It ran as a sidebar to a more pressing story about myths surrounding organic food, and was quickly pushed into the back of people’s minds.
Now, many years and millions of pounds later, the debate over Scotland’s most divisive energy project has left the environmental lobby split. The nation faces some of the toughest choices it has ever had to make on the future of its energy, and the drawn-out battle has raised serious questions about Scotland’s planning system.
What started as a straightforward scheme to link the energy-rich Highlands with the needy and populous central belt quickly became mired in controversy.
Scottish and Southern Energy (SSE) first outlined its £200 million plan in September 2002, with the power industry and political authorities largely supportive of the project. It was seen as a given that the upgrade had to happen to realise Scotland’s potential as the “Saudi Arabia of sustainable energy”. The existing Beauly-Denny cable could carry just 160,000 volts, and even the 400,000 volt capacity after the upgrade was seen as a conservative estimate in the optimistic early days of Scotland’s renewable energy ambition.
The plan was to improve an existing line from Beauly, near Inverness, to Denny, near Stirling, from where it could link up to the Central Belt and vast markets further south. Initial commentary focused on the economic benefits and environmental gains.
Within a year, however, opposition to the scheme was beginning to crystalise. Local authorities grew uneasy about the prospect of a line of “mega-pylons” running through their back yards, and councils in the Highlands, Stirling, Perth & Kinross and Clackmannanshire went on to lodge formal opposition.
Outdoor organisations including the John Muir Trust, the Woodland Trust, the Ramblers Association and several others objected to the scheme on aesthetic grounds, and because it could cause significant damage to local habitats on its 220km route.
The 213ft pylons would dwarf the Scott Monument and the Statue of Liberty, campaigners said, and Cairngorm National Parks Authority warned that they would “desecrate” one of Europe’s last remaining wildernesses.
A report by the National Radiological Protection Board in 2004 drew a link between proximity to power lines and childhood leukaemia, and in doing so provided a more tangible, less woolly, cause for objectors to rally around.
In 2004 international rugby star Kenny Logan and his TV presenter wife Gabby signed up in opposition to the scheme, along with broadcaster and environmentalist David Bellamy.
For several years the Beauly-Denny line was rarely out of the news. Fresh attacks every week piled on the pressure to call off, or drastically modify, the plan. Campaign groups were set up across Scotland, and writer and outdoorsman Cameron McNeish created a memorable image by claiming the impact on Scotland’s landscape “would be like taking a razor blade to a Rembrandt”.
By the end of 2005, 12,000 people had lodged objections to the project, and Holyrood’s then-Presiding Officer George Reid called for a public inquiry. This was formally announced in
August 2006, starting the next February and due to finish in December 2007.What followed was the longest and most expensive consultation in Scotland’s history.
A planning application of more than a million words was lodged and the cost of the project was raised to £320m, with £250m from SSE subsidiary Scottish Hydro Electric Transmission, and £70m from ScottishPower subsidiary SPTransmission.
Critics branded the inquiry a “charade”, and complained that the pressure of meeting Scotland’s legally binding new renewable energy targets would force ministers to press ahead with the scheme regardless of opposition.
Many wanted compromise, with parts of the line buried. Campaigners claimed these ideas were largely ignored, and said power firms and regulator Ofgem rode roughshod over sensitive areas.
Other sections of the environmental lobby – including the Green Party, Friends of the Earth and WWF Scotland – were broadly supportive of the scheme, though they too wanted some costly underground sections.
Evidence was heard from 200 witnesses, and the inquiry eventually ended in February 2008. A report was presented to the Scottish Government 12 months later, and it then fell to ministers to decide on the Beauly-Denny line.
Even after the inquiry was closed, pressure continued to mount from both sides of the lobby. In March, Scottish Renewables chief executive Jason Ormiston called the case “the litmus test for the Scottish Government’s credentials on climate change”, and warned that failure to give the go-ahead would spell “disaster for the renewables industry”.
With confirmation of the go-ahead expected in the next few weeks, interested parties will now look to the details of the plans to see what concessions – if any – have been granted in recognition of the 18,000 people who signed their names in opposition to the scheme.
While ministers have finally taken a decision on the Beauly-Denny line, for many the battle will be far from over.
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