Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

Glasgow University study says there are ‘justified concerns’ about wind turbines near industrial plants

John Stevenson. Courier. 05/01/12. Fife. Mossmoran.Pic shows  police on duty near  the scene of the fatal road crash near the Fife Ethylene plant at Mossmoran.
John Stevenson. Courier. 05/01/12. Fife. Mossmoran.Pic shows police on duty near the scene of the fatal road crash near the Fife Ethylene plant at Mossmoran.

After The Courier highlighted a Fife Council windfarm planning blunder, new concerns have emerged over the potential dangers of the turbines spreading pollutants to wider areas.

A study suggests the turbines could push pollutants from a chemical plant towards neighbouring communities.

As we reported, Airvolution Energy secured permission to build two 100m turbines when planners approved its application instead of referring it to Cowdenbeath area committee for approval.

Now a new academic study has stoked fear that the windfarm could disperse emissions from the Fife Ethylene Plant at Mossmorran, jointly run by energy giants Shell and ExxonMobil, across a wider area.

The research by Glasgow University entitled Interaction of an Eulerian Flue Gas Plume with Wind Turbines warns of ”an increase in the concentration of plume material (which may include pollutant gas and particulates) around the wind turbine.”

Its authors use complex equations to assess whether turbine rotor blades disperse pollutants from industrial plants.

The study, published in March, states: ”The results presented in this paper show that environmental protection agencies are justified in their concerns regarding the placement of wind turbines near to industrial plants and strongly suggests that the interaction between wind turbines and gas plumes should be investigated further in order to quantify clearly the risks associated with future strategies regarding the use of land near to industrial sites.”

James Glen whose complaint about a lack of scrutiny uncovered the error by council planners has now called on the authority to stop authorising applications to build turbines next to Fife Ethylene Plant.

The single dad, who lives in Lochgelly with his daughter Amy Rose (4), wrote to Fife Council about Airvolution Energy’s application and received a reply which conceded that it was signed off by planners when it should have been put before the Cowdenbeath area committee.

The letter dated April 3 also revealed that councillors now have no power to rescind the planning permission, prompting the chairman of Cowdenbeath area committee to call the decision ”undemocratic”.

Airvolution Energy has since submitted a second application to increase the height of the turbines to 125 metres.

Mr Glen said: ”Living in close proximity to the chemical plant is already a health concern for me and my daughter. Every couple of weeks I hear about someone else suffering from cancer in the local area.

”This new report suggests turbines could increase concentration of emissions in towns and villages near the chemical plant, so I worry there could be a bigger health risk.

”There have been a number of turbines approved in the area around the chemical plant and yet this issue about dispersal of emissions has not been addressed.

”I’d like to see planners take a serious look at the Glasgow University report before approving any more turbines at Mossmorran.”

The Courier contacted Airvolution Energy and ExxonMobil Chemical for comment but both companies failed to respond.