Carrick Wind Farm – Pre Application
ECU Ref No ECU00002063
Wind Farm (Generating station of >50 < 100 MW Capacity)
Categories: Other News.....
SAS Volunteer
We publish content from 3rd party sources for educational purposes. We operate as a not-for-profit and do not make any revenue from the website. If you have content published on this site that you feel infringes your copyright please contact: webmaster@scotlandagainstspin.org to have the appropriate credit provided or the offending article removed.
5 Comments
Mr Maurice McPhillimey · June 23, 2020 at 12:47 pm
I’m totally enraged, this one they are planning butts right onto my place. Referring to their plans I’ll have 4 Turbines within 1 Km and 8 Turbines within 2 Kms right on my door step. As well as Clauchrie windfarm, these 2 but together to make one super windfarm,,. 50+ Turbines all 200 metre high… this is Outrageous 2 years ago South Ayrshire council stated South Ayrshire has enough windfarms in fact we have more than recommended… But Scottish Government SNP. have decided we don’t care what the local Council say, we will build them everywhere we want, all we have to do is make sure they have over 50 mw output so they become a Sec 36… then the council has no say… the people of South Ayrshire Desperately need someone to help us…
SAS Volunteer · June 25, 2020 at 5:13 pm
Yes, it is very unfair but then you are far from alone, it is the same in every part of the country, some worse than others. In actual fact South Ayrshire is not one of the worst affected as you can see from the link below. East Renfrewshire is by far the worst (density of turbines per sq km). It is however untrue that the Council have no say in a s36. They have the right to object to the application and if they do it will trigger a public inquiry where they will be able to defend their objection. Anyone else – statutory consultees and members of the public will also have the chance to object and to take part in the Inquiry. https://scotlandagainstspin.org/2020/02/density-of-turbines-in-local-authority-areas-in-scotland-up-to-date-figures/
Maurice McPhillimey · July 10, 2020 at 2:00 am
Thank you for that like to East Renfrewshire, it’s gone past a joke now. I know people like these W.F. for the green status. But living next to a few you get to see them being put up… the think that I’ve see which gives me major concern, everyone I mentioned it to does know what I’m talking about or just ignore me… is the base of these Turbines, which is over 18 cubic metres of Concrete. I ask will they be removed after 25years. No they say they will just cover them over. Does people know that Concrete is made from mainly LIME. And that Concrete devolves and disintegrates after a time… that’s why old houses fall down. Therefore all this LIME.. is absorbed into the ground and gets into the water table. All these blocks of each Turbine all over the country… we are looking at a Massive amount of LIME. which I believe Will make a massive Health problems for over Children and everyone else living in Scotland. So to reduce the carbon,,, will end up will a massive amount of Scottish land destroyed and nothing will ever grown on it again due to the Lime contamination and the water will also be Contaminated…
Why has everyone completely Ignored this fact…
Instead of protecting Scotland, we are in fact in the near Future we will have destroyed it…
But they will no worry about that . As they will old people or dead by that time. Find out Why…
SAS Volunteer · July 10, 2020 at 7:46 am
The issue of environmentally unfriendly concrete being left in the ground for ever has been raised on many occasions but according to Scottih Natural Heritage it is a better option than trying to remove it.
“In summary, there is a relatively low environmental risk associated with reinforced concrete that is left in situ (The Concrete Society pers comm. 2013), and the noise, ground disturbance and cost (excavation/breaking/processing/transporting), along with associated carbon emissions, may create a larger environmental impact than leaving such concrete in situ. Figure 13 provides suggested measures that can be taken for the decommissioning of turbine bases. It should be noted, however, that some ground conditions can be dynamic, such as upland peatland environments. Therefore the decision to retain a buried structure should take into account the longer term stability of the landform in order to avoid buried structures becoming exposed in the future. ” See page 53 onwards of this guidance from SNH https://www.nature.scot/sites/default/files/2017-07/Publication%202013%20-%20SNH%20Commissioned%20Report%20591%20-%20Research%20and%20guidance%20on%20restoration%20and%20decommissioning%20of%20onshore%20wind%20farms.pdf
SAS Volunteer · July 10, 2020 at 7:48 am
The issue of environmentally unfriendly concrete being left in the ground for ever has been raised on many occasions but according to Scottih Natural Heritage it is a better option than trying to remove it.
“In summary, there is a relatively low environmental risk associated with reinforced concrete that is left in situ (The Concrete Society pers comm. 2013), and the noise, ground disturbance and cost (excavation/breaking/processing/transporting), along with associated carbon emissions, may create a larger environmental impact than leaving such concrete in situ. Figure 13 provides suggested measures that can be taken for the decommissioning of turbine bases. It should be noted, however, that some ground conditions can be dynamic, such as upland peatland environments. Therefore the decision to retain a buried structure should take into account the longer term stability of the landform in order to avoid buried structures becoming exposed in the future. ” See page 53 onwards of this guidance from SNH https://www.nature.scot/sites/default/files/2017-07/Publication%202013%20-%20SNH%20Commissioned%20Report%20591%20-%20Research%20and%20guidance%20on%20restoration%20and%20decommissioning%20of%20onshore%20wind%20farms.pdf
Reply