The proposed 400-kilovolt (kV) power line project connecting Kintore in Aberdeenshire to Tealing in Angus has encountered a significant delay, with Scottish Government officials requesting further comprehensive details from Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks (SSEN) Transmission regarding its environmental and agricultural ramifications.
The decision has been lauded as “positive and important” by NFU Scotland (NFUS), an organisation representing the interests of Scottish farming. The 66-mile (106 km) overhead line modernisation initiative, led by SSEN Transmission, is part of a broader infrastructure upgrade deemed essential by the company to achieve Scotland’s net-zero emissions targets by 2045.
However, various opposition groups, including NFUS and Deeside Against Pylons, contend that the “super pylons” scheme poses a considerable threat to modern farming practices and Scottish food production, particularly impacting the vital seed potato sector.
Scotland holds an international reputation for its high-health seed potatoes, accounting for 75% of the area grown in Britain, with the sector contributing an estimated £507 million to the economy and supporting 2,880 full-time jobs.
Concerns centre on potential biosecurity risks during construction, specifically the spread of Potato Cyst Nematode and other soil-borne diseases. Approximately 37 miles of the proposed route traverses prime agricultural land.
The objection lodged by Angus Council triggered a public inquiry, which is scheduled to commence next month. A separate application for a large substation at Tealing has also been subjected to government review. Opponents of the scheme welcomed the Scottish Government’s intervention, suggesting that SSEN has “effectively been sent back to do the detailed homework it ought to have done in the first place.”
Rhianna Montgomery, NFUS rural business policy manager, stated: “This is a positive and important development for our members and for the farming businesses directly affected by the proposed Kintore to Tealing overhead line project. Farmers and landowners have repeatedly highlighted the real and often underestimated impact this development could have on day-to-day agricultural operations, including access, machinery movements, drainage, land management and the long-term productivity of farmland.”
Following a review of submissions from surveyors, land managers, rural property consultants, and a coalition of protest groups, government reporters mandated that SSEN provide substantial additional information concerning the project’s agricultural and safety implications.
Ian Thornton-Kemsley, a consultant with Galbraith, a prominent rural property consultancy, who represents landowners along the route, highlighted previous warnings:
“We have pointed out to SSEN our concerns regarding biosecurity for the seed potato industry and issues regarding the clearance heights being insufficient for modern machinery during consultations. This was ignored in the proposals put forward by SSEN in their application to the Scottish Government for consent for the line. To protect our clients’ interests we have had to draw these failings to the attention of the reporters.”
Mr Thornton-Kemsley further elaborated:
In Case You Missed it:
“This is an important moment in this public inquiry process. It confirms the application, as presented, did not provide an adequate basis for proper scrutiny of agricultural operations, farm safety, land use or human health impacts as required in such applications.”
“We have said consistently that a line which cannot safely co-exist with normal farming operations is not a lawful or acceptable design. If key matters such as pylon heights, clearances, land sterilisation and operational safety have not been properly assessed, then the development being considered is not just incomplete, but dangerous.”
SSEN is now required to:
- Assess every single span of the line and identify clearance heights individually and cumulatively.
- Carry out a detailed risk assessment for agricultural workers.
- Consider the real-world use of modern farm machinery, including rain guns and spraying systems.
- Fully assess agricultural land use impacts, including loss of prime land, land sterilisation, and changes to farming practice.
- Identify consequential socio-economic effects.
- Assess any residual significant effects on human health, including electrocution risk.
