Welcome to the Highlands

Welcome to the Highlands, the land of  sparkling Burns, The Heather hughed Glens, High Mountains where the Eagles soar, a land of Deer and Salmon, Kilts and Pipes. The Corbetts, the Grahams and the Monros. A place to revitalise the Spirit and the Soul. This is a land of proud people, people that will give any man the time of day.

But today a certain sadness pervades all. In a desperate drive for fame our politicians have sold Scotland and its wild places to the lowest bidder. The march of the wind factories is heard in the Glens. Tourism for Scotland is dead. Our way of life crushed beneath the greed of mostly foreign adventurers and aided by our Government and Planners.

This is the opportunity for all you to have your say and perhaps we will save something for our children.

The first great requisite of motive power is; that it shall be wholly at our command, to be exerted when, and where, and in what degree we desire.The wind, for instance, as a direct motive power, is wholly inapplicable to a system of machine labour, for during a calm season the whole business of the country would be thrown out of gear.

William Stanley Jevons (1865)

“God never made an ugly landscape. All that sun shines on is beautiful, so long as it is wild.”

— John Muir

“Thousands of tired, nerve-shaken, over-civilized people are beginning to find out that going to the mountains is going home; that wildness is necessity; that mountain parks and reservations are useful not only as fountains of timber and irrigating rivers, but as fountains of life.”

— John Muir


About Dougal Quixote

Slightly mad. Always believes a cup is half full so continues to tilt at Wind Turbines and the politicians that seem to believe it is their god given right to ruin Scotland for a pot of fool's gold.
This entry was posted in Tourism, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

36 Responses to Welcome to the Highlands

  1. denise davis says:

    It is vital the Scottish government – current or new (post May 5th) – call a moratorium on wind farms. There will soon be nowhere left that represents in its full sense the description of the Highlands as defined in the introduction on this website. There will be no hillwalkers, no Nessie seekers, no hunters and fishers, no quaint cafes and enjoyable whisky tours, no desire to conquer Munros, no birds of prey. There will be no children inspired by the scenery to create music and art. No tradesmen to build houses because no one will want to live here. And no memory of a landscape heritage that has changed so much it may as well be comparable to Morhdorh. There will, instead, be towers of steel and turning blades, making billions for foreign companies and a few greedy, mostly absentee, farmers and land owners. There will be a smidgen of people working in a defunct industry that cannot exist without 1/2 of its earnings coming from subsidies. There will be the most expensive electricity in the world which no one will buy, including England. There will become a bankrupt country who got its aspirations all wrong – egged on by a government based in London who would very much like to watch, and laugh, as it falls, having destroyed its only true amenity and ruined its people. There will become a Scotland that, once again, is ‘rescued’ by Westminster and loses all ability to be an independent nation because it delved in a sinister business that benefited none besides billionaire companies and, in the process, screwed its own people and demolished its countryside.

  2. Bill Davis says:

    Absolutely horrendous what corporations do without regard to the people. I live in the Old Town section of Key West, Fl. Our city commissioners are in office because of how they stand by the wishes of the property owners. The tallest building is 5 stories and all other businesses and homes can not exceed 35 feet in height. This keeps the town quaint and historic looking. There was a $43 million dollar project at the harbor and the developers thought that their money and purchas of the land would convince the commissioners to allow a 45 foot high condo development. They failed and now the land sits vacant in bankrupcy. This comes when the people in office realize that their constituents will react unfavorably and vote them out in a recall election. Keep up the work and you will succeed.

  3. Scotland often forgets that is is already ready rich. Our wealth is in the landscape the countryside that is wild and untouched. In a world of ever disappearing wilderness we need to realize the asset that we still have. Scotland must not be blinded by the short term glitter of promised wealth but hold onto the true treasure that lies in our unspoiled landscapes.

  4. mary macleod says:

    Glen Convinth is the main route for “commuter” and tourist traffic,the latter including the Harley Davidson motorcyclists and many coach companies. These all stopped on the road to photo Higland Cattle deliberately placed by the previous owners in that field for that purpose. These were destroyed/shot by the Druim Ba developers because they didn’t have the right papers!!
    This road is also used by many who don’t want to face Nessie watchers on the Loch Ness road. The enjoyment of all will be adversely affected by the 23, 500 ft high towers.
    Druim Ba is disingenuous in their comments about “some problem for the small scattered community” and also that the road is acceptable for construction traffic, which it is as long as there are no other road users.

  5. Bob kingston says:

    Perhaps a nuclear power station is more to your liking.
    You can dissmantle a windmill if it goes wrong.

    • In the past Nuclear power supplied 60% of Scotlands power. The old technology Magnox and fast breeder reactors at Chapelcross, Dounreay and Hunterston A only produced 824mw in total. Hunterston B produces 1288mw. One modern state of the art powerstation on the footprint of a previous power station could produce an extra 30% of the total of decommissioned Nuclear power plants. We have moved on thirty years since the technology of the old plants and possibly fusion will repace fission within another twenty years. The old power stations were built within a nationalised industry and no financial provision was made for decommissioning them. And yes I would prefer nuclear than the whole of Scotland carpeted by wind turbines each sitting on a one thousand ton slab of concrete that can never be removed and is polluting the water courses and run offs. Government and the Industry deny it, but since when have you believed them. However this is not an either or situation! Future energy needs will be met by a raft of other resources but most have some form of intermittancy problem. Coal, gas and nuclear are 24/7 guaranteed provision. However we do need to husband the world resources so we must look to new technologies. Ground source heat pumps, PV solar and micro hydro do have a place but don’t expect the electricity supply industry to be enthusiastic about that. SEPA now won’t licence schemes under 15mw. My concern is as much to do with the statement of the CEO of the National Grid where he said that reliance on wind would cause large scale power cuts in five years. You would no longer be able to rely on switching your lights on. Wind is a unreliable (intermittant) technology which relies on fossil/nuclear base load. That in fact means that to rely on wind we need to pay for it twice. In my book that is the economics of the insane!

    • denise davis says:

      Firstly, Bob, turbines are not ‘wind mills’. And secondly, there are other options besides nuclear. The Scottish Government and Westminster are so hell-bent on ‘wind’ as a harnessable resource that they are failing to invest appropriately into anything that is truly reliable. Ironically, as it is OUR money that is being thrown at wind farms and supporting big-business, shouldn’t we have a say as to where our money goes? Wind farms would not exist without the subsidies. Wind, as a technology, is failing to provide. This is why Denmark and Germany – once ‘leaders’ of this invasive and environmentally destructive empire building – have pulled out. Their countries are covered with thousands of turbines, but no power station has closed, reduced its out-put, and wind gives but a minute fraction of the energy needed. Holland is withdrawing from the race to wind, Canada is reconsidering its energy policty, and the list goes on. Britain is NOT a second or third world country, yet it refuses to acknowledge the mistakes made by these other first world nations and reconsider its ludicrous energy policy – in particular Scotland. I think you should read ‘The Wind Farm Scam’. It is enlightening, well-researched, and delivers the facts. Anyone who supports the wind industry is either naive about the technology or making money out of the industry. And anyone who truly cares about Scotland’s rural landscape, wildlife, and people – who enjoys its greatest asset in some capacity – should not support wind farm developments on any level. And as for nuclear, you should do some research on that topic before you comment. Unlike Japan, we do not live on the edge of tectonic plates in Tsunami threatened regions. Nuclear technology has advanced a great deal since the power stations in Japan were built. And if nuclear is so unsafe, how hypocritical of us to be buying so much of our power from France, supporting this unsafe industry, whose majority of electricity production comes from nuclear. Should we support an industry abroad that we are not prepared to have in our own landscape?

  6. Lyndsey says:

    We already import Nuclear from France because the wind doesn’t blow enough. Hypocritical to not want Nuclear or don’t you think the French matter Bob?
    Nuclear has moved on a long way and is much safer than ever before. I would prefer it to what is happening with wind power.

    People’s lives are being destroyed by living near wind farms along with the environment, wildlife, tourist industry etc etc. Scotland’s greatest treasure is it’s wild lands and nobody has the right to trash it forever for inefficient, uneconomic wind farms. It is nothing short of a disgrace that our governments, the people who are supposed to serve US, blindly continue with their ridiculous targets for renewables when other, more experienced countries, are pulling back from wind power. Why? Because they have discovered that it is TOO expensive and NOT reliable. Our UK governments are too arrogant to learn from the mistakes of others. It is shameful and future generations will look at our butchered landscapes and think, quite rightly, that this generation had gone mad!

    • mary macleod says:

      Alex Salmond wants his legacy to be making Scotland the leading Green Power country. Instead it will be that he was solrly responsible for blighting our most valuable asset an awesome landscape

  7. “we do not live on tectonic plates ”

    Errr um, yes we do. The whole planet is made up of tectonic plates.
    The ring of fire is very volatile at the moment but we are not immune from
    tectonic activity. Nowhere is.

    Earthquake shakes western Scotland
    A 3.5-magnitude quake struck the village of Glenuig in the early hours of Sunday morning. 23 January 2011 16:39 GM

    • Thanks Michael, I think that Denise was intimating that building a nuclear power station on the juncture of four tectonic plates at Sea Level may not have been the wisest place in retrospect. I remember having a quite large quake in the Midlands in 2002 which measured 4.7, called the Dudley Quake which lasted about 20 seconds and I believe they had one in Worcester in 2008 which measured about 3.6. To put it into context I understand that the UK actually has about 200 earthquakes every year. However nothing on the scale or more to this point duration of the Japanese Quake. The Earth is a volatile mass, something that we often forget. Luckily the UK lives in the middle of one of these plates and does not have to live with this in the same way that Japan, Turkey, New Zealand and California does.

  8. Rivet says:

    The wind energy lobby is a real nuisance for Europe. And what’s worse is that the resulting destruction of landscapes and of the life of many rural communities across Europe is all for nothing, since windturbines indirectly impose the development of power plants burning fuel, gas or coal, to substitute when there is no wind (which is most of the time). It means that wind energy indirectly increases the emission of CO2. It shows the incompetence of politicians in most European countries; let’s not speak of the European Commission, that desperately wants to make believe that it does something for the environment. Pathetic!
    Take courage and defend the beautiful highlands!
    A regular tourist to Scotland

  9. George Lindsay says:

    Regardless of whether you are pro or anti nuclear, it is ever more obvious that wind and wave power are not suitable for base load electricity generation – at best they are marginal. Any weather based generation is bound to be unreliable and intermittent and it’s time that our dogmatic politicians wakened up to this obvious fact and started to develop a pragmatic, engineer designed electricity generation strategy based on reality rather than wishful thinking.
    The current “all eggs in one basket” approach is a disaster in the making and will ultimately bring our country to its knees. We all know that wind is highly subsidised and there simply would not be any wind turbines if they were not subsidised – anyone with an ounce of business experience will be aware that NOT ONE subsidised industry has survived in the long run – so why should we expect that we are any different in Scotland – Denmark, germany, Spain and the Netherlands have learned the hard way – let us also learn and stop behaving like ostriches.
    Not only is the current political approach economically viable but in the process of learning the “hard way” we are blighting, and in many cases destroying, our treasured and hitherto attractive landscapes – impacting the tourist industry in the process
    What a terrible legacy to leave our children and grandchildren – and all to massage the egos of politicians, who should know better.

  10. Ron Greer says:

    The negative effects on visual amenity are all too sadly obvious, but one of the strongest points in our favour is that wind turbines are well nigh on useless as a dependable and predictable power source. The Neta website provides a daily, indeed half hourly summary of that uselessness.
    No C02 is saved by windfarms, indeed they increase it through other back up systems having to be increased. Scotland in any case only produces 0.2 to 0.3% of the world’s carbon emission ‘problem’ so we are almost irrelevant as a source of that problem. We could access our huge reserves of low sulphur coal, burn it as cleanly as possible and not worry about what the Chinese and Indians think of us. They probably couldn’t care less!

  11. Our Minister of Doom, Chris Huhne, announced on the 4th March that he would introduce a “Capacity Payment” to make sure that the country could meet peaks in demand such as an advert break in Coronation Street. How? If the wind isn’t blowing no amount of cash is going to change that or can Mr Huhne walk on water. Another pearl of wisdom is the installation of smart meters that will allow energy supply companies to temporarily turn off fridges and freezers in your house to reduce demand. OK, next time you come home from holiday and find the freezer awash we know whom to send the bill, Chris Huhne. I expect that he will be made Minister of Health next to deal with an unexpected outbreak of food poisoning!

  12. Charles Wardrop says:

    The comments above almost say it all, but I would add that there is gross incongruity and an unholy irony in the support for wind and water turbines from a Scottish nationalist party, self-styled environment pressure groups and, for that matter, politicians with experience in business, such as Messrs Salmond and Huehne.

    Surely these renewables supporters, pushers and imposers can see by now the horrendously damaging, permanent impacts on Scotland’s fabric/environment, including flora, fauna, and finances that their completely illogical policies are
    wreaking. They are, conveniently, ignoring the withdrawal from wind turbines by the authorities in other European nations, some, like Germany and the Netherlands, further along the corrosive line of development in renewables, now recognised as a hopeless failure and cause of terrible damage.

    These policies, and those of the CO2 scams, represent a world gone mad in self-destruction. the notes above, and letters in today’s “Herald” (Glasgow), describe movingly the folly, greed and developing tragedy in our beloved Scotland.

    We desperately need an effective opposition, including, perhaps, the voice of a champion, like Churchill’s in the 1930s, to stop this crime destroying our land.

  13. C.Wardrop says:


  14. George Lindsay says:

    As ever more of these monstrosities are built, virtually on every hill and mountain in the country, more and more people are becoming aware of the impact they are having on our countryside – and the level of concern is increasing as evidenced by the increasing number of letters published in the press.
    The developers, aka subsidy farmers, have absolutely no respect for the countryside as long as they can make large sums of money. They are not building wind turbines in order to reduce CO2 levels (they simply don’t do that) nor to improve our environment as they blatantly don’t do that either.
    Surely, we should expect our politicians to stand up for us in that face of this demonic assault on Scotland’s landscapes – but they don’t which makes one wonder if they have some sort of invested interest (more taxes??) in having them built? So called politicains should hang their heads in shame.

  15. George Lindsay says:

    I forgot to add in my previous post, that it appears that the majority of subsidy farmers are from overseas – could this be because there is no longer a market for their product in their own countries now that subsidies have been withdrawn or reduced in Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Spain etc.??

  16. Lyndsey says:

    My thoughts exactly George. You would think the politicians would realise that wouldn’t you? Mind you perhaps they don’t realise Scottish Power is Spanish!

    I have just a read a report by a german scientist, Axel Kleidon of the Max Planck Institute for Biochemistry (New Scientist) who believes that mass turbines will add to global warming. This is because they will interfere with the wind flow across the land which in turn will increase the amount of solar radiation reaching the earth surface. In addition the working of the generators also gives off heat thus increasing the air temperatures.

    An interesting report indeed and not dismissed in the article by other UK scientists.

  17. The CAA in their document referring to planning guidance for Wind Farms reflects some of the same issues established in this report, then dismisses them. Funny how many authorative Government statements do that. Could it be that the authors are flagging up issues, but need to keep in line with CC doctrine. The Hayes and Mackenzie report. The recent withdrawn whale statement. All altered or withdrawn but, once the cat is out of the bag, we are quite capable of coming to our own conclusions. Whilst no record of schools of whales stranding on our coastline, it is perfectly reasonable that the low frequency vibrations will be sense by these mamals. We know that they are effected by propellers but at least these are transient disturbances. Again one suspects that cumulative effect will cause issues in the piscine or sea mamal population as it does in homo sapiens on-shore.

  18. Are the current planning rules impeding our human rights under the EU constitution?
    A rather wordy document and part of a large written response on the Economics of Renewable Energy to the House of Lords, but of note none the less.

  19. Mr Robson said: “I walked the great moor on Lewis for over 60 years, watching with wonder the light as it changed from season to season; hearing the birds; seeing the infinite sky and the ruined places of ancestral people.

    “It is priceless, irreplaceable; not just a place but the soul of Lewis

    Mr. Robson, in his letter relating to Barvas Moor on the Island of Lewis, sums up for me what the whole of the Beauty of our country means to us. Not just a place to build a wind factory, but the Soul of Scotland, stained by the blood of centuries and the sweat and toil of our ancestors.

  20. Some times we seem to be arguing in isolation, especially if you beleive the spin of Renewables Scotland and their parent Renewables UK. However nothing can be futher from the truth as a recent article on bird deaths suggests that the level is being disguised by the Wind Industry.


  21. John Shade says:

    Here’s a new t-shirt which encourages discussion of the impact of windfarms on wild life: Josh’s ecocide t-shirt.

    The killing of eagles in California may well quality as an example of ‘ecocide’, a term coined by an extreme environmentalist who apparently failed to see the irony of it:

    ‘At the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area, wind turbines provide clean, renewable energy to thousands of homes in California’s Bay Area. Unfortunately, these same turbines have killed an average of 67 golden eagles per year since the wind farm was constructed in the 1980s.

    The Los Angeles Times reports that approximately 5,000 turbines border the riparian canyons and grasslands where the protected raptors build their nests. The region has one of the highest concentrations of golden eagles in the United States, about 60 pairs according to field biologist and East Bay Regional Park District wildlife manager Doug Bell.

    “It would take 167 pairs of local nesting golden eagles to produce enough young to compensate for their mortality rate related to wind energy production,” Bell told the LA Times.’
    Source: http://www.care2.com/causes/environment/blog/California-Wind-Farms-Impact-Golden-Eagle-Population/
    Windfarms, and other renewables must surely cause far more environmental damage per MW than conventional power stations. Examples of such pollution include ground, air and water damage from solar panel manufacturing in China, deforestation in Scotland, or the destruction of habitats by solar panel farms. Loss of amenity and health risks can be so severe that living in the vicinity of windfarms would be intolerable for many people – another form of ecocide I presume.

    See: http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2011/6/2/more-dangerous-proposals.html
    And: http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2011/6/2/ecocide-josh-101.html
    You can order your t-shirt here: http://cartoonsbyjosh.spreadshirt.co.uk/

  22. Love the T shirts.

  23. Tony V. Concerned says:

    And if Mr. Salmond should succeed in “freeing” Scotland from the rest does he expect the subsidies for the turbines sited in Scotland to continue to be paid from Parliament? Because I believe all these payments will fall to the Scottish tax payers in their very much smaller numbers to pay them along with the repayments on all millions Mr. Salmond proposes to borrow to build new bridges etc. And we join the Euro! Won’t be too long before we will need bailing out and need billions to rebuild the infrastructure of the Scottish People’ basic needs which will have been sacrificed to prolong the First Minister’s pie in the sky dreams!

  24. geomac says:

    Tony. Whilst agreeing totally with your sentiments, you should be aware that the subsidies paid to wind turbine owners/developers are paid via our electricity bills – not by the government. As such, they are hidden (or rather were hidden) in that they were enmeshed in our electricity bills – now more people are aware of this as our electricity bills are increasing dramatically – my electricity supply company bill shows that 12% is attributable to subsidies – other supply companies have higher percentages – some as high as 20%!!!
    This subsidy, therefore is a reversal of the Robin Hood principle – this takes from the poor (as ever more find themselves in fuel poverty) and gives to the rich (wind developers and landowners) who then bribe local communities with piffling amounts of money relative to the huge sums they derive from subsidies.

  25. Tony V. Concerned says:

    Dear Geomac the government pay almost 45% of all monies received by the wind farm operators via the ROC (Renewable Obligation Certificates) paid from the EU who then reclaim the money from the Government and the tax payers pot. Information source the Daily Telegraph. Which is why the House of Lords is worried about the amount of Tax payers money being used to subsidise wind farms. This is not meant as a payment for the electricity generated but an added incentive for these greedy people to erect them in the first place. Then the Government has also insisted that all renewable generated electricity is bought by the energy firms. Why do you think Scottish power are putting so many up. They get immediate payment for all the generated electricity from our bills and the money from the tax man via the EU and the ROC’s . Please do not infer that I have not done my research on wind farms and look again yourself. We are paying for turbines 3 ways, 1 via tax, 2 via our energy bills and 3 by the loss of services in our local community and nationwide.

  26. Bit of confusion here. The Government has imposed Renewable Obligations on the Electricty supply companies as a percentage of their consumption. To balance this they, the companies, have to provide Renewable Obligation Certificates to the value of their Renewable Obligation. They either acquire these certificates coupled with renewable energy or buy the certificates on the open market. It is a perverse system which heavily penalises those companies that fall short on their obligation. It is only then that Ofgem get involved but only as an agent. There are some traders that make an awful lot of money out of it! Very complicated and it would take ages to explain but is all available on Ofgem site or on http://www.ref.org.uk To confuse matters FITS work somewhat differently. The Government and the EU are not directly involved in any of this but you, as a user, pay a hidden surcharge of between 8 and 14%(reputedly up to 20%) on your electricity bill. This way the government correctly say that it is neither a tax or a government subsidy. There are EU funds available for developing renewable energy which includes off-shore wind and wave and that may be what has confused the issue. They are available through the DECC but have absolutely nothing to do with either ROCS or FITS or in fact electricity generation as such. There was however a hidden funding stream that some developers could access in the form of loans to construct wind farms. This was to counter the difficulties that developers were experiencing raising speculative finance in the market. It had little to do with the Uk and was more aimed at supporting German and Danish based manufacturers. I understand that it has now dried up! Last year HMG announced a cap for FITS of around £400 million but as I say that is another story. FITS are payable on a wide range of renawable schemes and unlike ROCS are still paid on electricity you use yourself. Alhough guaranteed for 25 years, Spain recently removed the FITS on solar energy retrospectively. FITS are usually the system used throughout Europe but ROCs are a purely UK invention. I hope that you are a bit wiser by now, although I will happily accept “confused”.

  27. Tony V. Concerned says:

    Thank you for explaining that and my apologies to all and in particular Geomac, for relying on information several years old which was poorly written.

  28. geomac says:

    Tony – please don’t feel bad – this whole issue is an exercise in obfuscation by our ruling classes and designed to hide the fact that we are all paying subsidies. As Dougal competently explains, the subsidy is paid for via the electricity generating companies in order to comply with government dictate. This enables the government to claim that there are no taxpayer subsidies whilst deceitfully ignoring the fact that their legislation obliges generating companies (and hence the consumer) bears the predetermined cost level.
    Somehow or another my ID on this blog has changed from George Lindsay to geomaclin – life’s a mystery!!

  29. M says:

    Malcolm Shykles a retired Research Chemist

    The Climate Hoax, Wind Farm Pollution and Justice

    More than 1,000 reputable scientists have dissented from the prevailing Climate Change theory since 2007. About 400 originally did so in a U.S. Senate report of that year, and the list has since been steadily growing.

    Nobel Laureate Dr. Ivar Giaever recently resigned from the American Physical Society over its official position that “the evidence (for Global Warming) is incontrovertible” said ‘the temperature (of the Earth) has been amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have definitely improved in this ‘warming’ period.’

    The Inconvenient Truths

    In his senior year at Harvard, Al Gore had taken a class with oceanographer and global warming theorist Roger Revelle, who had sparked Gore’s interest in global warming because CO2 in the atmosphere was steadily increasing. However we now know that this rise follows a warming period, does not precede it and over the longer term CO2 is falling.

    The late Ken Lay CEO of the Enron Corporation realised that the company stood to make vast profits from global warming energy-trading schemes if, it could persuade the world that Carbon dioxide was a pollutant.


    Al Gore took office in 1993 as the 45th Vice President of the United States (1993–2001) and the Clinton/Gore administration was in frequent contact with the Enron Corporation led by Ken Lay. Gore became infatuated with the idea of an international environmental regulatory regime. A trade system was required, exactly what Enron wanted because they were already trading pollutant credits and making huge profits from the scheme.

    Thence Enron vigorously lobbied Clinton and Congress, and sought Environmental Protection Agency regulatory authority over CO2. The Enron Foundation lavished almost $1.5 million on environmental groups supporting international energy controls.

    Ken Lay was CEO of Enron from 1985 until his resignation on January 23, 2002. His crowning moment must have been the Kyoto Protocol adopted on 11th December 1997.


    On July 7, 2004, he was indicted by a grand jury on 11 counts of securities fraud and related charges.

    There it is; the whole fuss and bother of this Climate Change and Wind Farm nonsense was started by the mix of greed, unproven science, a naive politician and a crook.

    Finally following 25years of building Wind Farms across the United States at some enormous expense, they supply less than 3% of its energy usage. A nuclear power plant requires less than 2 square miles of land. A Wind Farm equivalent requires some 500 square miles plus a conventional power plant backup for the 75% of the time when the wind is not blowing just right.

    Some Wind Farms are located in areas shared with protected birds. In 2004, based upon carcasses found, it was scientifically estimated that 2,300 golden eagles had been killed by the large wind farm at Altamont Pass, California, in its first 23 years of operation.


    Wind Farms are a pollutant, Carbon dioxide is not.

    In time the facts will be laid bare. The number one fact is that Climate Change as depicted in the UK “Global Climate Change” document of October 1991 has not come about.

    What will worry politicians and promoters of Wind Farm Energy are future prosecutions and the fear of prison. The evidence is that the science of CO2 enhanced Global Warming has never been proven. All legislation on the subject has relied on corruption upon dishonest scientists who printed questionable papers in Scientific Journals which had not properly peer reviewed.

    Scientists of the UK Government, Greenpeace, and Nature magazine amongst others need to be sued for bringing about the massive cost of this crazy legislation.

    • geomac says:

      An excellent summation, Malcolm. For anyone looking for a more in depth history/analysis of the great global warming scam, I would stringly recommend the recently published book called Watermelons (green on the outside and red on the inside) written by James Delingpole. His research and detail is very impressive. The book is eminently readable and makes extensive use of quotes from those who would try to fool and scam us – making it difficult to challenge. At present the book is only available as a e-book (Kindle) via Amazon (£5) but I understand that it’s being printed in paperback format early next year.

  30. M says:

    Wind farms were never worth the bother.

    “In 2010 wind generation provided 4.2 terawatt-hours of energy, covering 1.3 percent of UK demand.”


  31. The irony isI: not only are they ugly and kill birds and bats, they also consume more energy than they produce over their lifespan (what with reserve power stations running at half throttle and all that, not so much their own production energy). It’s a travesty. However, don’t despair, in twenty years it will all be over. The Scots have face longer periods of suppression.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s