Comment posted Marine Scotland identifies 15 new Scottish sea areas for offshore wind by Alex McKay.
Robert is quite right that the areas shown on the map are indicative only showing areas for “research” and NOT areas which will inevitably have windfarms. Indeed, this map should not have come as quite such a surprise to Newsroom, with their highly emotive and ridiculously OTT language “the recoil of a rape”, as this looks like a redraw of a map published last March by Offshore Wind Scotland, a consortium of HIE, SE and the Scottish Goverment: http://www.offshorewindscotland.org.uk/index.php/journey_to_2050/scotlands_offshore_wind_sites
The new map enlarges some of the areas, especially in the Clyde, but the indication of joining Islay to Barra and blocking the north end of the Minch were on the earlier map.
Alex McKay also commented
- Newsroom. I don’t deny you legitimate concern, but you appear to have decided when writing your article to assume that all the areas indicated would end up completely covered in turbines, which a reading of the whole report instead of a glance at just one of the maps it contains would have made clear, so in my view your language was unwarranted, e.g. “unhinged”, “brutalist”,”rape”, “effectively unnavigable”, Frankenstein deskbound madness”. Offshore wind developments are going to happen, and what this new report deserves is cogent argument and considered responses not an OTT reaction such as yours.
Recent comments by Alex McKay
- Jim Murphy’s dilemmas
A loser’s whinge. It’s difficult to find anything else posted by Murdock
- Jim Murphy’s dilemmas
Murdoch. Who paid for the “White Paper”, which was no such thing using the accepted meaning the word but a blatant SNP manifesto with which they sought a Yes vote in the referendum?
Can I suggest you read again the paragraphs which tell you what a wonderful future there will be for Scotland with the oil price at $110/barrel.
- Labour selects candidate to fight South Kintyre council by-election
Why don’t you give the turnout instead of making a childish remark?
- Compromised Greens ask questions of Scottish Government on future of wave energy industry
A small experimental one was built west of Portnahaven several years ago. It never worked to planned capacity because a concrete beam fell and got wedged in the gully it was built over. It has been removed. A larger Wavegen machine was built into a purpose-built excavation a bit further west, but again didn’t deliver as well as hoped and is now closed and scheduled for dismantling.
- HIAL response to devolution to Scotland of Air Passenger Duty
“Many”? Or even “many, many”? What silly nonsense is that? Your state of denial just gets worse. Get it into your head that 2,001,926 people voted No, 383,937 more than voted Yes. I am delighted to see more people now actively interested in politics than before the referendum, and note that SNP membership has increased by some 75,000 since it was held, but would point out that this is still only 3.7% of those who voted No, even if your claim about “many of them” joining the SNP was backed by any evidence. But, of course, you have not thought to consider that all 75,000 might have voted Yes, or a mighty 4.6% of them?
powered by SEO Super Comments