could it be that is considered 'not our problem' as we won't be around when it could potentially all go horribly wrong?
Complain about this comment
62. northhighlander
"Every wind farm is subidised. If not they don't make money."
I've had a quick look around and haven't seen any evidence showing that windfarms wouldn't make any profit in the absence of subsidy - could you post a link please.
Complain about this comment
113. jediirnbru
Come 2027 the existing devices will be nearing the end of their lives and my money would go on another subsidy being required to replace them
Complain about this comment
#32
Utter rubbish.
Do you include the thousands dead right across Europe because of Chernobyl.
Where do we get uranium ore when it runs out (probably before 2050)?
Is it a good idea when we have no uranium ourselves to be dependent on a fuel source from a number of unstable areas in the world, some of whom are not at all friendly to us?
TO compare like with like have you calculated the number of miners who have died extracting uranium ore?
Or the number of people who have died and are dying in the clusters of leukaemia, non Hodgkins lymphoma and throat and oespphagus cancers around the plants. The only thing nuclear power stations are very good at is covering up the leaks, errors and near catastrophes that continue in them.
Niclear power is quite the most expensive and most dangerous way the world has to date devised to boil lots of water.
The figures quoted by the nuclear lobby of the price per unit of electricity provided by nucleat power always does not include the enormous costs of building the plants and the enormous costs of decommissioning the these plans or the even more enormous costs incurredd almost forever to deal with the nuclear waste. They quote only the present costs incurred by running the plant. It's like suggesting when you acquire a new car your only expense is the petrol.
Next year, 25 years after an explosion which killed God know how many people, the authorities in the Ukraine are having to build another heavy concrete shield over Chernobyl because it is still poisoning the wider environment.
Just the job for Glasgow Green
Complain about this comment
just watching the 10oclock News Haiti disaster.....suspect we are now past moderators bedtime.....but just in case...
EDF energy have proved to us all that nuclear is cheaper because even Scotland imports electricity....all the way from French nuclear power stations....to offset the overall unit cost of electricity to the consumer. Why would we ever need to import french electricity if we already produce more than we actually need ourselves?
Complain about this comment
A (relatively) short term period of subsidy for these emerging renewable energy sources in order to get them up and running is surely acceptable with a view to long term energy security, as opposed to continually pouring money into the big conrete lined hole i.e. nuclear.
Perhaps there may be some interested in this academic literature on the subject available in .pdf format:
Reconsidering public acceptance of renewable energy technologies: a critical review
Complain about this comment
A question that is never asked.
Has any of the power generated by wind turbines ever been used?
The system generates a surplus, which is a good thing, so as to avoid blackouts.
Nuclear produces an unvarying supply, coal stations, days to adjust, gas and oil is more variable and hydro brings instant electric which is why it is reserved to meet peak demand.
To a fluctuating surplus wind introduces a fluctuating supply.
However, if it does not replace an existing generating source then it is of no value and I doubt it has ever done so.
Has output from any other source ever been reduced to be replaced by that from wind?
Complain about this comment
northhighlander, especially for you, you'll like this as I think it makes some of the points you've been advocating:
"Energy issues are crucial for Scotland. Considered are the environmental, social and political questions surrounding energy and environment in general, and analyses the passionate arguments surrounding onshore wind farm developments in Scotland in particular. Scotland has the best onshore and offshore wind resources in Europe, with almost a quarter of the total resource, and onshore wind is now rapidly overtaking hydropower as the renewable technology with the greatest generating capacity. This development has proved highly controversial, with many schemes attracting vociferous public opposition. The main issues involved are explored and shows that whilst some of the controversy centres on factual issues such as job creation, intermittency or bird mortality, a primary reason why consensus is so elusive is that conflicting values lie at the core of the debate. Issues such as landscape aesthetics, community (dis)empowerment and the relative importance of global and local factors are perceptual, unquantifiable and shaped by personal world views. Consequently, even if all the misinformation provided by those supporting or opposing wind farms was removed, profound disagreements would remain about the appropriate choices for securing Scotland's future power supply. This highlights the need to deepen our understanding of the social construction of public attitudes, to develop better criteria for strategic locational guidance and to investigate the potential of emerging development models such as community-scale wind power schemes."
Charles Warren, University of St Andrews
Complain about this comment
Scotland No More?
Complain about this comment
76. loveme2times
"Can anyone explain to me how to post hyperlinks on this comments page?"
You did it already. :)
If you want to be able to add a hyperlink with some other text displayed rather than the url itself, you can find out how (and other useful stuff) at tipiglen.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
120 Andrew
Your wrong, Scotland does not import electric. The interconnector is used to export.
Complain about this comment
Just watched Scottish Questions from Westminster - what a waste of time!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
122. rochcarlie:
You are correct about the fluctuating supply, even if sited offshore. Hydro-electric is I think the only power source that is instant, since you simply open up the sluice gates.
The biggest threat we have to renewable power supplies are the NIMBY brigade. Underground cables are a good idea, but they are extremely expensive and more so if they require repair. And if you need to repai an underground cable that means a lot of digging.
The solution to energy has to be multiple approaches. Wind, clean coal, gas and hydro. What is also needed is the opportunity for insulating homes cheaply. Instead of spending 2 billion on a bridge, why not spend a fraction of that money helping homeowners and businesses (where applicable) to insulate their premises? In addition you run an education programme. (I was once an energy warden, makes you as popular as traffic warden as you chase people around to switch off lights!).
If people spend less money on energy, it leaves them with more spare money which can be spent thus helping the economy.
Most of the housing stock in Scotland is old, and not designed to be energy efficient.
Post 18 correctly points out that none of the energy companies are Scottish. Therefore it is beneficial to reduce the income they are gaining from our energy usage. Either that or the Scottish Government forms its own company if allowed to legally.
Core services in the country should never, ever be privatised - energy, transport, health, education and defence.
Complain about this comment
81 old nat,
When I usualy post a link by copy & paste it never appears as a hyperlink but this time for some reason it did. (not complaining)
Good journalism is hard to find these days as we all know but you can trust old Ken.
96 Online Ed,
I thought this piece would be of interest to you from reading your blog, I just wish there were journalists like him, I think we would all be happier. (keep up the good work)
For anyone that missed the link here it is again (also an excuse to see if I can work the hyperlink again!!!!)
http://www.scottishreview.net/KRoy193.html
Complain about this comment
Watched Newsnight Scotland.
Labour complaints about this appear to boil down to the announcement not mentioning some details out of the 5 volumes that the report is.
In particular that the reporting officer had recommended refusing permission for 2 small parts of the line.
Gordon Brewer then extracted that if this permission was refused then the line may be in jeopardy, also picked up on the matter stated by Lewis Macdonald, that if refused then planning consent need not be re applied for, for these two sections?
Sorry but Macdonald was made to look foolish and petty.
Complain about this comment
Oh and thanks to all who posted links to help my hyperlink problem.
It's late
Good night
Complain about this comment
128. oldnat
SoS propoganda half hour does nothing for anyone except the commisioner and understudy to spin.
Complain about this comment
130. enneffess
"Core services in the country should never, ever be privatised - energy, transport, health, education and defence."
Or water.
Complain about this comment
When Brewer interviewed the minister on this subject a couple of nights agohe was very aggressive. Brewer sounds like he thinks he has a divine right to get all the information he demands, even before parliament has heard it.
Complain about this comment
100 kered
Does Scotland need to sustain energy levels? Yes! why wouldn't we?
There is an excess of generating capacity in Scotland, that is why so much is exported.The Beauly to Denny line is an existing line?
Conversely, a similar quantity of electricity could be imported.From whom at what expense and what happens if the country has a dispute and our electricity is cut off?.
Most of our generating capacity could disappear overnight and it would not make a blind bit of difference, except to the shareholders of the global power companies.I think your being over zealous there rochcarlie.
Complain about this comment
Interesting point from the recent Populus poll
84% of Tories expect their side to gain a majority, while only 47% of Labour supporters expect theirs to do the same.
Of the small Scots sample, only 21% expect Labour to win!
Complain about this comment
It really does feel and look like labour are handing the tories the election on a gift plate.
What worries me more is the rise in the BNP support, many old left wing voters now consider the BNP as a left wing party, promising left wing policies?. How can a far right organisation be interpeted as a left wing party?. Politics gone mad.
