Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Sunday, 7th September 2008

Free Capercaillie CD

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Scientists agree placing wind farms on peatland is 'disastrous'



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 17 April 2008
BUILDING wind turbines on Scotland's precious peatland could be catastrophic for the environment, according to a Scottish MEP.
Following a seminar given by key scientists at the European Parliament in Brussels, Struan Stevenson, MEP, is calling for action to stop any further building on peatland.

At the seminar, organised by Mr Stevenson, who is the president of the Inter
group on Sustainable Development, leading scientists agreed that building on peat bogs could be a disaster.

"We are getting the whole development of wind power catastrophically wrong if we allow wind farms to continue to be developed on peatland," Mr Stevenson said.

There are 980 wind-farm proposals in place across Europe, of which 187 would be built on peatland. Some are gigantic wind farms, such as that proposed for on Lewis.

"This is a looming catastrophe," said Mr Stevenson.

The problem of building wind farms on peat bogs was highlighted in a report in The Scotsman earlier this week.

The European Commission is drawing up a draft directive on renewable energy, and Mr Stevenson is pushing for it to include an amendment to cease all building on peat bogs – whether it be wind farms or other structures.

The process could take at least 18 months and he is worried about the number of wind farms that might be granted permission in the interim.

"I wanted the EC to call a moratorium of building on peat land while they carry out a more detailed analysis. But that is beyond the commission's power, apparently," he said.

Peatland is a natural carbon-storage system and about a sixth of the planet's total is in Scotland. Professor Joseph Holden, of the University of Leeds, who is a specialist in wetland environments and carbon processes, told the seminar that extensive infrastructure would dry out vast areas of peatland.

When peatland dries out it loses carbon – a process that is irreversible. Mr Stevenson thinks it is ridiculous to destroy such an important resource, while at the same time there are huge amounts of research are going into creating artificial storage systems for carbon.

"Scotland, despite only having a 60th of the world's land mass, has one-sixth of the total peat bogs. Peat bogs are Europe's rainforests," he said.

"The evidence we heard at the seminar makes it quite clear that by allowing this development we wreck the peat bog and irreversibly destroy its capability of acting as a carbon sink.

"It also releases tens of thousands of tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere."

Mr Stevenson believes more thought is needed on how to move forward with renewable energy, including wind farms.

"We are rushing towards them without thinking of the consequences", and whether these processes are sustainable," he said.



The full article contains 462 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 17 April 2008 12:37 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Ard Righ,

The Rock Of Edinburgh 17/04/2008 01:08:12
Any energy technology that bases it self on intemittent natural power is pathetic and is a schoolboy technology. It is a waste of resources in the broadest appraisal, a 1000 ton concrete block, how much resources does it use to make that possible and build roads to lay these monsters? Who will remove them? How much will be destroyed in this cycle of short sightedness.
2

Ard Righ,

The Rock Of Edinburgh 17/04/2008 01:08:39
1 "intermittent".
3

nabodican,

Rural Scotland 17/04/2008 01:47:57
""We are getting the whole development of wind power catastrophically wrong " Full stop ! Not just on peat bogs but anywhere on Scottish soil.
4

Navvy,

17/04/2008 02:52:03
I think that the is a place for wind power and of course peat bogs are wide open to the wind. However there are great limitations mostly arising from the intermittant nature of the wind.

we live in a world dependent upon technology and a wind turbine can be a thing of beauty. Techniques are available which avoid all the road building and bog draining. Why not string them along the existing roads and railways in selected places.

Better though to harness the tidla streams of the Pentland Firth, Kyle of Lochalsh and Mull of Kintyre to name but a few and to use their off peak power to make hydrogen from seawater to be recombined in gas turbines at the same locatin at peak periods
5

Dave from Barra ©,

Western Isles 17/04/2008 07:31:17
Wait for Fred to come poo poo what a scientist says........ Why has this taken so loooooong??????
6

Dave from Barra ©,

Western Isles 17/04/2008 07:33:30
Navvy is right. A turbine can be a thing of beauty. It's an industrial feature so belongs in an industrial landscape (which some people like, makes them feel secure...).

