Brian Heaton
The awaited application for the construction of a wind farm in Glen Dye has now been made. Due to the proposed windfarm size the planning application has been made to the Energy Consents Unit in Edinburgh rather than to Aberdeenshire Council. The Trust sent an objection into the Energy Consents Unit copying it to Aberdeenshire Council. We hoped that our letter would help support the objectors in any internal debates that were held by them, and although the Council was not the planning authority they did object. However, it is the Scottish Government as the Energy Consents Unit that makes the final decision.
The NEMT letter ran as follows:
“Dear Sirs
I am writing on behalf of the North East Mountain Trust (NEMT), a voluntary body based in the Grampian area which represents the interest of hill-goers and those who enjoy visiting wild land. NEMT membership, comprising twelve hillwalking and climbing clubs along with individual members, totals around 900 people. NEMT maintains an interest on behalf of its members across the whole of Scotland but has a particular focus on the Cairngorms and the wider Grampian area. Our position with regard to the construction of wind farms is that they are part of a balanced energy production policy and we support the Scottish Government’s efforts to decarbonise the economy. We do however believe that this should (and can) be brought about without detriment to Scotland’s finest hill and mountain landscapes.The location of this proposed development is a designated Local Landscape Area. The purpose of these areas was outlined in the summary of the document published by the Scottish Government Spatial Data Infrastructure as recently as August 2018 where it says the purpose of the designation “is to ensure that the landscape is not damaged by inappropriate development” and “These designations play an important role in developing an awareness of the landscape qualities that make particular areas distinctive and promote a community’s sense of pride in their surroundings”.
I write with our particular concern regarding the detrimental effect that this wind farm will have on this Area, in stark contradiction to the purpose of such an Area a defined above by the Scottish Government. The quality of views from the surrounding hill and glens, not just from the higher ones surrounding the upper Glen Esk, which are in the Cairngorm National Park and Mount Keen Wild Land Area, but the closer, very popular, lower ones will be severely affected. These lower ones are used extensively by families, school parties and member of the general public from Aberdeen, Dundee and the areas in between because of their accessability and more gentle terrain. The windmills would be constantly in view from the walks up, and ridges from, Clachnaben, Mount Battock, Sturdy Hill and Glen Dye. This could so reduce the quality of the experience that future walks are not undertaken by people, potentially to the detriment of their wellbeing.
Associated with this must also be the potential impact on tourism with people no longer wanting to stay in the area where the currently easily accessible experience of seeing a natural wild Scottish landscape as a major attraction is no longer the case."
NEMT contacted Mountaineering Scotland and they also objected to the wind farm. The essence of their objection ran thus:
There is substantial local mountaineering interest in the popular hills of Clachnaben (589m) and Mount Battock (778m), often climbed together from the east along the northern ridge enclosing Glen Dye, which rarely drops below 550m. There would be almost constant visibility of the proposed wind farm from this ridge at less than 5km distance from the nearest turbines.
This is not the right place for a wind farm. The proposed development would devastate the popular Clachnaben-Mount Battock, Glen Dye and Sturdy Hill (and adjacent ridges) walks, with a lesser but still seriously adverse impact on Hill of Wirren. It would extend the reach of wind turbines visually and perceptually far into the hills surrounding upper Glen Esk (which are in the CNP and Mount Keen WLA), which have so far been largely spared impact from wind farms.
Aberdeenshire Council's Local Development Plan 2017 Policy C2 indicates areas with strategic landscape capacity to accommodate wind turbines. The proposed site is not within such an area. It does lie in an area identified as being of significant environmental constraint for wind energy.
Having carefully assessed the proposed development, Mountaineering Scotland is of the view that it is not 'the right development in the right place'. This is the wrong place.
The needs case does not outweigh these adverse impacts since the need for low carbon electricity can be met in many places but the adverse impacts are site-specific.
We await the outcome, but not with optimism.
Of major concern are proposals to effectively extend the Stronelairg Wind Farm which is situated in the Monadhliath mountains. When the original planning consent was given for this wind farm, in June 2014, the developers were required to reduce the number of turbines from 83 to 66 and to restrict its visual impact by siting it in an upland basin. There are two proposals, Cloiche wind farm and Glenshero windfarm which, although submitted as separate developments, are in fact extensions to the Stronelairg windfarm. The Cloiche proposal for 40 turbines effectively more than replaces the ones excluded from the original application and the Glenshero one moves the profile of the development out of the upland basin it was originally confined to. This development is for 39 generators and would involve 28 km of track being made.
If both are granted there would be up to 145 turbines effectively joined together on one site. These turbines will have heights varying between 135m and 175m. It will result in one of the biggest industrial estates in Scotland, covering an area over 70 km2. Detailed objections to these proposed developments can be found on the John Muir Trust web site and the Mountaineering Scotland web site.
One claim that is being increasingly quoted in mitigation to the work being undertaken in applications is that any peat removed from a construction site will be "laid down elsewhere" or "reinstated". The implication of this is that this returns the peat to its original condition in the ecosystem. Once extracted peat is no longer a "living" structure and can only be considered as its various components.
Please let the webmaster know if there are problems with viewing these pages or with the links they contain.