14 million Trees Sacrificed for Scottish Windmills – IOTW Report

14 million Trees Sacrificed for Scottish Windmills

energy news brief

Scotland, site of the recent United Nations 26th Conference of the Parties (COP26) climate summit, has cut down 14 million trees to make room for new wind power installations.

As reported in The Herald, the tree removal was for 21 wind turbine projects.

“The Scottish Government has moved to reassure that more trees have been planted, but it is unknown what proportion of these are mature plants that play a bigger role in turning carbon into oxygen. More

23 Comments on 14 million Trees Sacrificed for Scottish Windmills

  1. Killing one bird with two stones?

  2. Won’t they, I mean you and your kids, be sorry in about a hundred years, and even less.

  3. Uhhh, what about all of the Balsa trees used to make the windmill blades?

  4. I wonder how much clean air, water and soil has been sacrificed for oil and gas.

  5. Might as well kill those trees now. They’ll die after we eliminate CO2 anyway.

  6. You are aware, Ned, that oil comes naturally out of the ground and vents into the oceans every minute of every day?

    Stupid cunt.

  7. Michael Moore is a Big Sack-O-Shit

    But his Movie “Planet of the Humans” (2019) had whole section about the Damage windmills were causing & how “Co-generation Electricity” was Burning Trees & creating a barren wasteland.

    The Asshole made a good point and pissed Off a lot of Leftie Scum. It was free on Y-tube and worth a watch.

    He also hammered electric cars quite nicely.

  8. We’re in a Sherwood Forest Lord of the Ring simulcasting stream!!! Magistrates. Agents. Highway Robbers. Forests and Trees.

  9. Ned
    You want to see pristine land destroyed by man for a really dumb reason? Look up what Lithium mines look like. It’s disgusting. And they cause just as much damage when they need to dispose of them.

  10. It’s a good thing we won’t be able to burn witches.

  11. Or Warlocks. Hey, how come your very standard little pink guy there has a fucked up left eye. Unique. Is that the side where they hit you with the axe?

  12. Would be better for the environment to burn the trees for energy, as burning wood is carbon neutral. Wood is made from carbon captured from the environment, burning it is simply releasing it back to the environment and not “creating” carbon. Oil is the same thing, just on a longer timeframe.

    Now we “create” a bunch of carbon to manufacture wind turbines that, in the best possible case, will recapture what was created by generating energy during its lifetime. Most likely this wind farm will add more carbon to the environment than it will ever recapture. Best case: release a bunch of carbon, recapture it over 20 years, then release it again for new turbines, and the cycle repeats. It’s not doing anything for reducing carbon.

    An identical scenario would be to grow a forest, burn it for energy, regrow it. Same outcome, but with better predictability since a tree isn’t subject to manufacturing defects, mechanical failures, and blowing wind, not to mention the gallons of oil and grease needed to maintain a turbine.

    But oh no. Don’t burn the trees! Let them rot and release methane that’s 10x worse for the environment.

    Every green energy scheme is worse for the environment on any timeline.

  13. “… that play a bigger role in turning carbon into oxygen.”

    How’s that work?

    Some really dumb muthahfuckahs are professional writers.

    And, did anyone stop to compute how much energy was stored in those 14 million trees?
    My guess is that all the smart Scots got out back in the 1700s.

    mortem tyrannis
    izlamo delenda est …

  14. The huge solar farms that cover large areas with solar panels damage the local enviroment as well.

  15. ^^^ ““… that play a bigger role in turning carbon into oxygen.””

    they don’t really change the oxygen into carbon. They’re redefining it for us and identifying it as that. They just want us to believe it. Trust the science.
    welcome to idiocracy

  16. used a bad name I guess?
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    ^^^ ““… that play a bigger role in turning carbon into oxygen.””

    they don’t really change the oxygen into carbon. They’re redefining it for us and identifying it as that. They just want us to believe it. Trust the science.
    welcome to idiocracy

  17. Now they have room to graze their beef cattle!

  18. The eco warriors bemoan the loss of rainforests, but are OK with destroying 14 million trees to build windmills?

    Is a tree in Scotland worth less than a tree in the Amazon?

  19. ecp,

    From what many are saying, Old growth Diverse forests are cleared & replaced with fast growing trees that they then burn. All very similar trees & not what the natural wildlife had adapted to thousands of years ago.

    So, No oak trees, redwoods, Maple, and other types… (not sure what they are using)

    Now the very assholes that do not want to disturb the red speckled tree rat, stop hunting, and want to prevent farming with fertilizer, are destroying nature much faster that WE ever have.


  20. Don’t worry, all those trees are going to grow back among all the abandon windmills in about a century from now.

  21. We had to destroy the village in order to save it

  22. There was a large farm field near my home that was converted into a solar collector grid a few years ago. I’m talking HUNDREDS of acres of prime farmland. The other day I drove by and noticed a team of lawn mowers and guys with string trimmers clearing the brush in between and under the collectors. It looked like it was not an easy task getting to all those weeds growing around the foundations and frames supporting those collectors.

    I bet NOBODY ever considered the labor and energy wasted in keeping the weeds under control…


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.