[ exact phrase in "" • ~10 sec • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


LOCATION/TYPE

News Home
Archive
RSS

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links

Alerts

Press Releases

FAQs

Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics

Videos

Allied Groups

Distillery loses legal fight to stop turbines going up near national park  

Credit:  The Press and Journal, 14 June 2012 ~~

A distillery firm has lost a legal bid to halt plans for a 59-turbine windfarm near the Cairngorms national park.

Proposed developers Dorenell Ltd (UK) applied to build the windfarm on the Glenfiddich estate, in Moray, prompting a local public inquiry at Dufftown in 2010.

A reporter concluded that the scheme would make a significant contribution to meeting national renewable energy targets and that the site, 1.2miles (two kilometres) from the northern edge of the national park, benefited from a good wind resource.

Adverse landscape and visual effects would be localised and limited in extent and any impact on key industries of tourism, food and drink and their brand images did not justify rejection. He was satisfied that the integrity of the River Spey special conservation area and the interests of protected otters and bats would not be adversely affected.

The reporter recommended to the Scottish Government that consent should be granted and ministers followed the recommendations.

But William Grant & Sons objected to the proposed windfarm and challenged the decision in a judicial review at the Court of Session in Edinburgh. The spirits producer, whose brands include Glenfiddich malt whisky, argued that the reporter allowed a decision over the need for the windfarm in terms of national energy policy and guidance to override important adverse factors. It sought to have a grant of deemed planning permission set aside.

But Lord Malcolm rejected the grounds of challenge put forward by the firm and dismissed the petition.

Source:  The Press and Journal, 14 June 2012

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

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate

Share:


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook

Share

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

Wind Watch on Facebook

Follow Wind Watch on Twitter