Allt an Tuir Renewable Energy Park
Guidance notes for objections based on the developer’s new (August 2026) Revised proposed development and Additional Information. Object by 20th September 2026
Details provided by NO Ring of Steel (NoROS Kyle of Sutherland)
Background – the original proposal. In February 2025 a company called Allt an Tuir Renewable Energy Park Limited submitted a planning application to the Scottish Government Energy Consents Unit (ECU), for the Allt An Tuir Renewable Energy Park comprising - 9 turbines (8 at 200 metres and 1 at 180 metres high), plus a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) and a solar photovoltaic (PV) array, plus the associated infrastructure including three Borrow Pits (quarries).
The site is located approximately 2kms northwest of Rosehall village, with the site boundary abutting onto the Allt an Tuir burn, which runs into the River Cassley.
Change to original February 2025 proposal. As a result of consultation responses received from consultees in relation to the original application in Feb 25, regarding aspects of the proposed development, the developer now proposes to amend the design to reduce the height of 2 turbines by a few metres. Also, following the Wull Muir decision in Feb 26, this revised proposal also covers the proposed Grid connection and the proposed Abnormal Indivisible Load works. You can read full details on these aspects by googling Allt an Tuir Renewable Energy Park ECU 00005008, then click on “documents”.
The Wull Muir wind farm factor. Furthermore, and importantly, since the Allt an Tuir application was submitted in February 2025, the Edinburgh Court of Session in February 2026 issued a judicial review decision following the Raeshaw Farms Ltd versus Scottish minister case, regarding the Wull Muir Wind Farm. The challenge against its developer by Raeshaw Farms Ltd focused on whether planning permission for Wull Muir Wind Farm in the Scottish Borders had been lawfully issued, given that the proposed grid connection was neither included within the planning application, nor assessed as part of the environmental impact process. The central issue before the Court was whether the wind farm and its grid connection should be treated as a single project for the purposes of environmental impact assessment (EIA). The court’s decision was that the EIA did not consider the environmental effects of the grid connection.
Why is the Wull Muir decision applicable to Allt an Tuir? Because the original Feb 2025 EIA for Allt an Tuir did not provide detailed information about the proposed grid connection for the project, and in light of the Wull Muir decision, the developer for Allt an Tuir has now been instructed to provide consideration of the likely significant environmental effects of the proposed grid Point of Connection (PoC) and associated cable route, insofar as they solely serve the proposed development, in combination with the Revised Proposed Development. It should be noted that Allt an Tuir currently does not have a grid connection, and until it does, the grid connection point and route connecting the wind farm to the grid network cannot be known for certain and hence is called the proposed Grid connection.
Due to a number of already operational windfarms in the Kyle of Sutherland plus those approved, and with more in the various planning /scoping stages, the Kyle of Sutherland area faces being encircled by a ring of steel of 231 turbines.
NORoS is most concerned that Allt an Tuir and other future developments will cause significant damaging impacts on the area, the rivers and glens and the local economy and that our once rural landscape is being trashed. The proposed Grid connection route, which includes boring under the River Cassley, is sufficiently outrageous to warrant objections.
If you objected to the original proposal for Allt an Tuir, that remains valid, but you can and should also object to the revised development, based on the Additional Information. If you DID NOT object earlier, then you can still object to this Additional Information.
How you can help
Please note that the deadline for receipt of your objection is 20th September 2026.
Thank you for your help by objecting, for which we, the NORoS Committee, are most grateful.
The essential headings for a letter of objection by either email or post are shown below.
Note that e-mail objections are no longer accepted, and all objections must be submitted through the Scottish Government’s Energy Consents Unit (ECU) online portal or by post.
Submitting an objection via the ECU’s on-line portal.
1. Type into Google - “ECU 00005008 representations”. The website will appear. Then click on “Representations”. Then, click on “Add Representation”. The form will then come up for you to proceed. 2. You will see the information you must provide: - name, address email address etc (you may mark it as private) This information is required for your representation / objection to be accepted.3. There is a time out limit on your input, so it is recommended that you prepare the text of your representation in advance, so that you can type it in before time expires.A WARNING ABOUT THE FINAL SUBMISSION PROCESS
a) Once you have pressed the “submit” button on the portal you should be taken to a page which says that your submission has been successful, it advises that an email has been sent to the address you have given in your representation, and asks you to click the verification link in that email. This should activate a second email to your inbox which confirms submission of your Public Representation. Done! b) BUT, if, having pressed “submit”, you are taken to a page which says “This representation has already been submitted”, it means that your objection has not gone through! This could be for a number of reasons, the most likely one being that the website timed out as you were working your way through the pages of the portal or writing in (or pasting in) your objection. Unfortunately, if this does happen you will need to repeat the whole process. Once you receive the message mentioned in (a) above you will know that you have been successful and simply need to follow the verification process which will end with a separate email from the ECU confirming successful submission.Submitting an objection by post.
1. Provide your name (block capitals), and full postal address. If you own a house locally use that address. More than one person can object from an address.
2. You should head-up your representation as follows: Letter of Objection to the proposed Allt an Tuir renewable energy park Additional Information. Ref: ECU000050008. Then add your objections / representations.
3. Send it to: Scottish Government Energy Consents Unit, 4th Floor, 5 Atlantic Quay, 150 Broomielaw, Glasgow G2 8LU.
Key factors on which you may choose to object to the Revised proposed Allt an Tuir Energy Park development and its Additional Information
The principal additions in the Revised Proposal are the details on the effect of reducing the height of the two turbines nearest Rosehall, plus the significance of the proposed grid connection and its proposed route, plus the work needed for the Abnormal Indivisible Loads (turbine blades).
Visual Impact:
The reduction in height by a few metres for turbines 8 and 9 will make almost no difference to the visual impact.
They will dominate the skyline.
All 9 turbines are disproportionately high compared to the local landscape. In terms of landscape character, the EIA concluded that the development would give rise to major and significant effects on the local landscape within a 5 kms radius. So, the lesser height of turbines number 8 and 9 is insignificant.
Note that the site overlaps into the Reay-Cassley “Wild Land Area 34” (WLA) and that 8 of the proposed turbines and associated infrastructure are located inside the WLA, which would give rise to significant adverse effects on WLA 34.
The ground area covered by the Solar array is vast at 23.8 hectares, equivalent of 29 football pitches.
Cumulative effect
The reduction in height of two turbines will not alter the cumulative effect, as in the local area there are currently two operational windfarms - Rosehall & Achany, two more Meall Buidhe and Strath Oykel currently approved and a further six in various stages of planning. Even with only the existing and approved developments Allt an Tuir would create a 360-degree view of turbines.
Even with two slightly lower turbines, the development would add significantly to the overall cumulative impact on the landscape character, the visual amenity, plus the additional cumulative noise from turbines.
Grid connection
Whilst the developer was given a grid connection offer in 2021, this offer no longer represents the current connection position, thus the developer currently does not have a Point of Grid Connection (POC) at a substation, such as Invershin.
However, to try and get their proposal moving through the planning stages, the developer is outlining the route of a proposed connection from their on-site substation to a Point of Connection (POC) based on the Shin sub-station. Note that this route is speculative as their POC is by no means certain and might alter. How can a planning committee consider the route given this uncertainty?
The proposed route. The route chosen to take the cable underground to the POC at Invershin Substation (at Inveran) is untested and loaded with significant risks and such work will impact greatly on the local people. It is planned to put the cable underground for the full distance from the site to the Shin substation, including underneath the River Cassley.
Boring under the River Cassley. It is planned to bore horizontally under the river and put the cable through underneath. This operation will impact significantly on the river, a Special Area of Conservation for its fresh-water pearl mussels. There are significant risks of sedimentation and pollution and environmental sensitivities.
Fish and the SAC’s aquatic environment. The plans envisage using Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD), sometime between July and September, to take the cable(s) under the River Cassley some 400m upstream of the A837 road Rosehall listed bridge; the latter forms part of the Oykel Special Area of Conservation (SAC) for salmon and freshwater pearl mussels.
Risks of under river drilling The main threat to fish during HDD is a “frac-out”. This occurs when high-pressure drilling mud (usually a mix of bentonite clay and water serving to lubricate the drill bit) escapes through underground rock fractures and into the riverbed, causing –
1. Suffocation; the thick clay settles on the river bottom, coating fish gills and smothering benthic organisms (the insects and larvae fish eat). It is particularly deadly to freshwater pearl mussels, which are highly sensitive filter feeders that rely on pristine, oxygen-rich, and sediment-free gravel beds. An influx of drilling mud can blanket the riverbed, smothering adult mussels and cutting off oxygen to juvenile mussels buried in the substrate.
2. Blanketing of salmon spawning gravels
3. Poor water quality, disrupting feeding opportunities for juvenile salmon and trout.
4. HDD generates considerable noise and heavy vibrations; the latter can disorient sensitive migratory fish species causing them to delay or abort their migrations.
Raise these points in your objection.
The SAC and Kyle of Sutherland SSI. – The impacts and risks of burying a cable along the A837 Rosehall to Invershin public road. Much of the Kyle is a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). The excavation of a trench along the entire route from the River Cassley to Invershin, including crossing 16 significant additional watercourses (and numerous smaller burns), has great potential for silt to be washed into the river and/or the Kyle SSSI. The applicant states: “Excavation of the trenches would generate loose sediment, which could potentially gain access to surface watercourses and waterbodies through entrainment in surface runoff. This could potentially have an effect on the downstream watercourses through damage to fish spawning habitat and changes to dissolved oxygen and nutrient levels in watercourses and waterbodies.” Raise these matters in your objection.
o The applicant maintains that the effects “will be minor and not significant” and that impacts in the Kyle“beyond 1km is highly unlikely.” This contention does not stand up to basic scrutiny as it ignores the fact that the Kyle is tidal; thus, any sediment reaching the Kyle may be carried, not only downstream, but also upstream as far as the Bailey Bridge on the River Oykel. The applicant proposes to mitigate against silt being washed into the River Cassley and the Kyle using silt fences; the latter are simply useless during high rainfall events. Furthermore, the Kyle is prone to flooding alongside the A837 and spills over it in places to a considerable depth. Raise these matters in your objection.
In summary, the extensive works to facilitate the proposed grid connection route amplify the unacceptable risks that the Allt an Tuir Renewable Energy Park project poses to the integrity of the Oykel/Cassley SAC.
Other Cable laying issues - The construction corridor for the underground cable along the A837 is assumed to be up to 5metres, comprising an approximate 1metre wide trench and 2m either side. Trenching along 12 kilometres of the single-track public road is an incredulous and unacceptable plan.
Route closure for locals. The route would be constructed in the A837 Rosehall to Invershin public road using opencut trenching. A road closure of this route section, which could last several weeks, is expected by the developer, whereby all vehicles would be diverted around the A839 via Lairg. Your objection could be along the lines of - This route is used extensively throughout the year by locals and by east to west traffic (and vice versa) and any closure is unacceptable.
Transportation -Abnormal Indivisible Load Works
An abnormal load is one consisting of a turbine blade or the turbine towers. The blades are the main problem due to their length (indivisibility). There would be a considerable amount of work to prepare the route from Lairg to Rosehall prior to abnormal load delivery. This would include the removal of the safety barrier and parapet railing over the bridge between the two lower Shin lochs, removal of road furniture including traffic signs, fencing taken down, plus tree pruning or felling. Some private land may be required. Objection –this work would cause major inconvenience to all road users. The removal of safety barriers on the Shin bridge should not be authorised.
The developer is assuming that to enable over sail of the vehicle chassis and turbine blades for both the Ministers bridge and the Rosehall River Cassley Listed bridge, no dismantling of the bridge parapets will be required. The consultancy firm carrying out the assessment recommended “further investigation”, but this does not appear to have been actioned. Objection – It is no use assuming such an important matter. Any dismantling of the parapets should not be allowed, especially the Cassley Listed bridge.
***
NORoS funding. To counter each wind farm development costs NORoS a considerable amount. The NORoS committee are most grateful to all those who contribute to the fund, as without you we would be unable to run a campaign. If you would like to contribute to our fund it would help greatly and you can do so either by a one-off donation, or by a standing order arrangement.
The account is called NOROS; Sort Code 80-22-60; Account No: 17619760.
Thank you.
NORoS mailing list. Currently we have to hand deliver printed copies of these guidelines to a number of those who wish to object. If any of your friends and family have an email account, but are not on our NORoS email list and would like to be included, please encourage them to join up emailing us at noringofsteel@gmail.com.
Thank you for your support.
1st September 2026