Therefore, they should be built in towns and cities. The great thing being, most people live in toiwns and cities so any energy produced, will not be lost.



Great, we have solved that problem. What's next?
7

Nell,

The Preservation Hall 17/04/2008 07:43:03
"Scotland has a 60th of the world's land mass". I find that hard to believe.
8

Nell,

The Preservation Hall 17/04/2008 07:48:22
No. 6 Dave:- Wind speeds/pressures are less in a town environment than open country. Coastal or elevated areas also have higher wind speeds. Most towns and cities are built at lower levels. So it would probably not be economical to build wind turbines in towns. Although I suspect your comments are tongue in cheek.
9

Dave from Barra ©,

Western Isles 17/04/2008 07:57:24
Nell

No, I'm being serious. Edinburghs average wind speed is exactly the same as rural Denmark who have the highest proportion of wind turbine-age in Europe. Glasgow is the same and in Scotland, no town is every far from a hill or coast line.

Coastal areas, like here, have the opposite prbolem, too much wind. The turbines that are on the market, operate at lower wind speeds, therefore, they are more suited to urban landscapes.

Right, that's another problem solved. C'mon you Urban Anti-Anti NIMBY's, put yer money where yer mouth is.
10

Dave from Barra ©,

Western Isles 17/04/2008 08:01:41
And Nell, if we are serious about this, wouldn't it be a precautionary principle to build as many of these turbines in urban areas to gain as energy as possbile? Just in-case the eco-facsits are right? Common sense really if you use THIER logic.

The logic would be "build turbines in really windy places to gain as much as possible as so much is lost through attenuation....also build as much as you can in towns and cities; the lower average wind speed will be compensated by the lower losses made through attenuation".

Easy. Another problem fixed, what now?
11

Nell,

The Preservation Hall 17/04/2008 08:05:06
Dave:- Wind pressures are less in an urban environment than open country. I cant comment about the wind turbines being more suitable for lower wind speeds. I very much doubt, however, that your proposals will meet with much approval. ;-)
12

fred bloggs,

Edinburgh 17/04/2008 08:08:06
Only a small fraction of the area of a wind farm on a peat bog is destroyed. The carbon emitted as a result is paid back by the saving in carbon emitted by fossil fuel stations within a period of 1 - 2 years.

SNH Report 2000
13

gus1940,

Edinburgh 17/04/2008 08:09:53
Try prefixing the headline with the word 'Some'
14

Conan the Librarian™,

17/04/2008 08:10:25
11
A wind turbine at the top of the Waverley steps would have the extra benefit of beheading drunken neds.
15

Nell,

The Preservation Hall 17/04/2008 08:11:08
I should add that I think building these wind farms will destroy the natural unspoilt beauty and I would propose that other forms of power generation should be considered.
16

Dave from Barra ©,

Western Isles 17/04/2008 08:11:09
Nell

No, they are not. Wind pressures vary just like the weather. You can have a 60 knot wind ripping through Edinburgh for the day and nary a like in the Western Isles. It works both ways.

Considering that most turbines in the EU come from Danish manufacturers and given that Edinburgh's average wind speed is the same as rural Denmark, ergo they are well suited to be erected in the towns and cities of Scotland. It'a ll out there on the web. Doesn't take much to put 2 and 2 together. and if you find the thought of building turbines in urban areas, not only do you knwo how we feel, you also show that you do not believe in the technology and you do not believe in MMGW. Otherwise you would support, wholeheartedly, the erection of lost of 500 foot turbines all over the urban landscape (where they belong).
17

Dave from Barra ©,

Western Isles 17/04/2008 08:12:34
And here's non scientist Fred trying to refuts a scientists claims. Good try NIMBY boy.
18

Nell,

The Preservation Hall 17/04/2008 08:20:52
Dave:- As I said above, I dont agree with sticking wind farms all over areas of outstanding natural beauty.
19

Dave from Barra ©,

Western Isles 17/04/2008 08:21:33
Ach, I know Nell. I posted after you posted yours. Appreciated.
20

fred bloggs,

Edinburgh 17/04/2008 08:37:51
16. Wind turbines are not placed in urban environments because the turbulence from buildings affects their performance. They are placed in locations where there are good steady winds. The wind speeds in Denmark are rather low compared to the Scottish highlands and islands. Power losses in transmission are more than compensated for by the higher efficiency of generation which increases as the cube of the wind strength.
21

Nell,

The Preservation Hall 17/04/2008 08:41:22
Dave:- They are currently building a wind farm on the hills just above Rochdale (just outside Manchester). Interestingly some people think the turbines are things of beauty. One bloke on the local radio suggested putting lights on them and people would enjoy the light show. (Bit bizzare building something to stop carbon emmissions and then waste energy with lights all over it). I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
22

Dave from Barra ©,

Western Isles 17/04/2008 08:43:19
20

Yawn. Made up fact. Most buildings are NOT 500 foot tall. Silly billy.

21

Nell. Interesting. And I agree.
23

Dave from Barra ©,

Western Isles 17/04/2008 08:44:29
20

And it goes against eco facist thinking. Which is "build them everywhere, as a precaution". Nice try NIMBY boy.
24

Dave from Barra ©,

Western Isles 17/04/2008 08:50:26
Let me see if I can remember Edinburgh.

Arthurs Seat, get quite a few all over there and no buildings.

Pentland Hills. Pretty big expanse of hill, very windy, close to Edinburgh and no buildings.

That wee hill at the Observatory near West Mains (think there is a golf course on it?). Quite a windy place as far as I can remember.

And Freds favourite haunt, Carlton Hill (where that daft folly is). Replace the folly with other more eco sounbd follies, eh Fred. You'd love that when you go up there, eh?
25

Slioch,

Scottish Highlands 17/04/2008 09:09:42
#7 Nell

""Scotland has a 60th of the world's land mass". I find that hard to believe."

Yes. You are right. A quick scrabble in an encyclopedia reveals:
Total land surface area of the Earth = 148,000,000 sq.km.
Land surface area of Scotland = 78,742 sq.km.

Therefore Scotland has 1/1880 of the Earth's land surface.

I think I have heard the other figure - that Scotland has "one sixth" of the Earth's peat bogs before, and as that was also stated by Professor Holden, who ought to know, then let that be accepted.

Which only goes to show that, as a country with only 1/1880 of the Earth's surface, but 1/6 of its peat bogs, we have an enormous international responsibility to look after them.

I can forgive (just) Struan Stevenson,MEP, for being innumerate since he speaks so strongly in defence of peat bogs. That defence first became prominent in the 1980s with the defence of the flow country against afforestation, and the more recent row over wind farms has brought the importance of peat bogs into further prominence. That is progress.

Should any country seek to prosper, let it first remember the ground rule: "look after your soils!"
26

Cadgers,

Perth 17/04/2008 09:26:00
#24 Dave from Barra. Haven't bothered with this site for quite a while but good suggestions Dave. Why shouldn't the turbines be situated near to the urban populations.Arthurs Seat and the Pentlands would look very pretty covered in turbines. Seeing them wheeching roon might encourage more city dwellers not to leave things on standby etc,etc
27

GrahamH,

Edinburgh 17/04/2008 10:26:12
Surely 1 efficent, large scale nucleur station, located in a remote location to appease NIMBY's would solve the issue of countless windfarms destroying local amenity and Scotland attractiveness to tourists and wildlife alike.
28

nabodican,

Rural Scotland 17/04/2008 11:31:52
Dave, you were right about Fred, he soon appeared with one of his usual gems of misinformation at post #12
"The carbon emitted as a result is paid back by the saving in carbon emitted by fossil fuel stations within a period of 1 - 2 years."
I would like him to explain how this can be when it is only the steam turbines that are switched off when the wind is blowing, the coal fires keep burning and the excess steam is simply vented off.!!
If I can throw in my tuppence worth on wind speeds etc.
Wind turbines need steady dense winds and the only place to find these is in the southern oceans about 20deg south of the equator at sea level.
The higher you go up our hills the less dense the air is and also on places like Lewis and Skye the wind can be blowing a hooligan one minute and flat calm the next. Turbine gearboxes do not like this . An classic example was on the first windfarm at Edinbane on Skye where after only a few weeks one of the turbines suffered wind damage and the engineers (from Germany) were back to fix it.
No jobs for there for the Skye locals !!!!
29

Neanderthal75,

Rocky Mountains USA 17/04/2008 12:28:55
Hello All,

Once again I am amazed at the idiocy of professional politicians: the MEP hears just ONE SIDE of the story from ONE PANEL and he rushes right out to declared that he's NOW got 'the truth' about peat bogs, their constituent biological particulars, and that ALL building across the entirety of Europe must stop.

He didn't ask for opposing data/science/opinions from other scientists, he merely went hippity-hoppity to the media, to other EU organs, and asked for a moratorium on all building on Peat Bog areas (which means in real terms, Wind Farm Construction).

How informed the MEP is, how enlightened, how open minded, how inquisitive, how IDIOTIC!

This is why so many of us deride the Eco-Fascists and their Enablers (ie, the MEP): to use the MEP's own words in paraphrase; ""We are rushing towards them without thinking of the consequences", and whether these processes are sustainable," he said."

The one thing the lackluster MEP twit got right: that passing laws, making decisions, building policies without investigation, ie, taxing people to death to 'fight' Global Warming, killing businesses, putting hundreds of thousands of people out of work, etc., is sheer IDIOCY.

Keep up the good work Scotsman; without offering opposing points of view, your stalwartly one side reporting continues to illustrate just how bankrupt are the Eco-Fascists and their Enablers.

Cheers from the Rockies
30

Saoghal Beag,

17/04/2008 12:49:19
27 only problem is nuclear is currently scotland's most unreliable energy source, so we will have to amtch it's output with generation from fossil.

Nell and Dave, embedding energy generation in the built environment is something that we should be pushing for. The turbines at the mitchelin factory in dundee have proven to be effective. The problem with urban wind flows is that there are eddies and disruptions. Siting turbines in turbulent flows is pointless. However edinburgh does have potential for embedded generation. The Leith docks area certainly has potential. Siting turbines on arthur's seat is really not an option and unfortunately holyrood is in a dip so no good there. but this is only one part of the solution though the anti-environmental fascists will try and
31

Neanderthal75,

Rocky Mountains USA 17/04/2008 13:48:49
Hello Saoghal,

Have you heard/read about the guy in Chicago who flipped the concept of Metropolitan Wind Generation Problem on its head, by getting rid of the standard turbine (propeller) Wind Generator and designing one on its 'side' (rather like a funnel from a meat grinder, but the 'vanes' turned vertically.

He designed it specifically for use in major metropolitan areas AND for construction on EXISTING roofs!

I saw it on (I believe) 'Invention Nation' or a similar Science Channel program.

I'm all for using EVERY viable source for Wind Generation: it's 'free' and renewable, and viable if the WG's are designed for each differing environment.

Cheers from the Rockies
32

Saoghal Beag,

17/04/2008 16:20:09
hey neanderthal, don't know if i have seen that one specifically but there are quite a variety of vertical and horizontal axis turbine designs knocking about. they ahve the potetnial of being used in urban situations. The lighthouse in glasgow has intersting turbines on thier roof fixed in a box to direct the airflow.
33

dido-bendigo,

Scotland 17/04/2008 16:38:09
# Fred

I seem to recall that SNH commissioned such research to be carried out by developer's consultants (employees)? I do know that findings put forward for a (defeated) planning application in Argyll was riddled with half truths and greenwashed presentations. SNH hardly shone from under their bushel at that event. Thank God the(then) council saw through it at the eleventh hour and put a stop to the project. I wish I could say the same for the present incumbents. Look up the websites for the Braes of Dounie if you want evidence of how peatland is 'slightly effected' by windfarm construction. One passed for construction in central Argyll shows real promise of possible (probable?) contamination of water supplies to domestic, industrial and natural features. We will see what the curate's egg looks like when it is up and running.
34

dido-bendigo,

Scotland 17/04/2008 16:39:26
Sorry # FRED 12
35

Ard Righ,

The Rock Of Edinburgh 17/04/2008 19:08:07
4
Navvy,
17/04/2008 02:52:03
"we live in a world dependent upon technology and a wind turbine can be a thing of beauty. "

Thats what was said about the pylons.....

The dependency has been inbuilt by greedy companies.
36

Saoghal Beag,

17/04/2008 20:53:34
Ard Righ and personal greed, the need for a tele that fills half a wall for why?
37

Caora Dubh,

Croit sheasgair 17/04/2008 21:48:13
I thank my non-existent god that scientists have finally woken up. Peat is so unstable that each turbine requires a massive foundation to counteract the gyroscopic bending moments, which are imposed when the plane of the rotating blades has to turn to face the wind. If made of alkaline concrete containing lime and/or dolomite, such a foundation will cause appalling chemical damage to the bog. And then there are all those causeways required for transporting the parts of the turbines and servicing them. These roads not only dry out the peat bogs, but also isolate sections of the bogs, preventing water circulation.
38

Neanderthal75,

Rocky Mountains USA 18/04/2008 08:36:53
Hello Caora,

Wow, your extreme PC mindset is truly boggling, considering the information in the article: the idiot MEP didn't even bother to get comparing opinions from other sources, to even check what he had been told.

He just assumed that all the information spoon fed to him was good as gold!

Willful ignorance is not an excuse for regular folks doing regular jobs; but for a guy whose actions can literally affect MILLIONS of people, such a mindset is truly criminal.

The negative impact on people is going to be huge, if we do NOT move to Wind, Solar, Tidal, and Ocean Current, electric generation.

For YEARS the Eco-Fascists kept up the mantra about Ethanol, dogging politicians at their every step, filling the ears of culpable and all too often willing accomplices in the mainstream media, and filing lawsuit after lawsuit, to keep anything remotely related to the petroleum industry from being built.

Well.....now the E-F's have gotten their hearts' desire: Ethanol Production is going through the proverbial roof!!! Hundreds of THOUSANDS of Acres are under tillage and planted with corn.

Corn NOT for eating by humans or livestock, but for Ethanol production!
Never mind that it takes 12 times the amount of energy just to produce 1 gallon of Ethanol, INNOCENT POOR PEOPLE are beginning to starve because they CAN'T afford the 100%-300% INCREASE in corn prices for their food staples.

What do you have to say about that FACT Caora? You E-F's badgered anybody and everybody to get Ethanol Production into the 'mass market' and for the Auto Industry to build rigs to run it, and now YOU'RE starving people through YOUR success!!!

YOU and your fellows have purposefully ignored all those of us who WARNED what the real world result would be from such a paradigm shift in Energy production, but YOU and those like you would NOT listen!

YOU have helped to CREATE MORE pollution than before, because all that Ethanol being produced is pumping 12 TIMES the amount t
39

Neanderthal75,

Rocky Mountains USA 18/04/2008 08:37:51
Hello Caora CONT,

YOU and yours have helped to CREATE MORE pollution than before, because all that Ethanol being produced is pumping 12 TIMES the amount that is saved by producing just 1 gallon of Ethanol: 12 times NEW POLLUTION which, until YOU and your fellows got their way, did NOT exist!!

Tell me true: aren't you just ecstatic over your 'success'?

Starving people, pumping 12 times more new pollution into the environment than previously existed, raising the prices of eggs, milk, breads, cereals, beef, pork, chicken, lamb, fish, fruits, vegetables, and virtually everything else which humans eat.

Congratulations you narrow minded Eco-Fascist: mission accomplished in causing untold suffering, which, prior to YOUR 'success' did NOT exist.

Cheers from the Rockies

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.