Talk:Wind power in Scotland

Images

I created commons:Category:Wind power in Scotland and moved some existing images into it. I added a {{Commonscat}} template to Wind power in Scotland. More photos will appear on Flickr from time to time; use {{Flickr free}} to search for photos under free licenses suitable for uploading to Commons. For example, the following general searches are productive:

• Search Flickr for images with the keywords: wind farm Scotland under these licenses: cc-by or cc-by-sa
• Search Flickr for images with the keywords: wind power Scotland under these licenses: cc-by or cc-by-sa
• Search Flickr for images with the keywords: wind turbine Scotland under these licenses: cc-by or cc-by-sa
• Search Flickr for images with the keywords: windmill Scotland under these licenses: cc-by or cc-by-sa - as many people label their photos of modern wind turbines with "windmill".

Note that most photos on Flickr are not under suitably free licenses, so don't use Flickr's general search function. Geograph British Isles also has many photos suitable for uploading to Commons. --Teratornis (talk) 08:48, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Removal

I just removed the exact same thing from Wind_power_in_the_United_Kingdom see Talk:Wind_power_in_the_United_Kingdom#Quotes there are two issues here - one is the use of quotes to construct articles, which is not ok. The other issue is one of reliability of the source - it either needs to be shown that it is correct, or the assertation that the data was false removed, preferably both.

Some discussion of low wind and statistics of wind generation is definately needed, I'm not convinced the http://www.jmt.org/wind-analysis-report.asp report is the one to use. The use of word/statistical massaging may make a headling - but does not make a reliable source.

Better sources can be found eg http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=q3IAkdbntiwC&lpg=PA16&dq=wind%20farm%20variability%20scotland&pg=PA16#v=onepage&q&f=false Oranjblud (talk) 22:52, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Recent unconstructive edits

There have been some recent additions which do not accord with the source given. The most recent of these is:

"Contrarily, an application to build by wind energy developers in the Forest of Ae in Dumfriesshire, has led members of the Buddhist community at the Tharpaland Retreat centre to oppose the proposed development due to Infrasound issues."

The source actually concludes with the statement: "Tharpaland are hopeful that the Committee can find ways for the Renewables Obligation targets to be met, bringing economic benefit to local communities and Scotland as a whole, whilst still ensuring the health, happiness, safety and well-being of the Scottish people." (p.7)

I'm all for pointing out local opposition to wind farms where it exists, as long as good sources, and a fair summary of these, are used. We need to avoid POV and exaggeration.

I've also noticed that bare URLs are given as the sources, but experienced editors should be using full bibliographic details, to avoid WP:Linkrot.

-- Johnfos (talk) 03:19, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

It appears to have been a study on wind farm infrasound, rather than a "oppose/support" document. Some of the content is interesting eg The Human Impact Assessment carried out by Tharpaland (2003b, 2004) demonstrated that windfarm impacts can produce a wide range of the same kinds of adverse health effects known to be caused by exposure to infrasound. The results of the Tharpaland (2003b) study are also corroborated by surveys of the physical and psychological complaints of communities living near existing windfarms in the UK, Sweden and Germany (see appendix 7–Tharpaland, 2003b)

The place for this is Environmental_impact_of_wind_power#Noise.Oranjblud (talk) 10:57, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

But there are already many more recent and authoritative sources at Environmental_impact_of_wind_power#Noise. Johnfos (talk) 01:23, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

References

POV

Serious POV here, so have restated the tag. Both sources cited in the intro about community support represent those who have vested interests in Windpower in Scotland, and nothing there about the opponents to certain schemes. Where have these surveys been carried out, in the cities of Scotland, where the populations will not have to live with turbines on their doorsteps, or in those communities that will? Dubious further down, as it IS one man's opinion, as stated inline: Has a straw poll of inhabitants of Ardrossan been carried out? If not then it is one councillor's opinion. Further having the central state ride roughshod over local authorities' planning decisions, as has recently happened with Scottish Borders Council and the Scottish Government, is a clear case against wholesale community support. A selection here of articles: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] Brendandh (talk) 18:03, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

