| N E W S F E E D S >>> |
|
Wind Farms News Bulletins And Information |
|||
| Forss Wind Farm Index | Wind Farm Index | ||
|
Forss Wind Farm FORSS WINDMILLS - A RESIDENTS VIEW Ah, the end to another beautiful quiet day in
Caithness. February 10th 2003 will go down in history round here as
the last day we had unspoiled views of Orkney, as on February 11th,
several lorries containing a crane and parts of some wind turbines
arrived at Hill of Lybster, Forss - or as it's known to most people,
the US Base. On today, Valentines Day, there are no cards to
welcome this industrial eyesore, except perhaps from the landowner,
who is the only one benefitting from this development. One turbine
is already up and the second under construction. Residents are absolutely disgusted with the situation - despite attempts by John Thurso MP to get a public debate on all Caithness wind developments under way (after being bombarded by objections), nothing has resulted, which means that we can only sit and watch the men from the Planning Committee decide on our future - our livelihoods, our quality of life, our house values, and our health. There are about 20 homes situated within a 1km distance of these turbines who will be affected. Health issues from living near windfarms are not generally acknowledged, but there are many reported cases where long-term exposure to the constant noise has caused at first stress, then extreme stress, then breakdown, usually followed by selling up (for a massive loss) and moving away. Hang on a minute - that's a little reminicient of what happened last time some clown in the south decided to put "a good little earner" up our way, isn't it? Could these developments lead to a new Highland Clearances? Certainly, as far as villages and farms within a mile or so of developments are concerned. Health effects on animals are less well documented. So what are we - the community - getting out of this? Highland Council have talked about levels of community compensation, but by "community" they mean Thurso, Wick and even Inverness - not those having to live beside it. Yet local compensation is not new - developers of the Dunbeath windfarm have effectively bought out the local opposition by offering an annual sum per house within a certain distance of the development until it comes down. Our developer and landowner haven't even had the decency to drop us a line to let us know it was coming! I would consider that the least developers can do is offer people who do not want to live beside their development a fair price for their home. The Planning Department in Inverness have had objections on these proposals from across the world. People have written from throughout the UK, Europe and the USA objecting to these developments. Some have said that they will not now visit Caithness as tourists and instead will go directly from Helmsdale to Tongue and out west. At least one other has pulled out of investment in the area as a result. So are the Planning Committee going to listen? We hope so, but have no guarantees of any sense in this at all. There is, after all, no nationally or locally prescribed minimum distances between turbines and occupied homes, or between individual windfarm developments. There were, but Highland Council did away with them. And, despite spending good taxpayers money on a trip to a windfarm in Germany last year, when the Council members who had been recommended a minimum distance of 1km between turbines and homes, and of 10km between windfarms, the recommendation was overturned as no-one could agree on what the actual distances should be! Having said all that, things have changed for the better recently, and on-shore wind farms are now a thing of the past. In November 2002, Brian Wilson announced a major offshore initiative for Wind Energy, with developments to be situated far away from homes, out of sight, out of hearing, and close to where the power is actually needed. The key development areas identified are in the Wash, the Thames Estuary, and off the west coast. This very much follows the lead by Denmark and in January 2003, the Irish Government announced a similar measure. Off-shore developments are not restricted in height, size and numbers of turbines as land-based developments are, so can be much larger, much more efficient, and can produce significantly more power. The DTI are currently considering views on this (closes on Feb 18th) so have your say at http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/leg_and_reg/consents/future_offshore/index.shtml . In theory, these could produce more power than the country actually needs, and makes complete sense, so why are the almost paltry attempts to produce electricity using land-based windmills continuing at all? The answer, of course, is money. UK Government are offering huge development grants to developers, in order to get wind power off the ground. Despite facts (1) that energy generated is significantly more expensive that customers actually pay, and (2) that more carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere as a result of making and transporting the cement for windmill foundations than is ever gained from their replacement of fossil fuel stations, they continue to be approved - because developers and landowners can make significant amounts of money from it. It is estimated that the ten turbine development at Borrowston west of Forss (remember it?) will result in £900,000 to the landowner over the life of the project. That's not bad for doing nothing. So what can we do? We can sit and watch. And pray. And we can hope that when it comes down to votes on May 1st, people will remember who has defiled the Caithness landscape. We are all, of course, in favour of renewable energy, but in its righful place. And off-shore is the right place. "Weathertopper" |
|||