LOCATION/TYPE

NEWS HOME



[ exact phrase in "" ]

Archive by Month

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 Archive Home

Please note that opinion pieces (including letters, editorials, and blogs), reflect the viewpoints of their authors; National Wind Watch does not necessarily agree with them in their entirety or endorse them in any way, nor should it be implied that the writers endorse National Wind Watch.

Windfarm photomontages 

Highland Council must be applauded for questioning the accuracy of photomontages presented by windfarm developers (the Press and Journal, July 9)

Lewis residents complained for years about Lewis Wind Power’s misleading photomontages for the now-rejected Lewis windfarm, but the developer insisted its visual representations were accurate, right down to the floating, sylph-like structures, poised like ballet dancers on an otherwise pristine, undisturbed moorland landscape.

Often, these delicate alien impostors looked the same height as the 10-metre electricity poles already on the landscape. Had they been an accurate representation, they would have been 14 times taller, as they were meant to portray giant 140-metre turbines.

In Lewis, we had the Butt-of-Lewis lighthouse against which to judge the visual impact. At 36 metres high, we knew that a 140-metre turbine would be four times higher. It was difficult to visualise what 234 super-lighthouses strewn across our moorland would look like, but they would look nothing like the dainty ballerinas depicted on the montages.

Photographic techniques used in the misleading visual images a developer includes in his planning application, which are not subjected to the same strict regulatory tests as other parts of the application, are a misrepresentation of public interest and could ultimately call into question the validity of some planning consents issued already.

Dina Murray,

49 North Galson,

Lewis.

The Press and Journal

11 July 2008

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 BS M TS TG Share


News Archive 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 Bluesky Wind Watch on Mastodon Wind Watch on Truth Social

Wind Watch on Gab