Peter Preston: A chink of light for activists in pylon campaign
We were very puzzled that Scottish Power maintained their standard response that "undergrounding cannot be justified on the grounds of cost, technical difficulties and limited environmental benefits."
The technical assessor to the public inquiry concluded that undergrounding was viable. He also stated that undergrounding up to 10km would not affect the overall economics of the line. This would resolve almost all of the issues around Stirling.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdIn December 2010 matters moved forward significantly when the European Commissioner for Energy published a report entitled Feasibility and Technical Aspects of Partial Undergrounding Extra High Voltage Power transmission Lines.
This report concluded the costs are far less than originally claimed by the applicants, at 20 times overhead lines, and were more in the range of 5-10 times, and that undergrounding is reliable, with faults only occurring every 33 years. It also confirmed there is no exposure of electric fields above ground so the same health concerns associated with overhead lines do not exist. The report also listed case studies where similar lines in "sensitive" areas are being undergrounded in the Netherlands, Germany, Austria and England.
It is difficult to think of a part of Scotland with a greater combination of "sensitive" issues than the Stirling route, with the National Wallace Monument, the Sheriffmuir battlesite, the Ochils Area of Great Landscape Value and the former coalmining communities of the eastern villages. If this combination of factors does not warrant undergrounding where does?
This has presumably persuaded the minister not to approve Scottish Powers proposals for a few shrubs and painting a few pylons. He is quite correct and Scottish Power should think again.
• Peter Pearson is secretary of Stirling Before Pylons