dunblanemike Posted July 11, 2007 Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 Please ignore if you do not object to overhead power lines destroying the beauty of Scotland. As some of you probably know by now, I am faced with the likelihood of a huge overhead power line passing within 200m of my cottage. This 'thing' will have pylons of over 60 metres and will ruin some beautiful contry between Beauly and Denny. There are health risks associated with an overhead line but I'll not bore you with these. However, if the line is undergrounded these risks disappear. We have organised an online petition to ask that the line be undergrounded. I've mixed feelings about this petition as it implies that we accept the line is going to happen - something that no-one has yet proved to me is required as it looks to me as though there is plenty of spare capacity for transferring the supposedly green energy from the outer Hebrides to the south. Anyway, it would be great if even just a couple of you could sign it - give Mr Brown something to do in his new job! http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/UndergrndCabling/ Thanks Mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dev Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 I sympathise with you to an extent but I feel that this entire cause is simply extreme NIMBYism. I don't want to hijack your thread so I won't go into any of the issues again, I'm sure they've been discussed on here before and I gave my opinions then. Has there not already been a number of different petitions on this subject? Also, online petitions rarely achieve anything anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 This was agreed between John Swinney and Jim Wallace and the power companies on a train journey from Edinburgh to Glasgow on Friday April 8th 2005. I only know that as I was sitting across the ailse from them as the agreement was drawn up and signed, on the proviso that the SNP got elected this time round! Will sign Mike but feel it is a done and dusted thing as too many landowners will be getting massive cash payments for carrying the pylons on thier land.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintly Child Posted July 13, 2007 Report Share Posted July 13, 2007 Would love to comment but I can't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunblanemike Posted July 14, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 14, 2007 nice to spark off a bit of debate. Your comment Kevin about it all being agreed during a train journey is worrying but does not surprise me. I also agree with some of what saintly child has said. I am all for renewable power but having huge wind farms miles from where the power is need just does not make sense. Make the polluter pay, have wind turbines near to where the power is to be used. Scotland currently EXPORTS 10% of the power it produces and will probably continue to export once the planned wind farms come on stream. This will also be why the inter-connector to England is being upgraded.... to send the excess power south to England (and beyond!). Dev, to an extend you are correct, there is a bit of not in my back yard about this. However, I would still be against this (and by the way, at least 3 other similar lines down the east coast, one nearer Perth) as I feel these new structures are so massive and to be a real eyesore. This is old technology, we must have the wit and skill to come up with something better. Unfortunately, the power issue is not being thought through in the 'whole', it is too piecemeal and only really benefits the energy companies, who lets face it, do not really want us to reduce our power usage - it would cost them money! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cagey Posted July 14, 2007 Report Share Posted July 14, 2007 Is the line not a replacement for the existing. Admittedly they will be taller structures but they will be further apart so not so many. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunblanemike Posted July 14, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 14, 2007 Will sign Mike but feel it is a done and dusted thing as too many landowners will be getting massive cash payments for carrying the pylons on thier land.... The landowners will actually get a surprisingly small amount, a legacy from when power delivery was in our hands. It is the wind turbines for which landowners get lots of money, not just one off payments either. Get a few of them on your land and you could retire. The important money grabbers are the trasmission companies, as I understand it they get a payment for every megawatt of 'green' energy they transmit. This will all go to the shareholders of course while you and I are still paying our usual price for our electricity. Agree though about it being done and dusted. The more I see of the PI the more it is plain to see that this is the case. In answer to Cagey's question, yes they are taller, over 60 metres in some cases, and yes there are less of them per km but being higher they are far more obvious. The line was meant to replace the existing and the plan was to follow the exact same route. However, certain birds and animals have more priority than humans so they have moved some sections. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted July 15, 2007 Report Share Posted July 15, 2007 However, certain birds and animals have more priority than humans so they have moved some sections. So are you saying the pylons should run through the countryside and upset the wildlife balance rather than humans? I'm sorry but I'm not too up to date with this subject. Why do we need this new upgraded powerline in the first place? To bring down renewable energy generated in the north? I still say more nuclear plants should be made instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintly Child Posted July 15, 2007 Report Share Posted July 15, 2007 I still say more nuclear plants should be made instead. And how do you think Nuclear energy is transmitted to other places in the country??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cagey Posted July 15, 2007 Report Share Posted July 15, 2007 Maybe instead of having a windmill on our roof we could have a nuke plant in our back garden. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted July 16, 2007 Report Share Posted July 16, 2007 And how do you think Nuclear energy is transmitted to other places in the country??? which was the reason I was asking why the upgrade is needed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.