And to elucidate a little further, and here it is also my own personal POV, there IS strong community support in Scotland for reneweable energy, but not at the expense of our few remaining wildlands being covered with large power station/wind-factories. Brendandh (talk) 18:17, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

The problem is your are tagging the entire article as having POV issues, while your complain refers to one sentence in the lead. Furthermore, if you have reliable sources to provide evidence on the contrary, please go ahead and expand this views in the corresponding section. I am moving the contentious content to the public opinion section (which could be rename, something like acceptance and criticism...) and putting the POV tag there. Once this section is expanded reflecting all POVs, a summary can be introduced back in the lead reflecting the consensus of the participating editors.--Mariordo (talk) 18:25, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough. Brendandh (talk) 10:13, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Can't believe how the Pubic opinion section has got loaded up with POV tags. An anti-wind campaigner at work? The reality is that wind power is growing rapidly, more community wind farms are being built, and surveys consistenty show majority public support for wind farms in Scotland. And not all of these public opinion surveys are industry-related. In 2002, MORI Scotland was commissioned by the Scottish Executive to undertake a study examining the attitudes of people living close to windfarms in Scotland, and a detailed description of the survey is here. At the local level, yes there may be opposition at particular wind farms, and there has been considerable media hype about this, but to balance this some wind farms become tourist attractions. Johnfos (talk) 19:09, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

No reply, so I have taken the initiative and improved the "Community interface" section as best I can, reflecting the discussion here. Considerable expansion and copyediting has been done. Johnfos (talk) 01:56, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I think it's time some up-to-date figures were dug up about peoples' attitudes to wind farms in 2013 as opposed to 2002. I feel the article understates how contentious wind farms are. My own POV 11 years ago was broadly in favour of wind power but now that the scale of the industry is becoming apparent and what I see as the rapid devastation of Scotland's landscape I'm against and I'm far from the only one. There also seems to be mounting evidence that they are not the panacea they first appeared to be, from a carbon emission POV. Yes - I'm an an anti-wind farmer but that doesn't mean these issues shouldn't be covered in the article.Ullscarf (talk) 15:14, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I have now added this updated info:

"New YouGov research for Scottish Renewables shows Scots are twice as likely to favour wind power over nuclear or shale gas Over six in ten (62%) people in Scotland say they would support large scale wind projects in their local area, more than double the number who said they would be generally for shale gas (24%) and almost twice as much as nuclear (32%). Hydro power is the most popular energy source for large scale projects in Scotland, with an overwhelming majority (80%) being in favour".

-- Johnfos (talk) 11:20, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

Ullscarf, Johnfos, thought I would weigh in here. There are some legitimate reasons to oppose wind energy (noise, aesthetics, avian mortality, etc.) but everything I have read - from the US DOE, from the IPCC, from the peer-reviewed literature - suggests that wind turbines ARE a significant improvement over almost any other source of energy from an emissions standpoint. Lifecycle studies and studies of energy payback ratios/energy returns on investment (EROIs) confirm this trend too. So while they may not be an economic or aesthetic panacea, they do very much seem to be a climate/environmental panacea.Bksovacool (talk) 10:04, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

References

Rupert Soames speech

The Rupert Soames speech is excessive and needs to be trimmed. It is preferable to summarise a viewpoint rather than cut & paste a lengthy quote. — TPX 14:43, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

requests: 1) Lewis Isle Wind Farm. 2) Donald Trump opposition

Hello!

There's nothing here about the 2004 proposal to build wind farms on Lewis.

And there's nothing here about President-elect Donald Trump's opposition to the Aberdeen Bay Wind Farm.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/21/business/with-a-meeting-trump-renewed-a-british-wind-farm-fight.html

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/trump-scottish-wind-farms-231741

Mang (talk) 18:07, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

article needs updating

this article is three years old.

It would be good to refresh it. --Patbahn (talk) 22:31, 12 November 2018 (UTC)