Get Involved

How to Object

Save Loch Ness has been working hard behind the scenes with Planning, Hydrological and Ecological consultants, and we have also been engaging with aquatic and landscape specialists, to draft an initial holding objection, which has been submitted to the Energy Consents Unit. This will be revised and updated in due course as more information from Glen Earrach Energy and consultess becomes available.

 

It is important you have your say, and to help people with representations – below are some summary bullet points covering various reasons to object. These are not the only reasons, and others can be found on our website (and within the EIA report). We still encourage you to read the EIA chapters that are most relevant and/or of greatest concern to you. If you would like help with a specific area, then do get in touch and we will do our best.


Current suggestions for objections include:

 

  • Cumulative Impacts –Glen Earrach Energy’s proposal is one of many development pressures leading to detrimental landscape and environmental change in the wider area around Loch Ness. The wide range and nature of cumulative effects is of particular concern and have not been adequately assessed. 
  • Visual Impacts – Landscape and visual impactson key locations such as Meall fuar Mhonaidh Summit, Foyers, Urquhart Castle and from Loch Ness itself are significant and likely to impact the local tourism economy. These impacts will last many years.
  • Peat – Significant amounts of peatland (24% of the site) will be removed. Peatland is protected. The level of loss and disturbance to the high quality peat resource is not justified.
  • Geology – The site lies on the active Great Glen fault line with unstable rock and secondary faulting. There has been insufficient testing of seismic risk.
  • Groundwater – Activities will substantially disrupt and modify Locah nam Breac Dearga and its ability to supply the Old Red sandstone aquiferand there will a high risk of contaminants and pollutants seeping into the groundwater and gradually flowing down-dip to reach the privatewater wells and bores at the settlements of Grotaig, Balbeg, Ancarraig, Bunloit, Divach, and Clunemore.
  • Traffic – Traffic increases will give rise to serious congestion, safety, and wear and tear issues. The heaviest traffic impacts include: A831 Milton: 152% increase from 53 to 133 HGVs per day; A831 Strathnacro: 670% increase from 27 to 205 HGVs per day; A833 Culnakirk: 393% increase from 25 to 124 HGVs per day; A82 from Inverness: 46% increase from 25 to 241 HGVs per day. Potential cumulative traffic impacts from works on Chrathaich and Cnoc Farasd wind farms, the Bingally SSEN substation, and the grid connection link from the proposal to Bingally. 
  • Hydrology– There is not enough water in Loch Ness to support the existing, consented, and proposed pumped storage hydro schemes. The total drawdown could be as high as 1.25m, making Loch Ness tidal. The project is totally reliant on modifications to the weir on the River Ness at Dochfour, however, this critical aspect is not part of the current application.
  • Ecology –Insufficient surveys have been conducted for bats, reptiles and red squirrels. The prevalence of watervole is underestimated. The effects of the proposed weir modification on the Urquhart Bay SAC have not been adequately assessed. The effects of the loss of ancient woodland have not been assessed. The effects on salmon are the subject of an ongoing survey which means that these effects are unknown. Frequent water level changes will fundamentally impact the ecology of the shallow water environment of Loch Ness, which has knock on impacts on other species reliant on this foundation in the local foodweb.
  • Policy– The overall proposal is not supported by the relevant polices within the National Planning Framework (NPF4) that Glen Earrach Energy have opted to rely upon in support of their application. 

Individual objections to the Glen Earrach Energy project can be submitted by email to the Scottish Government Energy Consents Unit (ECU) via: representations@gov.scot

Quote reference ECU00005121 in emails sent, date your response and clearly state your name and postal address. If you object, the words “I object” must be used within your email to be counted. We’ve been informed that addresses local to the project carry more weight than those from further afield, and if 2+ individuals from the same household make an objection separately, this will be counted as one.

Other groups, businesses and individuals may wish to respond bas the ECU have a duty to accept representations up until the date of determination, which is likely to be October 2025. So, if more time is needed to read and think and discuss (we will be starting weekly walks so concerned residents can join together – see our Facebook page) there is no urgent rush. 

We recommended that all objections are copied to The Highland Council at eplanning@highland.gov.uk (quote ref: 25/01599/S36.).

more posts: