Mark Ruskell, of Scottish Renewables stated in his letter (the Press and Journal, April 25) that “the renewables industry, by law, has to assess the environmental impact of any windfarm application and design the scheme appropriately to minimise environmental damage, including by restoring habitats”.
I wonder what his response was to the beautifully-glossy environmental statement made by the promoters of the Loch Luichart windfarm proposal a year or two back? On the subject of restoration, they stated that, at the end of the proposed 25-year run of the windfarm, they would remove the turbines, but would cover up the bases and the five miles of roadway as “to remove them would cause too much disturbance”.
It didn’t take more than two brain cells to interpret this as meaning it would be far too expensive. Forty lumps of reinforced concrete weighing about 750 tons and buried in the peat (never mind the five miles of 18ft-wide roadway) would make removing skyscrapers mere child’s play. So much for “restoration”.
1a Pulteney Street,
30 April 2008
|Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding