I can't help but wonder that as one of the major hurdles for the UK relying entirely on renewables at some point in the future is the need for considerable storage of which this scheme can play a significant role if it is ever to be addressed.
As a rough guide the total volume of the upper reservoir for Balliemenoch would equate to Loch Ness water level dropping by I metre.
I wonder, hyperthetically, just how many Balliemeanoch's the combined volumes of the great Lochs, Ness, Lochy and Lomond could support?
Its normal range is about 0.9m and in extremis a bit over 3m although I doubt it would approach the upper or lower limits other than exceptionally. Not least because it would restrict navigation
John_S wrote: ↑Sat Aug 10, 2024 10:33 pm
Loch Ness is around 16m above sea level.
Its normal range is about 0.9m and in extremis a bit over 3m although I doubt it would approach the upper or lower limits other than exceptionally. Not least because it would restrict navigation
Yes I've noted that Fisheries and Loch cruises are already whinging about the negative aspects of being given the go ahead. Not too disimilar to that which faced Edward MacColl a century ago when originally proposing Pitlochry.
John_S wrote: ↑Sat Aug 10, 2024 10:33 pm
Loch Ness is around 16m above sea level.
Its normal range is about 0.9m and in extremis a bit over 3m although I doubt it would approach the upper or lower limits other than exceptionally. Not least because it would restrict navigation
Yes I've noted that Fisheries and Loch cruises are already whinging about the negative aspects of being given the go ahead. Not too disimilar to that which faced Edward MacColl a century ago when originally proposing Pitlochry.
Rather than complaining, perhaps the Loch Cruisers should look ahead to taking advantage of the abundance of clean cheap energy generated in Scotland by converting their vessels to battery so reducing pollution and operating costs in the process rather than just proclaiming they have low emmisions.
Ivor Brown, who had been so concerned about the "filthy mess" being made of the Tummel because of hydro-electric works and who had campaigned so strongly against them, went back to Pitlochry after they had finished. He gave a glowing assessment: The finished article is seemly as well as serviceable. I think we are nearly all ready to confess a victory for the innovators in a task which now we would not have undone. They have exploited the wealth of the waters without defilling them. An artificial loch sounds dreadful...but you are more likely to be charmed by the resulting views than offended by man's surgery of the natural scene. The Pitlochry dam and power station do not offend: they seem to ride the glen with natural poise.
I couldn't agree more.
