A LARGE CHUNK of our married life was spent on Tyneside and so, understandably, my wife and I retain an affection for the place and its people. When circumstances allow, we'll get in the car (sorry, but it's much more convenient than the train) and head south - the more so since our two sons still live in the region. Of course, it's two-way traffic because they love coming up here. About two years ago there was a period when our sons and their respective wives had been up to us at least a couple of times, but we hadn't made the journey south for a year or so. Now, our preferred route is anything but the A1 and, as we breasted Soutra on the A68, we were amazed to discover that, since our last trip, the muir had sprouted a veritable small forest of wind turbines, their great blades gently and hypnotically cartwheeling as we drove past them. I have to admit to mixed feelings about the things; they have a certain grace - a grandeur even - when seen occasionally, but would I feel the same if I saw them on a daily basis or had to live beside them? One of Westminster's more recent diktats suggests that many of us may well have to do just that.
Britain is part of a worldwide move to reduce dependence on fossil fuels (except for the US of course, it being exempt from that sort of thing). Fossil fuels allegedly contribute to global warming, so targets have been set for a huge increase in the use of "renewables" - power generated by water and wind. This must amount to 10% of overall UK supply by 2010 and double that by 2020. Of the two, water is the more versatile and reliable source, yet it is wind that seems to be hogging all the headlines at present - good old wind that sometimes blows so hard the turbines have to be shut down, good old wind that sometimes doesn't blow at all or at least not hard enough to drive the things. In short, these machines are part-time providers of power: they will always need a backup system.
So, what's the big attraction? Well, all the research and development work having been done by others (notably the Danes), it is an off-the-shelf technology and one that's far in advance of that of wave and tidal power. But there's an added attraction. Profit.
I am not alone in thinking that much of the pressure to concentrate on wind power comes from that well-rehearsed double act - landowners and developers. Both stand to make big bucks from the provision of land for, and the construction of, windfarms. Wave and tidal power? Nowhere near the same opportunities. And there's another problem in that since any landowner/developer partnership can claim to be following government policy, it will expect greater cooperation from planning departments - and that's what it's getting. Just look at Highland Council's decision to allow an enormous windfarm to be built overlooking the village of Edinbane on Skye and the alleged admission of the planning officer that since the policy is government driven, "...there is a presumption that most windfarms will receive planning permission". Now, that is one frightening thought when all the indications are that windfarm applications are cascading on to the desks of planning officers all over the land. Recently, I read of a proposal from two companies to build contiguous windfarms in the area of the Waters of Ettrick and Yarrow. The chosen sites would occupy 7km of hillside creating a wall of turbines virtually marching alongside the popular Southern Upland Way.
Closer to home, the Braes of Doune scheme for 50 turbines has been given the nod of approval though, to be fair to Stirling Council, a secondary proposal to extend the scope of this particular windfarm was knocked on the head. The Clackmannanshire and Stirling Structure Plan 2002: First Alteration: Renewable Energy landed on my doormat some time ago and makes interesting reading - especially Policy ENV 15 Wind Energy. I quote: "For overriding landscape character, built heritage and natural heritage conservation reasons, siting of wind turbines will not normally [my italics] be acceptable in National Scenic Areas, in Green Belts or ... [in] Exclusion Areas. These areas are:
"The remainder of the structure plan area will be regarded as an 'area of search' for development opportunities. Scope within the National Park is expected to be limited..."
So, that's all right, then? Well, not really: the "area of search" covers a lot of ground including all the Ochils away from the escarpment and Sherrifmuir, and don't forget my italicised not normally in the foregoing structure plan statement of intent. Without becoming born-again Luddites, we're perfectly entitled to object long and loud to any proposal that might threaten a well-loved beauty spot or view. Remember: the landowner/developer's first consideration is profit. Saving the world comes a very distant second.