proposed turbine for easdale island

[hairy biker]

There is to be a turbine on Easdale Island that is proposed to be in a most unsuitable place. Instead of choosing many places on the island that are not surrounded by houses they want to go and plonk it right in the middle of the two quarries that provide the island with its world wide fame for the Stone Skimming Championships and surrounded by houses which is also overlooked by other islands. What was wrong with the back of the island or the other side where no houses exist. Oh yes i forgot the trust want to build a Bunk House there.
Whats your thoughts or am i the only one getting upset over this.

[Minimum]

What's the wind trubine for exactly? Who will benefit?

[MonaLott]

Seems crazy to site it in the middle of the living and tourist area. Where can the written plan for this proposal be seen? What stage is it at? Though I personally don't support windfarms, there is some logic, I suppose, in a small community such as Easdale having one windmill to help towards meeting its energy requirements but obviously this should be located sympathetically and the whole project should involve consensus of the local population.

[NickB]

there is some logic, I suppose, in a small community such as Easdale having one windmill to help towards meeting its energy requirements

I quite agree Mona. Fair Isle, for example, has two aerogenerators linked to its diesel generating station. When wind output falls the diesel generators are automaticaly ramped up to compensate. On a local level this sort of system works well and does reduce fossil fuel consumption dramatically for the local community. Fair Isle of course is not connected to the National Grid.

The carbon saving is very much less when the arogenerator in question is part of the national grid. (Read the 'Windfarm Scam' book or Google for reasons why). I suspect that the proposed aerogenerator on Easdale wil not in fact be powering the dwellings of the islanders directly, but it will be grid connected and making money for its owner(s) via the extremely generous feed-in tarriffs currently available (and guaranteed for 25 years!)

[Minimum]

My thoughts exactly.

So, if the wind turbine proposed for Easdale Island will not reduce household bills (because it will only connect to the hall and grid which means that everyone will simply continue to pay their usual rate), why do they want or need one?

I could understand it if the residents were going to get cheaper or free electricity and be helped with their bills, but this isn't the case with this proposal. There is no help offered for residents to access cheaper electricity produced by the wind turbine.

I also understand that there is no intention to insulate the hall - so any heat/energy will go straight through the roof!

It seems to me that this is a scheme just to get more money. Will the 'greed mentality' ever end?

[Beetlejuice]

Photo montage and questionnaire can be seen here:
http://www.argylearchitecture.co.uk/

The questionnaire's fun.
Q: Do you want a wind turbine?
A: No.

Q: Where do you think the wind turbine should be sited?
A:

[Seventhseil]

all the new village hall's in the uists and barra have these....... wots the problem??

[MonaLott]

Well, the questionnaire implies that all the sensible options are possible here so maybe all that's needed for a good outcome is communication, consideration and common sense. This proposal is certainly of a totally different (better) nature than the 2 farm monstrosities being suggested for either side of Loch Seil.

[hairy biker]

The problem is that once its up, there is nothing you can do!
It will be 80meters away from our house and stand approximately
20meters high on our direct line of sight, there is a potential for lots of
problems such as strobing, noise, etc.

There are better locations on the Island that would make the turbine
invisible to the residents of Easdale and Ellenbeich and would not be
the catalyst for more potential friction on the Island , the turbine
location seems to be a bit rushed and ill thought out.

[jimcee]

Well, one thing they need like a hole in the head. is the cause for more friction on the island.

[Minimum]

It seems that you're a bit of a NIMBY then, Hairy Biker. So long as it isn't in your back yard you don't mind that it effects another part of the island. I guess you are probably a second home owner and don't have to live with the consequences all year round.

I'd heard that several other proposals for improving the heating to the hall and reducing energy consumption, that did not require a wind turbine, had been put forward by residents but ignored by the "community group". Apparently the idea of the wind turbine was decided by one or two individuals without asking the islanders what they wanted.

I agree with jimcee, it's a real shame that, as usual, this lack of proper community consultation has led to yet more friction. I think a change of committee will be the only solution to the islands problems, to allow those with an real understanding of community development to help islanders achieve what they really want. Sadly, it seems the usual suspects are determined to get what they want rather than what the community needs.

[hairy biker]

Thanks for the broadside!

All of us have a role to play in fighting global warming that is ever more important living
on a island, But ANY wind turbine development should have FULL SCRUTANY and the
community should not be bulldozed into accepting it WHERE EVER it is proposed to be built.

As full rate payers we believe the proposed wind turbine that will at certain times block the sun light from our home has been pushed through far to fast with very little consultation, by that we mean the first we heard that a wind turbine was the preferred option to make money for the Hall was via a email last week.

