LOCATION/TYPE

NEWS HOME


[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]

Archive
RSS

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

WHAT TO DO
when your community is targeted

Get weekly updates
RSS

RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Stripe

Donate via Paypal

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links

Alerts

Press Releases

FAQs

Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics

Videos

Allied Groups

Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005.

News Watch Home

Ministers end four-year campaign by rejecting windfarm proposals 

Ministers put an end to a long-running saga yesterday when they rejected controversial plans to erect 37 wind turbines at a forest near Huntly in Aberdeenshire.

The proposal, submitted by wind energy firm Amec, had attracted criticism from local protest group Friends of the Clash, who claimed it was a mistake to clear woodland to make room for the farm.

Last night Amec’s managing director David Hodkinson said he was surprised and disappointed at the decision.

The firm first applied for consent to construct a windfarm at Clashindarroch near Huntly in July 2003. The original proposal for 47 turbines was later reduced after a number of objections were received.

Amec then asked for permission to increase the structures by 22ft, taking the total height to 351ft and despite a plea from councillors and objectors, the council over-ruled officials’ recommendations to reject that request.

In May 2006 the proposals were the subject of a public inquiry due to objections relating to landscape and wildlife concerns – and yesterday ministers accepted the findings and refused consent.

Mr Hodkinson, managing director of Amec’s wind energy business claimed the decision went against the views of the majority and said the public inquiry had been unique because “no statutory body appeared to oppose the development”.”

Huntly councillor Moira Ingleby said it was her personal view that the right decision had been made.

The Press & Journal

11 September 2007

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Contributions
   Donate via Stripe
(via Stripe)
Donate via Paypal
(via Paypal)

Share:

e-mail X FB LI M TG TS G Share


News Watch Home

Get the Facts
CONTACT DONATE PRIVACY ABOUT SEARCH
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.

 Follow:

Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook Wind Watch on Linked In

Wind Watch on Mastodon Wind Watch on Truth Social

Wind Watch on Gab Wind Watch on Bluesky