http://uk.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idUKLS61282420080828

It seems that E.ON have decided to appeal just when we thought the whole silly idea was out the window. I notice they are using the old story about the windfarm powering 24,000 houses but forgetting to mention that these will be miles away down in England - assuming there is some wind of course. They also don't mention the huge subsidies which they receive to both build and run windfarms (£1m per turbine plus a substantial amount for each MW generated) which are paid by us unlucky consumers with our ever increasing energy bills.

It should be interesting to see how different the new proposal is. When the article says that

Quote:

the proposal will comply with Scottish Government and Local Plan policy, with minimal impact on the environment and the local population.

I wonder if one of these changes might be to bury the cables that connect the turbines to the national grid?

_________________
Andy

Fear knocks at the door, knowledge answers and finds nothing.

A little bit of a contradiction from E.On in the Scotsman today:

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/latestnews/Coal-backup-for-wind-power.4442417.jp

So wind power is pretty useless when it is most needed then.....so why do they want to build another windfarm then?

It seems that the Public Inquiry is finally going to happen in January 2010, no doubt at great expense to us. Full details are at:
http://www.auchencorth.org.uk/news.html

I went for a run along the Penicuik to West Linton road the other day. Although the road is not busy, it is not very wide at all. Quite often cars have to pull in to let vans pass. It was a lovely summers day and the scenary was beautiful. I must admit that if they do go ahead and build the farm it will never be the same again. The pictures on the site are quite good at showing how it will look if they are built.

An article in the Evening News today about the public enquiry due to be held in January.

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/latestnews/Inquiry-to-be-held-.5639146.jp

Guess which lucky people get to pay for all this, along with all the subsidies to the energy companies if they get the go ahead?

Midlothian director of strategic services Ian Young sounds like he is not going to wave this through which comes as a bit of a surprise seeing as how practically anything with an "environmental" or "eco" tag seems normally to get an automatic green light. I recall a footballer getting the go-ahead for an ugly major concrete intrusion in a village simply because he had included some sort of grass roof on the gigantic swimming pool gymnasium complex that was planned. I reckon we could build whatever we liked in our back gardens if we included even the most tenuous connection to saving the odd butterfly or barrel of rainwater!

Found it:

Gerrard had originally been granted planning permission in October 2007 for the 'detached two-storey building to be used as a garden pavilion and gymnasium with games room'.
Neighbours were infuriated and complained the gym looked like an 'Asda supermarket in a beauty spot'.
But it is believed Gerrard won over planners by offering to instal a living 'sedum roof', which includes grass, moss and other plants and helps cut fuel bills by keeping the building warmer in the winter.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1171251/Steven-Gerrards-mansion-pool-kids-playground-putting-green-gym-8230-wheres-grass.html#ixzz0QqSRrjSL