Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Study backs undersea cable to export Scotland's wind and wave power

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.

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 January 2008
VAST amounts of wind and wave power from some of Scotland's most remote areas could be exported to southern England and Europe, providing a secure source of power and significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
There had been fears it would be too expensive to transmit the green electricity from northern Scotland to large population centres further south, but research commissioned by the Crown Estate found a sub-sea cable down the east coast of the UK was e
conomically viable.

A draft report, to be published today, says a basic connection linking the Northern Isles, Aberdeenshire and Norfolk, and then overland to London, would cost up to £1.7 billion.

A more comprehensive network, with links to the Western Isles, Norway, Germany and the Netherlands, would cost about £4.8 billion by 2020 and could be connected to the proposed European Supergrid.

As oil and gas supplies become more scarce or have to be sourced from unstable parts of the world, and as climate change forces countries to seek more renewable energy, pressure will grow to exploit areas with abundant wind or tide power.

The report, by the consultant Econnect, is based on "substantial renewable generation" – in the region of five to ten gigawatts by 2020 – off the coast of northern Scotland. Nuclear power stations typically have the capacity to produce one gigawatt.

Rob Hastings, marine estate director at the Crown Estate, which pays its revenues to the government, said: "The prospect of taking green energy right down the east coast to heavily populated areas in the south, and potentially to the rest of Europe, is incredibly exciting: today's report brings that key infrastructural development one step closer.

People were expecting the costs to be probably uneconomic in the extreme. But when we completed the report – and we consulted with many people on this – there was an awakening that the newer transmission technology actually makes it much more economically viable."

Mr Hastings said the idea of generating ten gigawatts of power was optimistic, but the amount of electricity that could be produced in northern Scotland would make a significant impact in the fight against climate change.

"What UK plc gets is not necessarily just economic benefit. It's more to do with achieving international commitments on carbon dioxide reduction and climate change," he said. "The other part is energy security. As the price of oil and gas increases, it's sort of a good idea to be looking at other forms of energy."

Professor Maxwell Irvine, who chaired a Royal Society of Edinburgh inquiry into energy, said: "If (the cable] is affordable, it is probably the only way we're going to be capable of fully exploiting the north-west's potential for power production."

Jim Mather, the energy minister, said he recognised the need to increase the electricity transmission system's capacity.

LEWIS WIND-FARM FIRM ACCUSED OF 'SPIN'

DEVELOPERS of a planned massive wind farm in the Western Isles were accused yesterday of corporate spin to put pressure on ministers to approve the project.

Lewis Wind Power (LWP) plans to erect 181 turbines on the Barvas Moor, in what would be one of the biggest wind farms in Europe. The Scottish Government is due to make a decision this month on whether it will get the go-ahead. Yesterday, LWP said an agreement had been reached with REpower UK, an Edinburgh-based wind-turbine manufacturer, to open the way for the towers to be made at the former Arnish oil yard near Stornoway.

But the timing of the announcement was attacked by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, which opposes the wind farm.



The full article contains 612 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Roger Irrelevant,

17/01/2008 00:30:20
Youth bulge theories have been criticised as leading to racial, gender and age discrimination.
2

Kipling,

17/01/2008 01:07:06
"What UK plc gets is not necessarily just economic benefit..."

That's assuming there still is a 'UK plc' in the year 2020.
3

druidh,

edinburgh 17/01/2008 01:34:25
So - why exactly do we need a line of pylons down through the Highlands???
4

C U Jimmy,

Ayrshire 17/01/2008 02:00:48
If we harnessed all the available water power we have in Scotland surely we would be a lot better off.
5

John Blackley,

Florida 17/01/2008 02:04:28
So where, precisely, are these 'vast' amounts of wind and wave power going to come from?

Shall we carpet the entire highlands north of Inverness with stark, dead-white forests of propellers or shall we pave the sea between John O'Groats and Sulom Voe with nodding, waterlogged coffins of wave generators?

Cart before the horse or pig in a poke?
6

Guga II,

Rockall 17/01/2008 03:28:23
Lewis Wind Power not only want to erect 181 towers on the Barvas moor, but each of them will be 487 feet high. We are expected to put up with this blight on our landscape for what? Not for any economic or other benefit to the islanders, including cheaper power. They will bring in a workforce from the mainland to build them, and to erect them, then employ two or three outsiders to maintain them. And all this is to allow for a foreign company to make heaps of money selling the electricty produced to the English.

This, of course is exactly what they are proposing all over Scotland; blighting our landscape and our coasts with monstrosities to produce power for export to England; and for profits for foreign companies. The people of Scotland will get nothing from this vandalism.

Scotland is already self-sufficient in power. If the English need more power, they should blight their own landscape and coasts with these monstrosities. Why should Scotland continue to be a junkyard and dumping ground for the English? Why not string out 181 towers, each 487 feet high, across London?
7

TommyKaye,

UK 17/01/2008 04:30:48
well and eloquently put Guga II.

The Cheviot The Stag and the black black oil now we can ad the white white turbine!
8

fred bloggs,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 06:37:33
Good news for the planet and its passengers.
9

nabodican,

Portree 17/01/2008 07:32:59
Having a subsea cable is a good idea, in fact I would put a ring main around the uk. However the reason behind it is totally wrong - wind power will never give security of supply.
What we can do is get rid of the existing pylons.
I see Fred Bloggs is still beating the drum for the wind industry ! Sorry Fred, but you lost all credibility when you recently showed your complete lack of electrical engineering knowledge when you claimed that these wind turbines that you love so much generated DC.
10

Iain fae Elgin,

London 17/01/2008 07:42:11
"Why not string out 181 towers, each 487 feet high, across London?"

Because it's not as windy as a lot of the North of Scotland.

Your anti-english slant btw is just embarrasing, not eloquent.
11

fred bloggs,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 07:49:23
9. Some are AC, some are DC. However, that is not the point. What we have here is a proposal for what can become part of a European Supergrid connecting windfarms separated by 100s of miles. As cyclones are separated by similar distances it means that there will always be wind blowing and therefore power generated somewhere on the system and producing clean, green electricity.
12

donald,

glasgow 17/01/2008 07:49:57
Holyrood needs to nationalise th power industries now.
13

spiderman,

argyll 17/01/2008 07:56:10
Let's hope the electricity can flow in the other direction because unfortunately England is the country chosing a sensible energy mix policy (including new nuclear) and we are the clowns thinking we can do it all with windmills. C'mon SNP, wise up, don't look the nuclear gift-horse in the mouth and don't cover our nice country with stupid piddling horrible windmills and nodding ducks.
14

Kenny A,

17/01/2008 08:00:29
If these windfarms go ahead in the Islands it will not lead to an economic rewival. What will happen is a lot of families with young childern will leave. (Thats a fact by the way). The community has already been split apart by this issue, it seems the population in general are not in favour of these farms but the council and the energy companys are desperate to get them erected.

I have read the proposals and it states claerly that these are high risk projects. In one area it is claimed that if the peat collapses there is a potential landslip of nearly 400,000 tons of peat coming away. Thats four hundered thousand tons.

Apart from that the Islands are seriously windy and there is a good chance that the structures could collapse.

An interesting site to visit is Moorlands without turbines. Very anti these proposals but lot of info available.
15

Kenny A,

17/01/2008 08:01:11
14 spot on

Pentland firth best place of the lot aparently.
16

Unimpressed one,

17/01/2008 08:27:39
#6, Guga II, Lewis has one of the highest concentrations of golden eagles in Scotland. How many would be shredded by the warmists' windmills? And before all you eco-smarmies say that the risk is minimal, just google the facts. Utter folly!!
17

Hugo of Garven,

17/01/2008 08:28:55
Connection to the proposed European Supergrid!

Sounds very interesting.

I had wondered about this before but always assumed it would not be an economic proposition. I would like to read the report when it is issued.
18

Unimpressed one,

17/01/2008 08:32:01
"Holyrood needs to nationalise th power industries now." No, Westminster should ensure that issues such as power generation are not devolved since it is obviously beyond the competance the idiots at Holyrood.
19

fred bloggs,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 08:43:07
The European Supergrid:

http://www.airtricity.com/international/wind_farms/supergrid/
20

fred bloggs,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 08:47:04
The report is here:

http://www.gnn.gov.uk/environment/fullDetail.asp?ReleaseID=337237&NewsAreaID=2&NavigatedFromDepartment=True
21

Dr. James Wilkie,

Vienna 17/01/2008 09:06:19
What is essential is that decision making on such issues is vested in the Scottish Government and Parliament, with an overriding constitutional right to a public referendum. These schemes must not be foisted on Scotland from London, Brussels or anywhere else, but must be entered into voluntarily by Scotland.

22

carrottop,

17/01/2008 09:19:19
If people are not happy with wave and wind power (I hate turbines on our landscape) then where is the constant lobby for the alternative to alternative energy. An American (among others) claims to have invented a water powered car and the technology to produce electricity by the same method. The only ingredient is water with water as a by product, also claims that there is a system operational with salt water. Worth checking out surely or is there too much money to be made by some in the present system.
Google search Water Powered Car will bring up all the relevant information.
23

Upbeat,

17/01/2008 09:34:31
The logic behind a ring of low resistance high capacity cables under the sea around Britain is valid. All existing nuclear stations are next to the sea.All new ones will also be there. Offshore wind projects are idealy served by such a connection. It is an ideal way of distributing the energy.

Once the technology has been perfected, it is obvious that subsea generators can be tied in as well.

But Barvas Moor can still be regarded as a project too far. Even if it is built there is no way to get the power to the market. If this article is correct the first consideration will be to establish a cable down the east coast which itself cannot be completed for over a decade.

Any thought about how Barvas moor will be integrated into the UK grid depends on Beauly Denny ,and a second planning battle east of Ullapool.

Of course we know that Onshore wind does not in practice have to be connected to anything before the subsidies start rolling in. Carbon offset payments are based on installed capacity, not the power delivered anywhere. This is why Barvas Moor must never go ahead.
24

The Lurgan Tiger,

17/01/2008 10:11:28
I assume that the people who live in the more remote parts of the world, where these turbines, etc, are likely to be situated actuall have an electrical supply. If not, I apologise for the upcoming rant.

The hypocrisy of some people regarding wind turbines astounds me. Yes they aint the prettiest but they are far prettier than huge coal, gas or nuclear power stations that others have to live beside.

You have a choice. Accept alternative form of power on your doorstep or loose huge portions of the coastline.
25

John M,

Melbourne, Australia 17/01/2008 11:11:03
Do these wind farms companies have to lodge money into a fund to pay for the removal of the towers if and when the companies go belly up?

If not, then who is expected to pay when it comes to the removal of these eyesores whose construction has often been subsidised by the taypaxer?
26

fred bloggs,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 12:12:02
27. They wont go 'belly-up'; each generator will last around 50 years and then be replaced by another one.
27

Margaret L,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 12:31:16
#28 2 have fallen over in the last 3 weeks. But I think you will find that #27 was referring to the companies not the towers! A good point as all wind farms are predicated by receiving huge subsidies and as they grow in number so will the subsidies until there will come a point when they are not subsidised anymore. Then the companies will go belly up.
28

Saoghal Beag,

17/01/2008 12:46:21
#25 Rules, and if we are so concerend about innocent creatures getting killed we better ban all traffic from the roads since road kill is far greater than windfarm kill.
29

Margaret L,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 13:18:42
#30

There are only 400 pairs of golden eagles in Scotland. I am not aware of any being killed by traffic. If attrition rates on raptors by wind farms are the same in Scotland as California or Spain then all eagles will be gone within ten years. But,hey, who cares, it was the bird's fault for not paying attention.
30

Saoghal Beag,

17/01/2008 13:43:59
Not so much an attrition (root atterere latin to rub) as a dull whack. Very unlikey that the kill rate in scotland wil be the same as the US and spain as we have differnet population densities and movement patterns. Though i do think that the braes of doune must be one of the most ill sited and designed turbine fields anywhere and inapproprate within an area used by red kites.

I'm just pointing out that there are human activities which ahve much greater kill rates than turbines. You want to ban turbines because of kill rates, then to be consistent you ahve to extend that to other activities which have significant kill rates, or don't you care about badgers?
31

Neil,

Glasgow 17/01/2008 15:32:42
At £1.7 billion we could nearly build 2 megawatt reactors which could in pactice supply more electricity than all the windmills in Scotland (when looking at the 5 to 10 gigawatt promise remember that firstly we have had many such promises before & secondly windmills average 28% of capacity).
32

Lianachan,

Highlands 17/01/2008 15:51:40
The wind farm on Lewis absolutely must not go ahead. The local population are, almost entirely, vigorously opposed to it. Not that their opinions will ultimately matter, I suspect. I hope they're not distracted by the recent announcement about the possibility of the towers being fabricated at Arnish - the prospect of a few jobs for a few months should be weighed against the impact on the heritage, character and wildlife of the area over a period of several years.
33

Saoghal Beag,

17/01/2008 15:55:18
Unfortunately nuclear is inreliable (28% of capacity last year), has a waste problem that remains unresolved and remains the most heavily subsidised and expensive generation option. BE remains in business only after a massive bale out by government. The French, state owned industry is more subsidised than the uk. Subsidies in inflated prices, garuanteed market shares, low rate loans, government bale outs, government funded security, subsidised waste management all add up to make nuclear the biggest white elephant in the industry, unless you believe GB.
34

Greenheatman,

TAIN 17/01/2008 16:31:20
Let's face it the UK is hopeless at nuclear, hopeless at renewables and hopeless at seeing the ONLY way forward.

Ditch current crop of renewables like windmills and marine turbines and start again with a 'target' to produce base load electricity from renewable energy.

Nothing short of this will do!
35

fred bloggs,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 18:31:22
38. The tower and foundations should last 50 years. Hydro stations last at least that. The turbines would need replacing or refurbishing sooner as I suspect the turbines in a hydro scheme do.
36

Dr John Etherington,

Llanhowell Pembrokeshire 17/01/2008 19:33:34
This is a bit off topic but Rulesbutnotrulers has spread a bit of misinformation which ought to be corrected (25). Mind you I'm glad to hear yet another "I dislike wind turbines, too".

It is a fallacy that because modern turbines revolve slowly they are no threat to birds (or that birds should pay attention!).

Bit of geometry and elementary maths tells the truth.

A 2.0 MW Vestas V80 turbine has an 80 metre diameter rotor with a maximum of 16.7 r.p.m.

The perimeter of an 80 m circle is

2 x 3.14 x 40 = 251.2 metres

Thus a blade tip will travel 251.2 x 16.7 x 60 = 251,702 metres in an hour.

This is 251.7 km/h or 156 mph, the speed of a light aircraft or Formula 1 car!

Birds die in collisions with cars at 20 mph!

I have recently written of this situation: - "The blade-tip hurtles round at 250 km/h. When it just misses a bird, the following tip is 83 m away (nearly 100 yards) on a curved path, approaching at the speed of a light aircraft, and just over 1 second from impact! A Harrier pilot might have a little problem!"

This is why the Brandenburg State list of turbine fatalities included 90 red kite and 85 buzzard (to Sept last). Thirteen white tailed sea eagles have died at the Norwegian Smola windfarm to the same date. I could go on - but just inattentive birds! At least the RSPB is objecting to the Lewis proposals.
37

fred bloggs,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 19:43:45
40. Bogmon; it is very seldom that there is no wind anywhere in the UK because the separation between an anticyclone and the next depression winging its way across the Atlantic is only a few hundred miles at most.
38

fred bloggs,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 19:50:11
42. For instance, the latest Met Office report (for 7pm today) shows windspeeds of 1mph in Glasgow and 49mph in West Wales.
39

John Blackley,

Florida 17/01/2008 20:23:33
I have a question for those who argue that "there's always wind somewhere in the UK". Do you propose to carpet every area of the UK with these giant noisemakers or shall we mount them all on really, really big trucks so that we can charge around to where the wind is forecast to be blowing tomorrow (knowing, as we do, how accurate our weather forecasts are)?
40

Draco Was a Wimp,

Edinburgh 17/01/2008 22:38:45
Would the eco numpties make up their minds? We can't have coal-powered because of CO2 emissions. We can't have nuclear because its the work of Satan. No we can't have wind-powered because of dozy raptors and sensitive types from the Western Isles. We can't have any more hydro because it scars the landscape. Well, we got to have something. I for one don't really want to go back to candles and open fires.If you're not happy, do your bit and turn off all your appliances. otherwise it's humbug and hypocrisy. I'm sorry, but the windiest places happen to be the prettiest places as well. Tough.
41

yoric,

England 17/01/2008 23:34:50
Its nice of Scotland to cover all their highlands in Windfarms, and pipe the Electricity to England, you should produce enough to light about 10 miles of the M1.
Dont do it, go Nuclear instead, If you build Windfarms your Tourist industry will go down the pan.
42

,

17/01/2008 23:51:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
43

John (Again),

Bury St Edmunds 17/01/2008 23:54:19
Correction

Better if Scotland makes use of its natural resources - than - rely on imported nuclear fuel form France
44

Fairfax,

18/01/2008 10:55:14
John (Again) (48): "Reuters reported that France is now importing wind power to meet a deficiency in its nuclear generation."

To be more precise, France is buying more electricity from Germany, some of which electricity is generated by wind. Looking at the country profile for Germany on EarthTrends, relatively little of that surplus power capacity is generated by wind:

http://earthtrends.wri.org/pdf_library/country_profiles/ene_cou_276.pdf

45

Liberal for life,

Dunblane 18/01/2008 23:44:38
The tide goes in and the tide goes out, daily, every day rain or shine. So waken up nuclear junkies before your armageddon!
46

Isabel,

Edinburgh 19/01/2008 23:06:01
#6 Guga II, Rockall

Another good post from Guga.

We should be thinking of our own first and forget about cheap power for others.
47

,

13/02/2008 12:49:12
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



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.