Jump to content

Windmills / SIC Cut Backs


croftygair
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 143
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

they were then they were taken over by the council. the simplest option would be to set up a not for profit company and transfer them to it. they could then make them more cost effective. ie wages and other council conditions. not good news for the staff but 2k a week per person is a joke.

 

why the new blueprint routine again. untill the new anderson is built your cant transfer anymore children into the old one. get the new one built then it may be more sensible.

 

if its true that we only ever got 60 million from the oil industry in payments we were conned.

 

if the windfarm is built and runs as expected then the wind turbines will produce 500 million over the 25 years. more if its expanded. even if its only half of that then its still 4 1/2 times the amout of funding going to the trust. than the oil folks paid us.

 

you can see the future if there is no new income. it may upset a few at the sight of them but be sure when the cuts have taken hold then you will see deaths and a seriously damaged community.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^^^^Death's and a seriously damaged community if windfarm does'nt go ahead....what total crap.

 

then pj i suggest you have a very careful look at the impact of the social care cuts. there will be deaths, that is a fact ask those in the care sector.

 

when all the kids from the outer isles will have to stay in lerwick and the others will be shipped to lerwick on poorer roads with less gritting do you really think that people will want to stay in the outer areas of the country.

 

untill the oil was brought in the population was declining this will start again.

 

pj you live in a reasonably nice house in hillswick with reasonable roads and you use the stuff funded by the charity and rec trusts. your local shop is supported by being rates free. if all of these were to go would you be as happy.

 

if your kids were younger would you have been happy for them to be educated in lerwick in the old school if you answear is no.

 

then please tell us were the money will come from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Within the judicial system, many Guidelines are actually accepted as being 'law' - it would be pointless to have say, for example, guidelines relating to Health & Safety matters or say guidelines pertaining to the schools admission system if they were not enforceable.

 

Cases have been won in the High Court relating to schools admissions policy that have been in breach of such guidelines.

 

So whilst you may be of the opinion that they are not 'law', they are, in fact, referred to when cases go to Court with the Judges usually regarding them as 'law'.

 

This is a new Scottish Law system then ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Within the judicial system, many Guidelines are actually accepted as being 'law' - it would be pointless to have say, for example, guidelines relating to Health & Safety matters or say guidelines pertaining to the schools admission system if they were not enforceable.

 

Cases have been won in the High Court relating to schools admissions policy that have been in breach of such guidelines.

 

So whilst you may be of the opinion that they are not 'law', they are, in fact, referred to when cases go to Court with the Judges usually regarding them as 'law'.

 

This is a new Scottish Law system then ?

 

Oops, I do know English Judges have set precedents where cases have come before them where, for example, the school admissions guidelines were broken and ruled in favour of the Claimant; as for Scottish law, fair point, I have to keep reminding myself that some Scottish and English Acts are different (But not all).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of Sullom Voe I wish people would stop saying that people were against Sullom Voe when it was first spoken about and look how it's turned out. Maybe there were people who did not want oil to come to Shetland, I don't know, I was but a babe in arms but Sullom Voe can't be compared to the VE project. For one thing the vast majority of people living in Shetland have never been to the Sullom Voe terminal and have no idea of the size of it or indeed, what goes on there. It is tucked away nicely and hidden from view so completely that when you pass the end of the road on your way from Toft to Brae you have no idea that it is even there. The only thing in sight is two flare stacks.

 

One of the main things that worries me about the VE project is the visual impact here in Shetland - you can not say that about Sullom Voe no matter what other worries people may have had at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ Don't forget though peeps that the Charitable Trust state they have millions of pounds invested in other companies and funds throughout the world, including BP (Well, that's what Nickerson said to me last night when I questioned why they wanted extra dosh) - so if we don't invest in the windfarm (err what's the interest rate again on the money they are borrowing?) does that mean that the Trust won't get any money from elsewhere within its portfolio?

 

Hey, how about this then? Steady, this is a real NIMBY idea. IF wind power is so profitable, how come the Shetland Charitable Trust doesn't just invest say £20 million in an existing profitable windfarm elsewhere in the world and reap the share dividends from that? Sorry, 140 jobs over five years constructing VE and 34 permanent jobs afterwards is far too much to sacrifice, I forgot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@paulb...there's at least 40 more years income from Sullom Voe, and by then onshore wind will be obsolete...stop panicking old chap.

 

Get yourself up to speed - there is no 'income from Sullom Voe' any more, as the payments ceased when the initial deals were renegotiated in the late 90's. The problem is we have been living off the fat from the investment of those funds and got used to spending far too much of it. The only answer is to wean the population of the level of services we have become used to or - find other sources of additional income to keep us going in the fashion we are accustomed. Time to get your head out of the sand and understand that we are rapidly heading for broke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we're not getting any dosh from Total then?

 

I think negotiations may have taken place already and a deal is in place.

 

You want to base our future on possible deals with Scottish and Southern who at owning 50% of the company are the majority shareholder and the Government?

 

Projected income from Total: £200,000,000/30 years = 6.6 million/year

 

Projected income from VE: £900,000,000/25 years = 36 million/year*

 

Which would you prefer?

 

 

*Of course the income figures from VE are based on an efficiency of 40%, so going by the 50%+ efficiency achieved by Burradale, they could be considerably higher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, that's even more than was reported in the Shetland Times. I thought it was £30 million with £10 million of that for jobs/economy, £20 million to Charitable Trust?

 

Even that would be great but when I have the prospective councillor for the North Ward ( who has an impressive background in investment banking, specialising in Charities) telling me that the VE figures do not add up I have serious concerns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...