Battery hub plan on Perthshire battlefield sparks conflict

Get the latest Daily Record breaking news on WhatsApp

Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info

Join us on WhatsApp

Perthshire residents are up in arms over plans to build an intrusive electrical plant on the site of the 1644 Battle of Tippermuir.

An application was lodged in May to build and operate a 50 megawatt battery storage system for renewables on the battlefield west of Perth.

The proposed scheme sited near Tibbermore village comprises between 20 and 30 battery units, switchrooms and substation as well as ancillary equipment enclosed by fencing and two large water tanks for fire safety.

Residents, concerned about the impact it will have on the landscape and surrounding area, have described it as “the industrialisation of Tibbermore”.

And heritage body Perth and Kinross Heritage Trust (PKHT) conclude the “inappropriate development” will have an “irreversible negative impact” on the battlefield site, considered to have regional, and potentially, national significance.

Greater Manchester-based YLEM (BESS) North Ltd, who submitted a pre-application in December 2023, insist the benefits of vital infrastructure are balanced with the need to protect the environment and conserve heritage.

The site lies within the boundary of Historic Environment Scotland’s Inventory of Historic Battlefields.

It is thought that 300 Covenanters killed in the battle are buried in Tibbermore churchyard, but no mass grave has ever been found.

Methven and District Community Council, which established a sub group in October to “prevent the industrialisation of Tibbermore” representing the group and Tibbermore residents, said they “remain totally opposed to the imposition of Battery Energy Storage System (BESS)”.

Chairman Ken Simpson added: “As well as being historically significant, this is open, flat, countryside; this development would be a blot on the rural landscape and better situated on a brownfield site.”

The Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA), consulted over flood risk, have submitted a holding objection to the proposal pending further information.

The September 1644 Battle of Tippermuir - also known as the Battle of Tibbermore, or St Johnstone – was the first fought by James Graham, 1st Marquis of Montrose, for King Charles I in Scotland during the Wars of the Three Kingdoms.

Montrose’s forces routed a Covenanter dominated Scottish government army under John Wemyss, Lord Elcho, which suffered heavy losses.

Consultants SLR have stated that any unknown [heritage] assets within the site may be susceptible to direct impact as a result of groundbreaking works, but unlikely to be of the highest cultural significance under Historic Environment Policy for Scotland (2019), adding that they do not think this would preclude development at the site.

But a Perth and Kinross Heritage Trust officer in a letter to PKC planners insisted: “...I...maintain my position that this is still an inappropriate development in a potential key area of the battlefield.

“As [previously] outlined...the battlefield itself is not well understood, and therefore with this uncertainty and due to the nature of the development I am standing by my original conclusion that this has an irreversible negative impact, at the least on a regional basis if not national, given the battlefield’s significance and inventory status.”

A YLEM Energy spokesperson said: “We acknowledge the concerns raised by both statutory consultees and the local community and are keen to address them.

“Our primary focus is to mitigate any potential impacts of the proposed development on the area and ensure the benefits of this vital infrastructure are balanced with the need to protect the environment and conserve local heritage.

“Our goal is to ensure that this project does not cause any negative impact on the local environment or community.

“We are determined to work collaboratively with all stakeholders to ensure the project proceeds responsibly and in line with local and regulatory requirements.”

A PKC spokesperson said: “Within the consultation period we received 20 individual valid objections, including an objection from Methven and District Community Council, and a petition with a number of signatories.

“A number of other objections were received after the consultation period (deadline July 5).”

Story SavedYou can find this story in  My Bookmarks.Or by navigating to the user icon in the top right.