Wind farms: green boon or a blot on landscape?
Few construction projects could claim to have split public opinion so fiercely, but the growth of Scotland’s wind farms will be inescapable during the coming decade.
According to The Herald’s calculations, the 1131 turbines already installed take up roughly 54 square km, or 0.06% of Scotland’s area.
If permission was granted for every new turbine currently under consideration, however, then assuming an average coverage of one square km for every 20 turbines – the industry figure used by the British Wind Energy Association – wind farms would occupy a total of 193 square km; approximately 0.25% of the national landmass, or an area twice the size of Loch Lomond.
Campaign groups have pointed to the indirect impact on local landscapes, which they say influences a much larger area.
Scottish Natural Heritage, the Government agency that advises Holyrood on the outdoors, focuses on the area over which land management is influenced by any individual wind farm – a “footprint” significantly larger than the space physically filled by turbines.
It has worked out that new developments could lead to a total coverage of 194,459 square km, approximately 10 times the land used to house turbines directly.
As Scotland presses towards its target of producing 50% of electricity from renewable sources by 2020, with an interim target of 31% by 2011, analysts on all sides of the debate have warned that further expansion of onshore wind farms will be necessary whatever the consequences. Wherever plans for wind energy are announced, they brew division and discontent among rival factions.
Conservation charity the John Muir Trust warned that current plans, if allowed to run unchecked, could destroy some of Scotland’s most picturesque countryside.
Helen McDade, head of policy at the Trust, said: “Too many onshore wind developments, from Shetland and Lewis to the Perthshire highlands, are threatening to scar the country’s world-class landscapes and damage sensitive upland habitats.
“The Government’s strategy has been transformed from an initial promise to reduce emissions, and generate energy through a mix of renewables, to one that is almost solely focused on heavily subsidised wind farms.”
WWF Scotland director Dr Richard Dixon said he could appreciate campaigners’ concerns about the countryside and wildlife, but that onshore wind was the most available technology for meeting green energy targets in the short term.
“One of the reasons for the concentration of onshore wind is that it’s one of the more mature technologies, which means that in terms of meeting our 2020 targets it is very important. After that, we may be able to spend more money on developing alternatives, such as offshore wind and wave power,” he said.
Duncan McLaren, chief executive of Friends of the Earth Scotland, agreed that ministers’ legally-binding pledge to reduce emissions left little alternative to onshore wind.
He said: “Of course not every wind farm ought to be consented but there is adequate capacity, on and offshore, for windpower to play a role in moving towards a decarbonised energy system by 2030. Movement towards this within the next decade will be required if Scotland is to achieve its ambitious targets of cutting emissions by 42% by 2020.”
The Scottish Government, which takes control of all large power projects over and above local authorities, is well aware of the need to strike a balance in its decision-making process.
In response to the concerns raised by countryside conservation groups, Energy Minister Jim Mather told The Herald: “We’ve always said ‘not anywhere and at any price’, and we’ve also said to developers to reconcile any environmental and community issues as early in the process as possible. When you get people talking, they’ve usually got some common goal that they can agree on.
“Like, for instance, a wind farm developer is making a local area more vibrant, giving it an opportunity to retain its young people, and to balance its local economy.”
The case for greater wind power has also been bolstered by a report from the Institute of Civil Engineers (ICE), which dismissed widespread fears about the impact of windless days.
Leading energy consultant David Milborrow wrote in the ICE journal: “In a nutshell, the answer to the question ‘what happens when the wind stops blowing?’ is ‘not a lot’.”
Even if 40% of all our electricity were generated entirely from wind, exceeding the amount generally envisaged by politicians and environment groups, the problem of fluctuations in supply would cause only a 5% increase in power bills, he said.
Chris Watt
Herald Scotland
7 December 2009
Tags: Wind power, Wind energy
Some possibly related stories:
The copyright of this article is owned by the author or publisher indicated. Its availability here constitutes a "fair use" as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law as well as in similar "fair dealing" exceptions of the copyright laws of other nations, as part of National Wind Watch's effort to advance understanding of the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development. For more information, click here.
