ABSURDITY IS .... REPEATING THE SAME MISTAKE, THUS CAUSING MORE PEAT SLIDES
SCOTTISH AUTHORITIES HELL-BENT ON IGNORING THE PRECEDENT OF DERRYBRIEN, TAKING UNNECESSARY RISKS WITH PEOPLE´S LIVES

Not only will the Pairc windfarm destroy active blanket peat, which is a priority habitat protected by European legislation, but it is likely to multiply the damage by causing peat slides.

The mitigation, as proposed by the consultant, won´t stop peat slides from happening. It won´t either stop them once they are set in motion. The arbitrary « significance matrix » does nothing to comfort the critical eye of the conservationist.

.
.
.
.
.
OBJECTION TO THE PAIRC WINDFARM PROJECT - PEAT SLIDES

ISLE OF LEWIS, SCOTLAND

PROMOTER : SCOTTISH AND SOUTHERN ENERGY


Sent by email to : energyconsents@scotland.gsi


Dear Scottish Ministers,


Please register my second objection to the above project, for the following reason :

Peat slides . The environmental statement ( “ES” ) identifies the risk of peat slides. This is a matter for concern. A windfarm at Derrybrien, Ireland, has caused significant damage this way, notably to a fish population of considerable interest : DERRYBRIEN and DERRYBRIEN2
There were no human casualties, luckily .
A video of the slide in motion is available - see further down.

Such an accident would release C02 into the atmosphere, as the displaced peat oxidizes . It would also ruin more priority habitat, damage fishing and fisheries interests, and kill or displace local otters. It may also, God forbid, cause human casualties.

Inasmuch as the risk has been identified before consent is granted, civil and criminal responsibilities may be incurred by the decision makers. The ES won´t afford them much protection, for it is doubtful that the pseudo-scientific risk assessment as practiced by the consultant would hold in court.

In fact, the « significance matrix » used by Mouchel Parkman Ewan plc could be appropriately described as a spin machine . Here is, for instance, how the matrix is being used in a practical case :

"Without the proposed mitigation measures described in Appendices 4.1 and 14.4, such pollution incidents will be likely and their magnitude potentially will be major. With the measures in place the potential magnitude will be reduced to moderate and the likelihood to unlikely. The anticipated residual effect will accordingly be minor." Then, generously, the authors add : "In view of the high sensitivity of the receptors and the major magnitude of the impact should a peatslide occur, the anticipated effect would be moderate." ( ES - 14.6.1 ).

One must be naive, or corrupt, to believe such a deficient salesman’s pitch . Besides, the peat slide video makes it very clear that mitigation won´t stop gravity . ( The video weighs 916 Mb. It is available upon request, in the form of a CD ).

Bulldozing through kilometers of active blanket peat to build tracks and platforms has the effect of loosening large portions of the blanket, which is basically floating on water. Once set into motion, they can’t be stopped. No amount of mitigation will do.

Inasmuch as there are alternative, safe sites available in the UK for erecting windfarms, there is no justification for taking such a risk, which may cause human casualties, kill or otherwise affect otters, release more C02 into the atmosphere, impact fishing and fisheries interests, and destroy more priority habitat as defined by European legislation .


X X X




I have published a first objection to the project :
Absurdity is... destroying carbon sinks in the name of Kyoto

There is more to be said on the "spin machine" : see my soon-to-be-published objection on the grounds of water contamination.


Yours, faithfully

Mark Duchamp..................................................23 july 2007

>> Autor: Mark Duchamp (23/07/2007)
>> Fuente: Mark Duchamp

(C)2001. Centro de Investigaciones y Promoción de Iniciativas para Conocer y Proteger la Naturaleza.
Telfs. Información. 653 378 661 - 693 643 736 - correo@iberica2000.org