GETITUPYETRUMP!...great news. What a truly huge step forward if half of one of Scotland's cities can be powered from this one centre.

It would be a truly huge step forward... if only it were true. It is saddening to see the level of naivety about the potential of wind turbines to power homes. It was reported in he Telegraph only last week that there is unrest amongst the (so-called) sustainable energy companies due to the Scottish Gov. Independence Referendum. They are concerned that the subsidies which make the industry profitable may be cut. "Ed Davey told the Scottish Renewables annual conference in Edinburgh that its members could no longer rely on subsidies from energy bill payers across the UK to make a profit." Proof that turbines farm subsidies, not wind. Read the article in the Telegraph for yourself: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/9938633/Ed-Davey-warns-wind-farm-companies-about-Scottish-independence.html

Olly - if you're looking for objective and unbiased coverage of renewable energy (or Scottish independence) you really aren't going to find it in the Telegraph - this is a paper that has consistently and blindly opposed wind power, and that gives a platform to ludicrous climate sceptics like James Delingpole. And a minister in the UK Government coalition from a party that opposes independence is hardly likely to give a subjective answer either - especially as the Scottish Government's record and policies on renewables put his department's to shame.

True #2, the understandable delight in seeing Trump scuppered, which I share should be tempered by the rediculous and naive proposition that wind farms can solve our energy problems. The industry is heavily subsidised by taxpayers and will remain so for years to come. It's frankly madness.

good planning decision 'We will spend whatever monies are necessary to see to it that this huge gabled monstrosity is never constructed.'

And nuclear (the alternative as fossil runs out) wasn't subsidised in it's R&D and isn't in its operation and decommissioning ?
We've got to find new ways of generation, and it takes time to refine that tech. Looking forward to the first osmotic power station in the uk!

Given the choice between wind power and hot air, I'll go for wind power any time.

these turbines are for a research centre to improve efficiency. 100 years the petrol engine has been around and it's only 30% efficient - wind turbines will improve as there is a lot of R&D behind the scenes. the energy companies are all about profit-take. wind turbines are a lot cheaper for them to build than gas/coal fired stations. agreed the subsides are an issue but they should not be paid to NOT produce. they should be forced to investigate methods of storage or conversion.

If only we could harness the power of the hot air that's spouted on these forums, we'd be the richest country in the world.

The point Trump is making is that he alledges he has been lied to by Salmond and his cronies, and he's not prepared to take it. Why are Urban Realm not stating this in this article?

GETITUPYETRUMP!... Indeed David, you're clearly a fellow of some refinement, much used to a higher lever of debate.

What's hilarious is that the wind turbines are more pleasant to look at than Trump's so called '5 star hotel'. It's an absolute travesty - no doubt designed by a man in a very grey suit.
As for trump, cadmonkey, he ALLEGES many things, but most of them aren't worth reporting. Who'll ever forget his 'I am the evidence' moment. Madman.

Nice also to hear from a torygraph reader, I didn't realise there was one in Scotland.

Cadmonkey - if we're going to talk about things Trump has alleged, let's not forget his championing of the poisonous and completely discredited 'birther' movement in the US. It's difficult to better President Obama's description of Trump as a "carnival barker".

Ouch Neil...apologies if my level of humour disappointed you. Must have been my uncontrollable reaction to the news that the toupe'd one won't be getting to build his big grey monster.

Let's get the facts straight
1. I share the understandable delight in seeing Trump scuppered, for many reasons: the destruction of protected landscapes, banal architecture, the arrogance of thinking democracy can be bought, bullying tactics, a bad toupee... the list is endless.
2. Sustainable energy is not a political issue - it affects the whole planet and everyone on it. It just gets hi-jacked by politicians to support their own ends.Whether you are labour/Tory or whatever should be irrelevant to an objective discussion on the merits/failures of the contribution that wind power plays in a sustainable future.
3. To get a holistic view of issues you need to read a whole range of sources not just your 'pet' publications. ALL newspapers have their own bias. I read a wide cross section. This quote just happened to be in The Telegraph.
4. I cited a direct quote of reported speech by ED Davey to the Scottish Renewables Industry from the article - not an opinion from a journalist.

The issue here for me is that the whole wind turbine application dialogue has been hi-jacked by Trump. The right's and wrongs of the planning application have become synonymous with whether or not you love/hate Trump.

It appears to me, and of course I may be wrong, that those who support the application just because they hate Trump are ultimately shooting themselves in the foot.

Come on everyone. It's not just a quote from the Torygraph. It's also the Con-Dem Secretary for Energy & Climate Change so it must be true!

I take it all back, I'm sure you'll get a truly balanced opinion on the effects an independence referendum will have on a sustainable Scottish future from him.

As a yet undecided voter, I'm still awaiting a positive reason why I should vote No. Being accused of naivety for daring to believe that we could possibly decide our own future affairs our own is slowly swinging me to a Yes.

A few points here. I think his hotel will ultimately look like Turnberry. I think this us a very appropriate precedent. The current proposal us clearly in an early form. Secondly....it is still Mr Trumps decision to build it. He is precently choosing not to. Thirdly, it seems obvious to me that Salmobd wanted the trump investment in tge araa so promused gim anything, then salmond has turned coat, as oubluc opinion is against trump and he wants to distance himself in the lead up to the referendum. We should be pleased to enciurage inward investment in this nation, not annoy those who choose to do so. I cant believe people are so anti trump on this website.

In an ideal world neither the turbines nor the hotel would be developed.