How could the community theoretically argue against this development?
1. The Environmental Principle argument: This is an area of outstanding, unspoiled natural beauty. It should be preserved for future generations.
2. The Wildlife Impact Argument: What about the geese/dolphins/(insert rare animal here)?
3. The Tourism Argument: It will ruin tourism (includes the "move it round the coast and we're all happy" argument).
4. It will ruin OUR view from MY house
5. The anti-windpower argument: Wind power is not the answer.
And the likely responses:
1. "Not according to Scottish National Heritage it's not, and even if it was, we build power lines through National Parks anyway, so we can just do this anyway too."
2. "Our studies show that there are no special wildlife considerations. Good luck with proving that there are."
3. "Our studies show that tourism is not developed enough in Kintyre for this to make a sizeable economic difference."
4. "What, all 150 of you? Would you rather your house ended up 20ft underwater? Everybody else in the country is going to have to look at them too."
5. "The Scottish Government is committed to windpower as a part of the mix of renewable energy sources as we transition to a low-carbon economy."
In light of the above, I have little doubt that his project WILL go ahead, although I would love to be proven wrong.
Attempts at painting those who are against this project as somehow "anti-progress" is ridiculous. Real progress would be serious long-term investment in the technologies that will inevitably render the blind alley of wind power obsolete. Those who are in favour of the project should also be aware that it is just the thin edge of a very big windmill-shaped wedge.
I AM against wind power in general, for simple scienctific and economic reasons. There are a huge number of alternative energy projects being undertaken in all parts of the world, most of which will inevitably provide greater efficiencies and more importantly be more SUSTAINABLE than wind power over the medium and long term. These new technologies are NOT pie in the sky, and once the US, China and Japan get serious about these they will become ubiquitous more quickly than anyone can imagine, leaving wind power looking like the lumbering heavy industrial anachronism that it is.
Of course, there will be advances and breakthroughs in wind power, just like in every field - in fact the proposed designs for Machrihanish have just become obsolete:
http://www.ubergizmo.com/15/archives/2010/07/aerogenerator_x_wind_turbine_to_outlast_the_rest.htmlOne of the top selling points of offshore wind historically is the fact that no-one can see it - out of sight out of mind. Call me a cynic, but my guess is that the power companies are probably aware that a variety of factors (eg. spiralling cost of fuel for shipping) could make far offshore wind uneconomic pretty soon, but there are probably limits in place for the number of allowed onshore developments, so they're pressing for "offshore" projects that are so close to the shore that the distinction becomes much less meaningfull.
I do realise that wind power is now set in stone as a major part of "the mix" in the muddled governmental response to the coming "energy crisis". The current Scottish government sees offshore wind as a good fit with a nostalgic view of Scotland's traditional strengths in heavy engineering and offshore construction. To them it seems like a no-brainer, and in the short term it is. But it is also brain-dead, because even in the medium term, wind will not be cost-effective or sustainable in comparison to other newer technologies. What is the point in trying to become a world leader in a technology that will inevitably be superceded? The Danish got on the bandwagon at the right time, the Scottish approach is "me too" decades too late. However, now that the political will behind this is "all in", any and all opposition will be disregarded.
The environmentalist lobby in Scotland are split and very confused - they are taking a "anything but nuclear/hydrocarbon" view even if it means the destruction of the natural environment, which in the case of "offshore" (1km!) wind will include most of the last genuinely unspoiled areas of western Europe.
A lot of local people and regular visitors (but clearly not all) are justifiably upset about the drastic change to the view and the proximity. However, we must note that Machrihanish is NOT a National Scenic Area.
http://www.snh.gov.uk/protecting-scotlands-nature/protected-areas/national-designations/nsa/If it was, you would think that the development would have a better chance of being blocked? The official line appears to be that it doesn't matter how "nice" a view is if it is not "special" geographically. Of course, it IS special to the 10,000 or so who see it regularly, but the government can and will steamroller over any opposition because the number of homes (and people/tourists) that will be affected are negligible on a national scale.
It's pretty obvious that they are going to put turbines everywhere they can get away with. It is clear on the SNH map that the North of Arran is a NSA but the south isn't, and lo and behold, there are plans for offshore wind at the south of Arran.
Even if Machrihanish WAS a National Scenic Area, I believe that the project would still go ahead. Why? The facts are that the SNP have shown no interest in preserving the environment on principle. If you want to know what is going to happen here, look at the Beauly Denny example where a power company was allowed to put a new power line THROUGH A NATIONAL PARK with almost zero consultation or serious investigation of alternatives. The M74 extension also went ahead despite the government's own £1 million study strongly suggesting that the project would not achieve its stated aims.
Going by the metric provided by S6MMF, it looks as if the community in South Kintyre could be in line for £453,600 per year? It sounds like a lot but really it's a drop in the ocean for a community. It is better than nothing though. The pragmatist in me says put all the energy from the campaign into securing those funds and maximising potential local employment. The romantic in me says tell them to "get tae".
Sad times.
!
maybe I should just uplift and leave....don't think so, but what I'll say is I live and spend like a local, and that goes along with many sub contractors who work here too.....living in local hotel accomodation (not national chains hotels), using the local leisure facilities (council run)....shopping in tescos 
