SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Sewell Chan reports at The New York Times that Britain's highest court has unanimously rejected an attempt by Donald J. Trump to block the construction of a wind farm near his luxury golf resort in northeast Scotland. Trump has vowed to stop further development on the project if the offshore wind farm — 11 turbines, which would be visible from the golf resort 2.2 miles away — goes forward. Trump spokesman George A. Sorial denounced the ruling as "extremely unfortunate for the residents of Aberdeen and anyone who cares about Scotland's economic future" adding that the wind farm will "completely destroy the bucolic Aberdeen Bay and cast a terrible shadow upon the future of tourism for the area. History will judge those involved unfavorably, and the outcome demonstrates the foolish, small-minded and parochial mentality which dominates the current Scottish government's dangerous experiment with wind energy."
Nicola Sturgeon, first minister of Scotland, withdrew Trump's status as a business ambassador to Scotland last week after Trump called for Muslims to be barred from entering the United States. Robert Gordon University in Aberdeen has stripped Mr. Trump of an honorary degree it awarded him in 2010. Trump's mother was born in Scotland and moved to the United States in the 1930s. "I think I do feel Scottish," said Trump at one time.
(Score: 2) by theluggage on Thursday December 17 2015, @07:26PM
What is it that American's (obviously not all Americans) seem to have against these projects?
We have them in England too: we call then NIMBYs (Not In My Back Yard) - is this not a universal phenomenon? File alongside "I want my children to be able to afford their own houses, but I don't want them built where I can see them and I want the value of my own property to keep going up at 10% a year!"
To be fair, there are some suggestions that wind turbines are harmful to birds & bats, and if you actually built enough of them to make a serious dent in fossil fuel use that might become significant - but at the current level I doubt it bears comparisons to the toll from domestic cats and destroying natural habitats with other forms of development (e.g. golf resorts!)
(Score: 2) by Vanderhoth on Thursday December 17 2015, @07:39PM
I was speaking specifically about wind turbines, which very few people in my neck of the woods seem to be against. I know what you're talking about though. I've heard the term NIMBY, but we normally call them CAVEs here (Citizens Against Virtually Everything). They usually only show up when someone wants a playground, dog park, query, or a ATV trail. We get people that drive into the city to complain about where a new dog park is going because people that live in cities shouldn't own dogs or have places where their kids aren't playing in traffic.
"Now we know", "And knowing is half the battle". -G.I. Joooooe
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 18 2015, @02:43AM
Query?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 17 2015, @10:52PM
> To be fair, there are some suggestions that wind turbines are harmful to birds & bats,
That is much less of an issue a couple of miles off shore. Sure there are some sea birds and the bases of the windmills will surely turn into artificial reefs attracting birds that eat the fish living on the reefs. But that might even make them a net positive for bird creation.