Conservationists condemn “insane” plan for huge Scottish wind farm

Posted: April 23, 2015 by oldbrew in Big Green, Energy, turbines, wind
Tags: ,

Windy Standard wind farm, Scotland [credit:]

Windy Standard wind farm, Scotland [credit:]

As this Herald Scotland piece points out: ‘Dumfries and Galloway … already has over 200 operational turbines, with a further 333 consented, 260 awaiting consent and at least another 450 ‘at scoping’.’ But major landowners like the Duke of Buccleuch want more – lots more. Martin Williams reports:

PLANS involving one of Britain’s biggest private landowners to develop a windfarm of up to 140 turbines stretching for several miles in Dumfries and Galloway have been described as “insane” by conservationists.

Buccleuch and 2020 Renewables, a prominent windfarm developer, announced they are examining the potential for the significant windfarm in the Lowther Hills, between Sanquhar and Wanlockhead as part of a “major land use strategy”.

Buccleuch is still pursuing an eight-turbine wind farm and hydro park at Glenmuckloch near Kirkconnel in Dumfries and Galloway.

If the new project proceeds, the partners say the economic, environmental and community benefits “could transform the area”.

Preliminary discussions have been held among Buccleuch, 2020 Renewables, other local landowners, Dumfries and Galloway Council, Scottish Natural Heritage and the Scottish Government. No decision to proceed has been taken to date and the Buccleuch say “a range of options are under consideration”.

John Glen, chief executive of Buccleuch, said the proposed farm would make a “significant contribution to the Scottish Government’s renewable energy targets”.

Full report: Conservationists condemn "insane" Buccleuch plan for one of Scotland's largest wind farms | Herald Scotland.

Where does the industrialisation of the Scottish hills stop?

  1. oldbrew says:

    Insanity rules in the wind farm goldrush. The Southern Upland Way should be re-named the Southern Windfarm Way.

    This is the general area of the proposed ‘development’:

  2. smamarver says:

    I wouldn’t call them “insane plans” but, at least as far as concerning offshore wind-parks, I would think twice; from what I’ve read here – – and on other blogs where you can find some sicentific studies, it seems that those wind-parks may influence climate in an unexpected way. More than that, they are a danger for birds and they also can alter the landscape. So….. we can have green energy, but what’s the cost? Will everybody assume it?

  3. ivan says:

    There are a few things that would make the developers pull their heads in or at least think.

    1) Absolutely no subsidies.

    2) Generated power is bought at the same rate as that from a CCGT power station.

    3) If they want the farm connected to the grid they must have on site sufficient CCGT spinning reserve to cover the total nameplate output of the farm.

    4) All output to the grid must be a a constant level.

    If they can comply with those conditions then I say let them go ahead. If they fail in any one then the application fails and should never be allowed in any shape or form for the same area.

  4. Richard111 says:

    Anyone know the manufacturing cost of just one of those turbines?
    And then the installation costs, making roads, casting foundations, connecting to grid etc.?
    How long would it take to recover the investment given electricity production as shown here:

  5. Evan HIghlander says:

    Ivan, that really makes sense

  6. Ben Vorlich says:

    Denmark is held out as an example of windpower at its best. You can monitor in real time here

  7. ivan says:

    Ben, there is a big problem with that site you give – it requires flash player, a product I have banned at work and home for its lack of security plus the fact that it only really works on windows which we don’t use.

  8. tchannon says:

    Totally agree Ivan. I’m afraid few comprehend or care.

  9. Peter Whale says:

    What you have is an agenda by the governing body to extract as much money out of the population as possible. They give the wealthy landowners a monopolistic elite, the advantage of rent seeking for owning land that is predominately unproductive. The crown estates our “poor” royalty are allowed also a rent for offshore windfams as they have sovereign rights over the sea. George Osborne became Charlie bigears best friend when he gave him the windfarm subsidies for the rent on the crown estates.
    The large corporations and utilities are compliant because they handle the collection through feed in tariffs and add their profit margin to the whole pricing structure and then distribute the funds to the elite. All of the fake charities go along with the scam because they are given a piece of the action from government. How the RSPB can promote windfarms when they destroy bats and birds in the quantity they do I will never know. Could it be the money?

  10. tgmccoy says:

    Just came back from my annual trip to Redmond,Oregon. The travel through the windfarm infestation on the banks of the Columbia river,provoked a thought from my wife: “What happens to those things if there is a volcanic eruption like St. Helens? would not the ash mess things up in the gearboxes?”
    Entirely possible….
    No if, but when.

  11. oldbrew says:

    tgmccoy: they would end up somewhere like this…

  12. tgmccoy says: