I assume what you are actually taking a look at is some variety of procedure that will strategise windfarm development.

This will be impractical to implement in britain as we have a tendency to follow the legal rights for the person. Asia would get away with exactly what your saying it is that that which we want, individuals bulldozed off land which they used to fulfill carbon that is national objectives? That has been that which was taking place in Scotland when you look at the fifties with hydro developments, maybe not pretty and yet many antiwind people love hydro as an option to wind.

The selection to therefore make is ours, as residents.

Do we require a carbon that is low for Scotland or perhaps not? Whenever we can not take action right here with all the most readily useful wind, revolution and tidal resources then there’s no hope of every other nation carrying it out.

And when we accept that people are part of something bigger like Scotland, the UK or even the EU or even the bigger people, then we have to accept the democracy as well as the general public viewpoint top-down that people organizations bring. Alternatively, our company is enabling democracy grassroots-up to call the shots. This is certainly no chance to alter the way in which people effect on the environmental surroundings plus it certain does not provide for effective strategy making that is central.

Last edited by Rheghead; 19-Mar-08 at 23:55 .

I truly do not understand why individuals dislike these wind “farms”

“farms”. 3 bloody turbines, ive seen bigger farms in my own restroom.

anyway, these things do not cause anybody any dilemmas, and also the people who dislike him are individuals who just want something to complain about.

I must say I do not understand why individuals dislike these wind “farms”

“farms”. 3 turbines that are bloody ive seen bigger farms during my restroom.

anyhow, these things dont cause anybody any dilemmas, while the individuals who dislike him are individuals who simply want one thing to complain about.

You cannot have already been windfarm that is following celtic302. The thing is perhaps perhaps maybe not windfarms by themselves it will be the true figures targetted on Caithness. see after estimate from another thread.

And Nobody Batted An Eyelid! (wind generators) On 23rd February 2008 at 11.01 I listed the only hundred and forty-seven (147, pure co-incidence!) industrial size wind turbines currently someplace in the look System that will be obviously visible from Watten, or from around Watten, when they’re built.

AND NOBODY BATTED AN EYELID!

Would the Cairns themselves perhaps maybe not create a base that is good the turbines? Assisting to save yourself the usage of tonnes of concrete would certainly reduce the ecological effect. How more straightforward to honour our ancestors?

You will want to? There’s nothing sacred anymore with regards to windfarms and fulfilling the Scottish Governments targets. IMO Caithness has been sacrificed to permit the areas of Scotland to be windfarm free. Little populace, very few voices that are dissenting they have currently got Causeymire, Buolfruich, Flex Hill, Achairn, Forss – landscape’s ruined already so stick the remainder up here and phone it the ‘green’ powerhouse of Scotland.

What lengths away could be the turbine that is nearest through the cairns at Camster? and can the spirits for the Dead have actually good grounds to whine about flicker and noise?

1.84 kilometer, and I am certain that the dead are turning within their graves during the despoilation associated with land they demonstrably cared for. ywy2

Many thanks for the details, a reasonable old distance then? Since far it, the neolithic and mesolithic peoples cared little about their environment, they were the ones that created much of the problems of upland areas through deforestation as I understand. Maybe they might have authorized the turbines for a little bit of power to help keep them hot?

Final modified by Rheghead; 21-Mar-08 at 00:00 .

Many thanks for the details, a good distance that is old? Because far as i am aware it, the neolithic and mesolithic individuals cared small about their environment, these were the ones that created much of the difficulties of upland areas through deforestation.

I have examined it out Reggy, also it appears these were our saviours!

“Removal regarding the woodlands generated reduced transpiration leading to the formation of upland peat bogs .”

Which of course lock up CO2.

I have checked it out Reggy, plus it appears these were our saviours!

“Removal associated with the woodlands generated reduced transpiration leading to the synthesis of upland peat bogs .”

Which of course lock up CO2.

Many Many Thanks ancestors!! ywy2

It could appear that method until we look closer in the carbon sequestration prices of particular forms of vegetation.

The Newtonhill woodland signage had been sequestration that is claiming of 7tC/Ha per 12 months, whereas peatland sequests merely a 0.4-0.7tC/Ha each year.

More guide if you therefore want.

It might appear that real method until we look closer in the carbon sequestration prices of specific forms of vegetation.

The Newtonhill woodland signage had been sequestration that is claiming of 7tC/Ha per 12 months, whereas peatland sequests merely a 0.4-0.7tC/Ha each year.

More guide if you so want.

I am all for growing more woods, ideally deciduous and pines that are caledonian but never dismiss some great benefits of sequestration by peatlands also. Damaging our valuable Caithness and Sutherland Peatlands SACs and SPAs with windfarms/access roads/cable connections is way to avoid it of line.

Therefore annually, a windfarm composed of 2.5MW turbines will mitigate 26,900 tonnes of CO2 per kmІ, woodland will sequester 700 tonnes per kmІ but bad Peatland that is old will sequester 70 tonnes ( at the best) per kmІ.