Complain about this comment
Great reasons why Scots should reject Labour totally.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6987136.ece
Bill Rammell (Armed Forces Minister) warns that the following trends made it difficult for Britain to conduct foreign wars -
1. the decline of deference and the growth in mistrust of those in authority, which challenge government and military decision-making
2. the new information age, which brings with it the demand for a different kind of communication between the Government and the public about military operations
3. a freedom-of-information culture, which asserts that everything known to the State should be in the public domain without considering the impact of this on government’s ability to act in our best interest.
All sound damn good to me if they stop deferential toadying to the likes of Blair!
Complain about this comment
Here's another! In the house of commons today during an Education and university skills debate.The shadow secretary for skills uni/educ David Willets conservative/ Mp, praised the teachers and lecturers Trade Unions as the secretary for state or higher education David Lammy labour /mp looked totally confused by Mr Willets declaration of support for a trade union. Stranger by the Day!.
Complain about this comment
Anyone remember when Labour bitterly opposed the Tory "right to buy" public housing?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8457681.stm
"Deputy Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont said ministers should be providing enough cash to build more homes, rather than 'tinkering' with right to buy."
Complain about this comment
That's the kinda thing I'm talking about.
If Johann Lamont supports the need for more council housing at affordable rents, then why is she opposing something that will create just that kind of policy?.Scottish labour should support the action to remove the right to buy on newish council homes, while still supporting the need to build more affordable homes.
Complain about this comment
142. oldnat
"Anyone remember when Labour bitterly opposed the Tory "right to buy" public housing?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8457681.stm
"Deputy Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont said ministers should be providing enough cash to build more homes, rather than 'tinkering' with right to buy."
"
Take a good look at that article--replete with quotes from the opposition to this bill. Not a SINGLE quote from the SNP in support of it.
Ask yourself. HOW can any country continue to replenish their supply of such housing if it is CONTINUALLY being sold?
Complain about this comment
144. JRMacClure
That was my point.
It was important to reform the housing stock in Scotland. The creation of vast council schemes by Tory and Labour policies in the 1950s did create difficulties, and I didn't have a problem with the sale of a proportion of council houses - though I wanted councils to be free to use the revenues to buy property from the private sector to create more balanced communities.
This is quite a good example of the sort of social housing that should not be subject to the right to buy -
http://news.scotsman.com/isleofgigha/Gigha-opens-doors-with-first.2761374.jp
Complain about this comment
Alex Neil, release information about his new policy today to help those in fuel poverty deal with their energy bills.Sounds like a very good policy indeed and about time someone took the matter on.Well done! you Alex.I'm waiting for the shadow energy Scottish minister to endorse this action.
Complain about this comment
Scots Tories demonstrate how out of touch they are with education
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article6987259.ece
Complain about this comment
146. kered
"I'm waiting for the shadow energy Scottish minister to endorse this action."
And waiting, and waiting, and waiting ..........
Complain about this comment
Much has been said about the manufacture of renewable generation equipment being foreign, however, our SNP government are actively pushing for huge investment in companies here. Notabally BiFab, Nigg and Arnish which has the potential to create many thousands of jobs.
Scotland has the people and the ability to become world leaders in the renewable field with the labour party being the only obstacle to achieving this.
You wouldn't have thought that the Outer Hebrides was once the worlds leading manufacturer of wave generation equipment until labour realised that this was creating jobs and boosting Scotlands image abroad and so sold it out to Portugal.
As someone mentioned before Scotland could have led the world in carbon capture but refusal by labour to invest meant that Abu Dhabi is now the leader in that field.
Clean coal was also mentioned. Scotland is sitting on Europes largest seam of low sulphur coal yet deep mining was finished in this country under labour under suspicious circumstances. Our last deep mine at Longannet had been awarded a £40m investment yet when Brian Wilson became energy minister he demanded the £40m be handed back to the government and shortly after that the mine mysteriously flooded.
Now, maybe I'm just being cynical but Brian Wilson was on the board of AMEC nuclear at the time and having a clean coal industry would be detrimental to his interests.
Complain about this comment
I was curious as to when the SNP would start it's election campaign and just who they would target! for votes. Not suprisingly it's labour, that will be targeted by the SNP and they have statrted pretty well indeed, with the proposal to dump the right to but and help[ for those in fuel poverty, two proposals that will indeed shift the core labour vote.
If you think about it, the SNP dont have to worry to much about the Tories and they certainly know who to play the lib/dems, so they have a classic attack on labour by intoducing labour policy! well! policies that people would once have associated with the labour movement.
Complain about this comment
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article6987259.ece
Their welfare reform plans are totally frightening! Cameron believe that child poverty steems from the hosuehold that children are raised in.He refuses to accept that hereditary poverty comes from an array of circumstances, Low incomes, poor housing,no prospects and a society that values money more than life.
We in Scotland want to make our state education system better than the private system.That is the first and real aim to eliminate poverty.
Complain about this comment
150. kered
"I was curious as to when the SNP would start it's election campaign"
Maybe I'm just naive, but I hadn't seen it that way. I thought of it as just a fairly centrist Social Democratic party pursuing social justice policies!
You may be right though. If so the Labour Party is being unbelievably stupid. To oppose social justice measures because the SNP came up with them, seems so crass that they shouldn't be trusted with power until they have reformed themselves as a party which is concerned with the people rather than personal power.
Jimmy Maxton must be birling in his grave seeing this lot!
Complain about this comment
Yes! very sad indeed. I had been conversing on the LL site recently and got into a real tussle with a conservative from the SE of England, who had all the arrogance of a young Portello, anyway the debate got on to Scotland and he kept on insisting that everyone in the SE of England had no time for Scotland and wanted it to leave and become Independent, that's when I reminded him that some 2 million Scots did live in England and maybe they wished for Independence too, so they could return home.
Now do the Scots in England get a choice to vote SNP on their ballot paper?. probably not! but why not?.
Complain about this comment
145. oldnat
"That was my point."
Sorry I didn't make it clear. I was agreeing with you. :-)
Complain about this comment
152. oldnat
"To oppose social justice measures because the SNP came up with them, seems so crass that they shouldn't be trusted with power until they have reformed themselves as a party which is concerned with the people rather than personal power.
Jimmy Maxton must be birling in his grave seeing this lot!"
Is it any different that the Labour in Holyrood opposing minimum pricing on liquor. Could they make it any plainer that this is solely because it is an SNP policy as Labour in England pursues exactly the same policy.
Surely this has been what they have doing for quite some time. The good of Scotland is apparently the last thing on their agenda and the only thing that matters is opposing any SNP policy. This is a sad form of "politics" -- the absolute lowest form whatever party practices it.
Complain about this comment
153. kered
"he kept on insisting that everyone in the SE of England had no time for Scotland"
I asked on UK Polling report whether anyone had bothered to ask the English as to their views in any poll, as to the UK constitutional settlement. Seems that no one has, but I got a number of fascinating replies with wholly divergent views, and they didn't seem bothered by the fact that they were simply pontificating their personal views.
Maybe it's about time the SNP commissioned a YouGov poll in England as to how they want the UK to develop/ossify/disintegrate, since the English/British don't seem to want to find out!
Complain about this comment
155. JRMacClure
"Surely this has been what they have doing for quite some time."
Indeed they have! It's going to provide very meaty stuff for an SNP campaign. Labour - the party of the drinks industry, selling off public housing, etc etc
Quite looking forward to that!
Complain about this comment
Yes! very interesting indeed. There's no doubt a large proportion of south England does want to lay some claim to English rule and an English only parliament.At the end of the day! I suppose they have every right to challenge this stupid status quo setup.To be honest it really is 12th century stuff.
Complain about this comment
158. kered
"To be honest it really is 12th century stuff."
I'm sure you weren't being literal but feel impelled to point out that it really isn't. Until some 600 years after the 12th century Scotland and England did not share the same parliament. In fact, in the 12th century, the English had other problems to worry them than their relations with the Scots--invading Normans among them. ;)
Complain about this comment
SNP take Jim Murphy to task at last
The exchange was in the commons and Murphy's reply contained an allegation that the SNP were obsessed with him and were always calling for him to be sacked.
