I write concerning the letter from Calvin Jones (The Press and Journal, December 30) in which he says that we must recognise the advantages of windfarms. Mr Jones declares that wind turbines and windfarms have a low cost and that they provide better power than electricity systems (which have a higher cost). He also claims that windfarms were “an important part of Scotland’s economic future.” However, Mr Jones seems to have missed the disadvantages of windfarms, which became immediately apparent as soon as the first wind turbines arrived on the scene. For example, he claims that they have a low fuel cost. Fair enough. But what about other costs? I refer in particular of the cost to wildlife.
In building windfarms, certain habitats have been damaged, especially rabbit warrens, some of which are important across Scotland. Wind turbines are also responsible for a fair percentage of deaths suffered by rare birds of prey, which are among the most beautiful, amazing and most important parts of Scotland’s wildlife heritage. Not only do birds of prey largely depend on rabbits for food, but the birds of prey also sometimes fly into the rotating wind turbines, which are large and powerful pieces of machinery. Smaller birds also have been know to suffer injury because of windfarms.
Mr Jones said that windfarms were “an important part of Scotland’s future.” Considering the damage they actually cause, what sort of future is that? Perhaps we humans should stop thinking about ourselves, and start considering our indigenous wildlife for a change.
|Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding