Reverse nimbyism (Evelyn Morrison)
I had every intention of ignoring Bert Morrison’s latest rant in the comment column of The Shetland Times but this time I can’t.
Mr Morrison proclaims from his south end pulpit, that he believes the future of children (his?) must come before any concerns regarding the destruction of the fragile carbon sink by Viking Energy.
I think this comment shows no regard whatever for the children who will have to live in the massive industrial windfarm site. What will the quality of their lives be? We still do not know the full effects of living within a windfarm upon physiological and neurological health, especially to children.
Has he considered the health of the Chinese children dying from the effects of the toxic waste from the mining of materials used in turbine construction? Maybe their deaths are of no consequence?
There seems to be a blind ambition among some Shetlanders to try to keep the bairns in Shetland at any cost by providing employment. That could also be interpreted as blackmail – “fine jobs fur dee here, du’ll juist bide hame wi wis”. A lot is remarked on how we will all be thrown back to the 1950s if this project does not go ahead.
As the poet Khalil Gibran wrote:
For life goes not backwards nor tarries with yesterday,
You are the bow from which your children as living arrows are sent forth.
It must be fine for Mr Morrison to expound upon the glories the windfarm will bestow upon us and how attractive to his eyes massive turbines will be.
I would have more respect for his comments if he was writing from his home in Nesting or Aith.
This is reverse nimbyism he is preaching – “It’s not in my back yard – so it’s okay”.
Evelyn Morrison
Setter,
Weisdale.
H. Tait
To Quote ” the health of the Chinese children dying from the effects of the toxic waste from the mining of materials used in turbine construction”.
Probably not the same children affected by the Chinese opening a new coal fired power station every week.
Bert Morrison
Believe me Evelyn, if and when a windfarm application is lodged for the South Mainland I will not be objecting (and you can quote me on that). With regard to possible health effects of living near a windfarm, with the number of windfarms now in existence (around 200 GW worldwide and the most in a European country being Germany with 27GW) you would think that if there was links to definite health effects then this would be clearly define where a turbine can be sited in relation to where people live. Although much is made of this by anti windfarm groups – is there actual evidence from reliable studies? If there is then it follows that there should be litigation cases against the windfarm owners? One or two successfull cases would stop them in their tracks.