Seil Chat

.
PACT (People Against Clachan Turbines) have now produced a montage showing what the proposed windfarm will look like from a viewpoint that includes Puilladobhrain. Click the pic for a bigger version.



There is a box down at Puilladobhrain with postcards for those who wish to to post their objections. I believe quite a few visitors have filled them in.

Planning permission has not yet been applied for, but it could be in the next few weeks.

PACT website

West Coast Renewables

.
Rory Young has apparently been looking seriously into setting up a special renewable energy electricity tariff scheme for people living near the proposed windfarm. This strikes me as a real 'community benefit'. More details and the opportunity to comment are available on the West Coast Renewables blog.

(I also asked about the possibility of a mobile phone mast, which could also be a very tangible community benefit).

No bribery acceptable, in my view, and in this case!

spiderman wrote: No bribery acceptable, in my view, and in this case!

So you don't think renewable energy developers should offer the local community anything then?

Didn't say that, Nick. But, "in this case", the proposed violation of our precious environment is much too gross, "in my view".

spiderman wrote: Didn't say that, Nick. But, "in this case", the proposed violation of our precious environment is much too gross, "in my view".

Not NIMBY-ism tho'? Hard to be sure, is it not?

Ultimately A&B Council will make the decision on this one. If it DOES go ahead then I would like to see the community get as much out of it as possible. If it doesn't happen then nothing is lost by trying ot get the best deal possible out of Mr. Young.

Times have changed. There was a time when those who were opposed to developments were pejoratively branded as NIMBY's, selfish individuals who only thought of themselves. But now, in the face of big business thinking it can steamroller local communities, there is more respect for the local who will not be bribed into selling the Earth. Just look at what Donald Trump did with his golf course development near Aberdeen. But ironically Donald Trump said he would oppose a local wind farm development http://theenergycollective.com/david-k- ... est-centre

What price do you put on the landscape and environment? If the local residents do sell out and accept the bribe of cheaper energy or a lumpsum to community projects (one or other, not both), who is more selfish, the NIMBY's or those who sell out?

If there is a pejorative term for those who object to such schemes, what is the term for those who selfishly accept a bribe, when others feel the landscape is so valuable it should not be sold at any price?

Pentlandpirate wrote:
If there is a pejorative term for those who object to such schemes, what is the term for those who selfishly accept a bribe, when others feel the landscape is so valuable it should not be sold at any price?

Eh? This is not a private negotiation between the residents of the three communities and Mr. Young, it is a planning matter. No-one is going to be 'accepting a bribe' ( unless you are suggesting foul play in the planning process (surely not ). I suppose that - if it is a moral matter as you suggest - it would be possible even in the event of the development going ahead for the communities to tell Mr. Young to stick his community benefit, but I find that outcome the most unlikely of all.

In the end I doubt if this proposal will go through as A&B has already rejected the much more credible Raera proposal and appears to be moderately anti further windfarm development in Argyll. However, if it does happen it would be better if the local community were able to both get something out of it and feel involved. In the meantime, am I the only one who feels that the threatened planning application is a long time coming? At least when it does we will be able to count the objections and more accurately gauge local opinion.

No, of course not suggesting this is inappropriate or illicit. But there is no denying it is a form of bribery in the shape of a legitimate finacial inducement to grease the wheels , to make things run smoothly, to use money as an expedient.

Coming back to the photo montage, I feel PACT have not made the impact they should have if this is the only one they have got. Whilst it shows the visual intrusion on a beautiful rural view across the achorage towards the mountains, it is a sight relatively few will see. Taken from an elevated vantage point the turbines are not skylined at all. The turbines would have been more realistically portrayed if their shadows were shown.

The reality is that probably 99+% of the time these turbines will be seen by people in the area, from the road or houses, most of which are closer to sea-level, from where the turbines will be very clearly exposed on the skyline and where the visual intrusion is dramatically emphasized. It's difficult to do realistic montages from that level, but you only have to look around you to realise how even the most 'ordinary' objects stand out on a horizon.

Perhaps it will never happen. perhaps wind power will be a dead dodo before then http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... using.html

Pentlandpirate wrote: The reality is that probably 99+% of the time these turbines will be seen by people in the area, from the road or houses, most of which are closer to sea-level, from where the turbines will be very clearly exposed on the skyline and where the visual intrusion is dramatically emphasized.

We would be able to see all the turbines across the bay from our house. However, if I hold my arm out straight and shut one eye I can block out all the turbines with my thumb. Not making any particular point, just an observation.

The reason for the PD montage was primarily to enlist support/letters of protest from visiting yachtsmen. There is a box with cards down in the anchorage.

Fusion power would be great, but it has been 'thirty years away' for my entire lifetime so far.

However, if I hold my arm out straight and shut one eye I can block out all the turbines with my thumb. Not making any particular point, just an observation.

But do the same thing coming back past Loch Seil or driving from home to the Bridge, what would you see?

Pentlandpirate wrote:

However, if I hold my arm out straight and shut one eye I can block out all the turbines with my thumb. Not making any particular point, just an observation.

But do the same thing coming back past Loch Seil or driving from home to the Bridge, what would you see?

You would probably crash. Better to keep your eyes on the road

There you have it. Wind turbines are dangerous!

Nice picture, shame about the yachts!

Pentlandpirate wrote: what is the term for those who selfishly accept a bribe, when others feel the landscape is so valuable it should not be sold at any price?

Quislings !

Or if you want a Scottish term for them : Parcel of Rogues

Such a parcel of rogues in a nation.
O would, or I had seen the day
That treason thus could sell us
My auld grey head had lain in clay
Wi' Bruce an' loyal Wallace.

The most wonderful inheritance which we have as Scots, something which we are so proud of, is our fantastic landscape and environment. It belongs to all Scots yet some are willing to sell our birthright in exchange for a few pence off their electricity bill and a mobile phone mast.

A true Scot fights for their birthright and doesn't behave like that "parcel of rogues" who sold our nation in 1707.

I agree with all you write on this subject Pentland. Keep up the fight against this proposed desecration of our land !

Finally, my belief is that it is not up to individuals here to do the negotiations with Rory Young via his website but up to our representatives, initially The CC and secondly PACT.

Seeing as I'm in a rant mood can I ask any PACT person who happens to read Seilchat to take a look at the anti-salmon farm group's excellent website and learn something about making the PACT website more professional. Its a bit of an embarrasment in my opinion.

And yes PACT, your new montage! I agree with others that its perspective is counterproductive and would add that it shows the view from a piece of land where access, can I politely say, is rather restricted....you try roaming that area of Seil and see what reception you receive.

Long Boy (Nuclear by choice)

.
Parcel of rogues? Quislings?

That'll be the Scottish government then - seems they are a bit keen on renewable energy as a way of renewing our economy.

Apparently quite a lot of people voted for them. All misguided I am sure.

NickB wrote:.
Parcel of rogues? Quislings?

That'll be the Scottish government then - seems they are a bit keen on renewable energy as a way of renewing our economy.

Apparently quite a lot of people voted for them. All misguided I am sure.

I suggest you reread the post.
"what is the term for those who selfishly accept a bribe, when others feel the landscape is so valuable it should not be sold at any price?"
I don't recall the Scottish Government accepting a bribe or there being any question about that.
Pentland's question was related to people around here who seem to want a bribe (a few quid of their electricity bill, a mobile phone mast) and what they should be called.
The bribes are being offered to us not to ScotGov. Your response is way off track.

Shankers

longshanks wrote:what is the term for those who selfishly accept a bribe, when others feel the landscape is so valuable it should not be sold at any price?"

I am not aware that I have a vote on this project or that anyone is attempting to buy this vote. At the end of the day the project will either go ahead or it will not. That will be the decision of the planning committee. My opinion as to the scheme's worth, validity or desireability is not and will not be altered by the amount or nature of the 'bribe' as you choose to call it, and neither I suspect will the opinion of any of our readers.

If the scheme does go ahead (unlikely IMO in view of the refusals for Raera and Stacain) there will be some 'community benefit' accruing, or bribe paid if you prefer, as is customary in these cases. I find the idea of cheap leccy for the affected communities more appropriate than a lump sum administered by an essentially unelected body. That's it really.

Re. the Scottish government - aren't they wrecking our landscape and seducing the public / buying votes with bribes in the form of promised jobs and economic growth? Sounds daft? Of course it does.