Now we believe the proposal is very close to being put to planning.

All we ask is that Full Scrutiny and a more objective consultation document be prepared
with regards the wind turbine proposal.
Is that to much to ask for!

[MonaLott]

The questionnaire asks for views on all options and locations. Surely that is a strong basis for community consultation in action?

[Minimum]

You chaps really do have a lot to learn about how democracy operates on Easdale Island.

Firstly, sometimes one or two self selected people (who tend to be members of the island charity), who want something, decide to apply for funding without telling the residents about it just in case they disagree. They are very good a writing application forms. No-one is allowed to see them so no-one knows exactly what is said. (For example: wind turbine proposal, island energy monitoring screen etc)

Secondly, quite often the money arrives. The one or two people who have got it then decide to tell the residents that it's arrived and what it's for. Usually there's a big article of celebration in the local media.

Then, and rather baffled, the residents start talking about it and asking questions. Those who are 'friends' of the 'one or two self selected people' tend to support the plan - after all, who would want to upset their friends? The rest of the residents who may be against the plans or perhaps have better suggestions for the use of the money, are usually ignored, sometimes laughed at and/or brow beaten. They are told that it's a 'done deal' or that 'the majority of residents want it', sometimes even that 'the planners support it' - as I believe has happened in the case of the wind turbine.

Finally, chaos tends to break out when the only course of action left to residents who wish to be heard fairly resort to responding to planning applications.

This, of course, is all rather amusing to outsiders. However, in my view, it's extremely questionable behaviour in which to secure public funds for projects that claim to be for the benefit of the whole community but realistically suits only a few. You're right, Mona Lott, full community consultation should take place, but with unloaded questionnaires and before funding applications are even considered.

[Beetlejuice]

Not exactly, Mona!
You can't submit the questionnaire on-line unless you've answered all the questions. So, even if you've said no, you don't want a 6kw wind turbine, or a 500kw turbine, or 10 x 50kw turbines, you still have to check the boxes that say what location you'd choose for the turbine(s) you don't want, and what you think should be done with the income from the turbine(s) you don't want.

The questionnaire's a classic of the sort that's designed to enable data manipulation, IMHO .

I agree with H. Biker, and Mini, on this one. Full scrutiny and full consultation should have been done, and before the money was applied for.

[MonaLott]

OK, you guys, to me, a concerned outsider from Seil, it seems that fairness and democracy are indeed not at work on Easdale island, which is a great shame. I'm therefore with Bj, M & HB, in wishing that the few would consult the many before applying for things that affect everyone living on, and visitors to, the island. It's such a great wee haven that it doesn't deserve such disharmony. Let's hope that whoever it is that applies for all these things unilaterally comes to his/her/their senses and adopts a more consensual approach. Otherwise the island might become more famous for its internal strife rather than for its peacefulness, beauty, heritage and, of course, its skimming.

[Beetlejuice]

I think the island is already "more famous for its internal strife" than for anything else, Mona!

Mini, you're suggesting that a change to the "community group's" committee would solve Easdale's problems. But why not get rid of the "community group" altogether? Why does the island need or want one when it constantly behaves as you so correctly described in your earlier post? It was set up to get a grant to renovate the village hall - which it successfully did - and that should have been the end of the story. Instead, since then its main focus seems to have been to do things that really get up islanders' noses; to lumber "the community" with so-called "assets" that cost money to maintain; to send threatening/solicitor's letters to islanders who oppose what they do; and to charge about wildly getting grants for absolutely anything and everything that's available. More than £1m (yes, one million pounds) of public money has already been thrown at that tiny rock. Isn't it time to call a halt??

[jimcee]

Well said Beetle juice - it's obvious that you are not a resident of that particular rock, to be as outspoken about the the situation thereon.
The heirarchy does not take kindly to residents who rock their boat.
On the subject of public money, it does surprise me that an island with a resident population of about 50, gets these Arts Council grants to supply them with a periodic supply of artistes to keep them entertained. Is this a handout to otherwise hard up entertainers to keep them off the dole, or a feeling that if Easdale Islanders don't have a gig to go to, come Saturday, they will all emigrate?

[canUsmellthat]

Let's not turn this thread into a slagging match on how bad/ good, however bad it is, to live on Easdale Island...

[Minimum]

I agree, CanU. How about we start a thread discussing how groups claiming to represent the community, wherever it is, should do things properly? Don't forget the Community Council had designs on "a strategic pan for Seil Island".