I'm not so sure the SNP are obsessed with him, they seem to treat him with the contempt he deserves. However can Murphy be taken to task for stating that the SNP are always calling for him to be sacked?
I have no recollection of any such calls, only for the position of SOS to be abolished - but they have been saying that since before Murphy started seriously abusing it.
Complain about this comment
*160
Having watched this broadcast live (HoC Scottish Affairs Committee) from a Westminster commitee room, the Scotsman has been quite limited in their description of events.
JM was going through - once again - his usual 'It wisnae me - it was the bad SNP!' and, to some extent this was unchallenged by the chair. Pete Wishart intervened strongly! (but in my opinion - accurately). The whole session can be seen here (Mr Murphy's sessions starts about 36.10) http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=5553
Complain about this comment
Reference #145 and the Housing Stock.
On reflection, the 1950s and 60s Planners of the Tory and Labour Parties has as much foresight as a backward looking blind frog and probably as much intelligence when they chose to build those hugh housing scemes on the outskirts of our towns.
One only has to compare London with Paris to realise the mess they made. In the evening and at the week-ends, Central London is DEAD. Only some 2,000 people actually reside in the City of Westminster and most of they are involved in the security of the office blocks etc., such as night watchmen. Compare with Paris where the commercial sector was bannished to the outskirts - La Defence- is the prime example, served with first class rail, tram, bus and road links. Yje City centre is full of shops, cafes, and HOUSES where people LIVE and ENJOY THEMSELVES.
Remember it was our woderful Westminster Government (Tory and Labour Parties) who authourised, financed and built these monstrosities like Easterhouse with very little regard to ammenities such as shops, pubs, recreational areas etc. Today, we pay the price with high levels of crime, kids standing around street corners, bored out of their tiny little minds consumming alcohol in order to rid themselves of the horrors of life in such places. Thank you, Westminster.
We hear about Wendy Alexander going on about planning - is this yet another case of the pot calling the kettle black?? What qualifications in town planning has Wendy Alexander anyway?? I would doubt very little if anything, so actually - what would she really know about the subject??
Complain about this comment
#153 - why would people living in England be interested in voting for a party that does not field candidates in their area?
Complain about this comment
All energy production has pros and cons but when it comes to COST, nobody can tell you how much Nuclear will finally cost, even on current production. So anybody who states Nuclear costs X is misinformed or trying to misinform others.
The facts of Nuclear cost needs to take the full cycle into account.
Decommissioning is expensive and the total costs keep getting revised every 2 or 3 years (upwards). National Statistics and national audit office and NDA can give details.
No sites or method for long term waste storage has yet been finalised across the UK. Vitrification is at least in process for temporary storage at Sellafield.
Nuclear certainly has its place in a UK context. However, politicians have been avoiding how and where to deal with the waste. This is irresponsible, negligent and altogether typical.
So we do not know the overall cost of Nuclear.
At least the Scottish parliament showed a little backbone and voted not to build any more plants in Scotland until we do know where and exactly how wee will ultimately dispose of the higher level wastes.
Personally I think that even in Scotland there is an argument for at least 1 Nuclear Plant for baseload at an existing site. But this then means we have to have all the supporting infrastructure around for just this. England, in choosing to build many plants makes more economic sense at least. England also has a lack of sufficient alternative sources.
Yet, nobody in England can tell you where they will put the waste. Gordon Brown and Family are strong proponents of Nuclear. Why hasn't his government decided where to bury it then? All they have done is have different groups come up with recommendations at our expense, do nothing, then have yet another investigation and another strategy. It is now between NDA and CoRWM to come up with a plan.
So, the NDA, finally, published a report in December 2009 for its proposed strategy for waste management. Their current stage for waste mangement strategy , they describe themselves as "We are in the process of aligning our overall programme of work against a number of ‘strategic objectives"
Really?
How about facts? How many people are dealing with the waste already?
"Over 20,000 people work at NDA sites, most of which carry out substantial waste management activities." Creates some jobs then.
How about waste disposal, where and when?
Intermediate waste disposal: is a Best Guess
'to be transferred to geological disposal once the disposal facility is available (estimated to be from year 2040).'
Translastes as We do not know or are not telling.
High level waste:
"Vitrified HLW is held at Sellafield pending the availability of geological disposal route, which is estimated to be from year 2075"
The waste is vitrified and held at sellefield but how it will finally be disposed of and when is a subject they want to hand to another generation.
Not only is this irresponsible but DO NOT try tell to me Nuclear is cheaper until you can tell me how much it will finally cost. The quotes above also only applies to England. Scotlands strategy for long term waste disposal of existing waste is "near site, near surface".
So now tell me, how does this stack aganst other alternatives? Yes, especially Andrew, please tell me. Please also tell the NDA as you seem to know more than they do.
Complain about this comment
2. At 2:18pm on 13 Jan 2010, john
Harsh words! There is an alternative. Underground!
A bit more expensive in the very short term.
I cannot abide these people who cannot see past 2 weeks in front of them for the sake of a few bob and those who are so easily and blindingly convinced to think likewise.
Why destroy for what you so call progress when we can preserve and improve. Yes, a few quid and the ease of supplying the south with power from our scarfices. As always has been the case.
Complain about this comment
#165 Phil
The simple answer is that it is money that we don't have at the moment. This investment is already long overdue. I would also point out that burying the lines is more destructive in the short term to the enviroment, so would be unsuitable for areas of Scientific interest, and so it only applies to areas of Scenic beauty.
I have no objection to mitigation, as long as it is decided now, and does not delay the implementation. What I object to are the people who seem to delight in delaying progress, but offer no alternative ways farward.
John
Complain about this comment
Would nuclear energy supporters on this blog reassure us that we would not see repeats of the OL3 Nuclear plant story in Finland.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8138869.stm
The € 1.7 Billion cost overrun seems excessive considering that plant may never actually start up operations due to safety concerns
Complain about this comment
Just watched FMQ, very interesting session, not so much for the questions and answers but for the tone in which it was conducted. Iain Grey raised question of literacy in a very sensible and consolatory manner which was reciprocated. Both agreed that this topic had to be tackled and that the SG was sympathetic to the findings of the Literacy report.
Annabel Goldie had another very poor session, two in a row. At one point had to be corrected by the presiding officer on the competence of her question.
Are we entering a new period of concessional government, or is it just a tactic with an election in the offing.
Complain about this comment
For those talking about jobs in the wind energy sector, I work in that sector (so that's at least on Scottish job created!). The current estimate is that there are 15 jobs per MW of installed capacity created. This is right through the development and deployment cycle (and in suppliers, etc). There are currently over 100,000 jobs directly in wind energy throughout Europe. The UK has 4000 of these. Denmark has 36000.
The UK has missed the boat on most of the development jobs, but it is not true to say that there are no jobs created by the deployments. It is true that a lot of the commissioning engineers come from the turbine manafacturer's bases in germany, denmark or Spain, but they do train local maintenance engineers to look after the turbines once they are commissioned. These are highly skilled jobs, with these engineers going on (potentially) to deployment and develpment activities. During the construction phase, the jobs will mostly be local constructors (eg roads, infrastructure, etc with only a very few being imported from abroad. Each windfarm will have a manager, and with the larger ones they will be onsite. The larger ones will have permanent maintenance crews on site all the time, while for smaller ones (up to about 15 turbines), the maintenance crews will cover a number of sites. As well as the maintenance, there is also the reporting, and manageing. this may be done off-site with remote systems (even half way round the world), but it is not true to say that these jobs are not going to Scotland. Look at the remote management facility that was recently opened in Inverness, where they are monitoring (from there) sites all round Europe. These again are high quality jobs.
The local jobs benefit will increase with the size of the site, as in these cases it makes sense for the management/maintenance teams to be onsite (and hence living locally). The construction phase will also be longer, so again it will make more sense to hire these people locally.
With regards the actual turbine manafacture, the turbine towers (and in some cases the blades) can be built anywhere, and frequently are (this is what the facility at campbelltown was manafacturing. Typically however it is only the Nacelle that is produced in the turbine's home state (Hence the large number of direct jobs in Denmark, Germany and Spain). These nacelles however will use components from all over the world (hence the 15 jobs per MW). With our history of engineering and electronics, Scotland should be able to get its share of these.
I will however shout out a note of caution: There are now over 120 different turbine manafacturer's in China (virtually all started within the last 5 years). Expect them to start exporting soon. China also has a stranglehold on the supply of rare earth metals vital for the manafacture of permanent magnets (used in the permanent magnet, direct drive type of turbine). They are supplying this metal artificially cheaply to their domestic market, which will allow their manafacturers to undercut their competitors. (permanent magnet turbines was a development route that was neglected in the past because of the expense of making the rare earth magnets. It is a simpler technology than is used in most european or american/Japanese designs, and so could start to dominate the market. The technical developemnt of turbine designs has trended towards making them simpler (over the last 10 years))
John
Complain about this comment
I see on the google grapevine that the fragrant Sally Magnusson has been slapped on the wrist ( not grilled?) for writing to a Sunday newspaper to complain about Britain's treatment of Iceland over interest repayments.
Ochone.
Complain about this comment
#170 GrassyKnollington
"A BBC Scotland spokesman confirmed that Magnusson was reprimanded for breaking rules banning news staff from publicly stating their opinions on political issues. She has been warned to pay closer attention to the rules in the future."
How does oor Glen get away with it then? It seems pretty evident that with his manner he states his opinion quite clearly on political issues or os that different because he isnt criticising labour?
Complain about this comment
149. Harry Stottle
To correct you on a point of accuracy the SNP government is not leading the efforts at Nigg. That is being done by Highland Council. Typical SNP trying to take credit for a lot of hard work over a lot of years by someone else.
Complain about this comment
171. At 1:05pm on 14 Jan 2010, skintybroko wrote:
#170 GrassyKnollington
"A BBC Scotland spokesman confirmed that Magnusson was reprimanded for breaking rules banning news staff from publicly stating their opinions on political issues. She has been warned to pay closer attention to the rules in the future."
How does oor Glen get away with it then? It seems pretty evident that with his manner he states his opinion quite clearly on political issues or os that different because he isnt criticising labour?
It's a timely reprimand and draws attention to what constitutes 'stating their opinion'.
The BBC clearly believe that their presenters are incapable of expressing their political beliefs when in front of the microphone or camera.
The question though is; What constitutes political expression?
Can political expression be defines and recognised by means other than explicitly making a point? I would argue yes; symbolism, body language, nuances, misrepresentation, subtle use of language and of course a tendency to harass representativs of only one party would constutute such expression.
People express political views all the time without uttering a single word - some employees at BBC Scotland express political views regularly.
FMQ's:
I haven't watched it yet but understand that Iain Gray adopted a sensible stance this time.
Will Brian 'Go Large' on this new approach?
Complain about this comment
#170 GrassyKnollington
But she is speaking up for terrorists, who have, by their evil machinations, undermined the Great Leader's claim to have "saved" the world. If she carried on she would be in line for a £2.5 million mansion, £25,000 a year and a police protection squad and the BBC can't (won't) match that as she doesn't "w" her "r"s.
Complain about this comment
exactly , just goes to prove the double standards of the beeb, and their Labour masters.
Incidentally if Westminster is so desperate for the 2.6bn plus interest from the residents of Iceland, why does it not call on the 260bn that makes it the 3rd largest holder of US debt ????
My understanding is the banks in Iceland were privatised, so how does that make it the debt of the Icelandic public ??
Complain about this comment
Apologies if this has already been mentioned:-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6983707/Cost-of-cheap-alcohol-will-double-to-curb-binge-drinking.html
How is Gray going to wriggle his way out of this one?!
Complain about this comment
skintybroko, Online Ed, handclapping, romeplebian lol, the whole business is enough to make you weep.
I predict that on this evening's Reporting Scotland, Sal will slightly alter her May 2007 election night question and say to Salmond " First Minister, what do you have to say to the people of Iceland who are afraid this evening?"
Complain about this comment
Online Ed, I think Brian's employed a blog whoosh just in time to save Sally's blushes!
The new thread has an opening line which may keep the moderators on their toes. Did someone mention Geoff Hoon?
Complain about this comment
Funny that. My wife who is not a great fan of things political, wondered why Sally looked as though she had been crying on the mid-day news bulletin. Was it a very recent reprimand?
Complain about this comment
Why wasn't she reprimanded for her comments as Chair of the panel discussion of the Scotlands History programme? Well, that was a comment against the SNP policies, maybe that's why.
Complain about this comment
Looking over this talk of Nimbys etc, I think the vast majority of people who protested about the line weren't against it, but were looking at ways of mitigating its impact.
In fact on the case of health it wasn't "not in my back yard" but more like not in anyone's back yard.
Common sense has prevailed with the high-voltage line around the Olympic stadium in London. It has prevailed too with the burial of a line in Yorkshire and many like them in Europe - why not Scotland?
I admire the "peer review" comment, but as my s grade chemistry studies showed me, if it was peer review that allowed drugs, we'd approve thalidomide and turn down aspirin. Common sense or the "precaution principle" is then the best route.
People need to be confident that the right decision has been made on the right grounds and so far the nervy, erm and um strewn responses have done little to convince us.
People should be mindful that, when it comes to big development projects Holyrood, whether in Scot Exec and Scot Govt guise, has a poor record - just look at the thing that decision makers sit in.
The Stirling-Alloa line and now its coal trains, GARL, trams, etc, etc, are all developments involving Holyrood which, when we look upon them, should make us rightly nervous about the scrutiny given to the Beauly to Denny power line.
I truly hope that the jobs the line promises materialise and that the energy security it aims to bring is fulfilled.
Complain about this comment
166. At 11:59am on 14 Jan 2010, john wrote:
Sorry, I think you are wrong. Well wrong. Money we don't have? What about all the money power companies and developers are raking in from hugely inflated power prices and subsidys (which, by the way, does not go to reduce bills) from hugely deflated people, in no small way due to the feeble placement of windmills on hills that produce so little power that it costs three times as much to buy? I supose the camp your in would have the typical response of just throwing mare winmills up. Sorry didn't mean to assume.
Get them pylons underground and get them out of our faces. Why? Because we can.
The pylons will just remind me of the little worth people have put on this country and its people for centurys. That's why I wanted independence.
As for jobs, well...the first minister himself claims that tourism is one of the main employment oportunitys of scotland.
I am not so naive as to think that undergrounding this thing will not have effects on the environment but I bet you the short term damage will repair itself just as quick as the short term damage caused by installing pylons will, with the added benefit of not having to glower at them. I also accept that it would maybe not be possible to underground entirely. It shows me though, how little concern people have when they have no enthusiasim for doing so.
And, maybe the underground line might need more maintenence, thereby creating more jobs? But wait, what will more maintenence cost? More money. Hmmm..I dont' know, is it the old chicken or the egg 1st thing? There are certain people promoting the creation of jobs out of thin air with the idea that it will create money. Where does the money come from in the begining?
We don't have the money....ugh..
Complain about this comment
#182 Phil...
It is a private sector company paying the money. If we demand that they should spend more, then they'll delay the project. It is already too late IMHO. (please note, I am not in favour of the utilities being privatised, but that is the current situation)
The underground lines will also be hotter, less efficient, and costlier to run (the lines will have to be cooled as the heat created by the electrical resisitance has nowhere to go). Either this or they will be a LOT more expensive.
Read my comments in the previous thread about this being only one area of natural beauty. IMHO the area being talked about is not particularly breathtaking, so why shold it be protected. people will soon get used to the pylons. Don't forget most people who live near turbines are in favour of them, and quite like the sight of them (on average). It is those that don't live near them that object t the site. It will be similar with the pylons.
John
Complain about this comment
183. At 4:56pm on 14 Jan 2010, john
"IMHO the area being talked about is not particularly breathtaking, so why shold it be protected."
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, what about if I want to get a clear view at something I consider breathtaking just beyond the pylons?
"people will soon get used to the pylons."
Oh, gee, thanks!
"Don't forget most people who live near turbines are in favour of them, and quite like the sight of them (on average)."
Yeah, well, if you like the look of them, move closer to them right enuff. I'll not be hugging any.
"It is those that don't live near them that object t the site. It will be similar with the pylons."
Would that be the same people who want to get as far away from them as possible?
Any way, it doesn't matter diddley what I think, nor you.
Just expressing my dissaproval of the continuing trend.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS