Unfortunately, the letter by Stephen Boyd et al (February 4) does not quantify the economic benefits which are claimed for the Lewis Wind Farm. The other side of the coin is the cost to the electricity consumer, which can be readily estimated.
The recent government consultation document on The Future of Nuclear Power gives a cost of onshore wind output of up to £62/MWh, although generators could actually be receiving in excess of £80/MWh.
However, the cost to consumers is greater than this because of the need for backup generation when the wind is light (or blows too strongly), and also because of the costs of extra transmission capacity to move the power south.
The capital and operational costs of this backup, required to maintain the normal standard of security of supply, could amount to some £20/MWh. The extra costs of transmission reinforcement from the north of Scotland would exceed £15/MWh before including the cost of the cable to the mainland. So the total cost to consumers for wind power could be in excess of £100/MWh compared with a mix of nuclear, coal, and gas power stations at £40/MWh (including carbon costs).
Thus, for a 400MW wind farm on Lewis the extra cost to electricity consumers would be more than £60m per annum, a figure which, I would suggest, is far in excess of any benefits to the island's population.
There are also less quantifiable costs to society in general for the loss of visual amenity and for the damage to the environment. Part of these costs will be reflected in a reduction in tourist activity.
Surely it would make more economic sense to support direct investment in infrastructure, transport and industry to create permanent job prospects at a fraction of the cost, and at the same time preserve the landscape and tourist industry.
Sir Donald Miller, Chairman SSEB/ ScottishPower 1982-1992; Colin Gibson, Power Network Director, National Grid Group 1993-1997, Biggar.
I must thank Ian MacGillivary for his honesty in publishing the costs of the project to install a grid in the island of Eigg (Cost of eleiggtricity, Letters, February 6). As they say, however, the devil is in the detail: £20,000 to install 1Kw of photo voltaic cells? Can they ever produce enough electricity, at a cost comparable to mains electricity even to pay back the interest on the capital? I think not.
If this is an example of the real costs of "green" electricity let us stay brown, or nuclear. It will be infinitely cheaper. Photo voltaics are a waste of money.
Drew Duncan, Paisley.
Environmental organisations are as keen as everyone else to support a sustainable economy for our remote islands. We are convinced that exports of renewable energy can form part of such an economy. However, this does not require damaging sensitive environments on Lewis, or, indeed, anywhere else. The open letter to the Energy Minister by the business and engineering community misses the point by insisting that large-scale development is the only solution for island communities.
We welcome the indication that the Scottish Government is clearing the backlog of large wind farm applications, and encourage it to approve all those which do not adversely impact on commercial, community or environmental interests. Research suggests that Scotland can meet its renewable electricity targets and support a strong renewables industry without intruding on areas designated for their national or international significance for wildlife or landscape.
Appropriate renewable generation projects coupled with energy efficiency measures are the best energy strategy for communities throughout Scotland. This is also a cost-effective way of contributing to government energy policy goals: reducing carbon emissions; ensuring security of supply; maintaining competitiveness and tackling fuel poverty.
There is a range of options available to the Scottish Government to tackle the carbon emissions that contribute to global climate change. Care must be taken that in dealing with one environmental problem we don't create another that damages communities, wildlife and landscapes.
Dan Barlow, Acting Director WWF Scotland; Stuart Housden, RSPB Director Scotland; Simon Milne, SWT Chief Executive; Duncan McLaren, Chief Executive FoE Scotland.
Thank you for printing the lovely, lyrical letter from Michael Robson of Port of Ness (February 7) - it brightened up the whole day. It would be good to have at least one letter of similar style amid all the facts, figures and political arguments which regularly assail us.
I enjoy a good debate, but it is important to have an occasional breath of fresh air.
Alison Duncan, Dunoon.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article