Would you support VE if.....

[Bubble Bear]

Hahaha Usual suspects having nothing constructive to say! Has 'Bug' moved in with you pair (Ghostrider/unlinkedstudent)?!?!

 

I am more interested in your educated views, not the usual tosh!

[bug]

Hahaha Usual suspects having nothing constructive to say! Has 'Bug' moved in with you pair (Ghostrider/unlinkedstudent)?!?!

 

I am more interested in your educated views, not the usual tosh!

 

(pat on the head)... Well done Bubble Bear... (pat on the head) good boy (pat on the head)..now roll over.... goood boy (pat on the belly).. now play dead..... (pat on the head)... Well done Bubble Bear... (pat on the head) good boy (pat on the head)..now roll over.... goood boy (pat on the belly).. now play dead

 

It does take a while ... but even dunderheads eventually get it.

[Bubble Bear]

[hairyian]

... It has already been put to us "join in or we will go on without you"! That is the really question at hand!! ...

 

You never played poker?

 

A game for 'losers' ?

Also a pointless inuendo.

You are just hopeing, clutching at straws, that non-investment by SCT will scupper the project.

 

Unless 'something changes', VE will go ahead.

The only competent discussion is whether community funds should be invested in the project or not.

SCT do not have to invest further. In fact they could sell their shares now and take the profit as it stands. Then that will be an end of the matter as far as community involvement goes. Also, any future profits will largely depart these Islands for the benefit of others.

 

Of course there is no guarantee of a profit. Does SCT only invest in guranteed profit schemes ?

[Bubble Bear]

... It has already been put to us "join in or we will go on without you"! That is the really question at hand!! ...

 

You never played poker?

 

A game for 'losers' ?

Also a pointless inuendo.

You are just hopeing, clutching at straws, that non-investment by SCT will scupper the project.

 

Unless 'something changes', VE will go ahead.

The only competent discussion is whether community funds should be invested in the project or not.

SCT do not have to invest further. In fact they could sell their shares now and take the profit as it stands. Then that will be an end of the matter as far as community involvement goes. Also, any future profits will largely depart these Islands for the benefit of others.

 

Of course there is no guarantee of a profit. Does SCT only invest in guranteed profit schemes ?

 

Thank You!! Might point exactly!!

[Ghostrider]

Unless 'something changes', VE will go ahead.

The only competent discussion is whether community funds should be invested in the project or not.

 

Not arguing either of those.

 

SCT do not have to invest further. In fact they could sell their shares now and take the profit as it stands. Then that will be an end of the matter as far as community involvement goes. Also, any future profits will largely depart these Islands for the benefit of others.

 

They could also form the opinion that regardless whether they believe the projected profitability figures, or consider selling out is the more profitable financially, that the material and human costs of the project proceeding far outweigh the projected financial returns, and quosh the project completely as "not being in the best interest of Shetland and Shetlanders", putting an end to everything, full stop.

 

Money, is not the be all and end all of everything.

[Ghostrider]

Does anybody else remember seeing diggers recently at AHS?!?! Don't think I've seen Bob the Builder around that area in recent years!!

 

http://www.shetlink.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=122262

 

So, despite being wrong when it was posted on this site at the time it occured, that "contractors were on site", nobody pointed out the error, and the false information was allowed to stand. Is that what you're saying?

 

Yes, projects can be cancelled and so on, but wouldn't Shetland like a voice in such decisions, which they won't get unless we finicial invest in the project! It has already been put to us "join in or we will go on without you"! That is the really question at hand!!

 

The only way they can "go on without you" is if the SCT have already signed over rights and/or control they had no business to relinquish, certainly not at this stage, and questionably ever. If they have been as foolish as sign over so much so soon, it is time folk started investigating the legal view of such behaviour, and the appropriateness of taking legal action against the trustees for misconduct and/or maladministration.

[Bubble Bear]

Money, is not the be all and end all of everything.

 

Yes it is when you are looking to make a viable profit!!! DOH!! Nobody is doing this for goody bags! If they could get away with building a nuclear reactor for a profit am sure they would do that too!!

[Bubble Bear]

That link provide by Ghostrider just proves my point about lack of construsction in regards to AHS.....who cares about road works in regards to this post?!?!

 

In the second part of your post, you are merely talking nonsense.....which takes me back to your link.....where again you are argueing a point to which you are not educated on.

 

Assumptions are made when no actual evidence is there! You, Ghostrider, have based everything on assumptions! I have given my opinions based on FACTS given by a variety of sources! You need to get your FACTS straight!

 

Good Night ladies!!

[unlinkedstudent]

"Money is not the be all and end all"

 

Well, BB, it would appear that to you it is! So, if a viable profit meant that there wasn't a blade of grass left in Shetland, you'd be up for it then, would you? If by allowing VE to go ahead, it means other smaller windfarms come here and people lose their homes, tourists no longer want to come and Shetland loses out on tourist pounds, that's okay then is it? Where is the 'profit' in that?

 

The larger overall picture ... Shetland covered as an industrial windfarm as much as possible for the good of Scotland?

 

Governments change, policies change. Take away those in charge in the Scottish Parliament and what happens?

 

What happens if they start doing geological surveys and find it isn't feasible/too expensive? Is that okay?

 

As for the SCT investing their funds, they previously didn't put all their eggs in one basket and spread their investments, usually in funds as low/medium risk - VE isn't.

 

VE to get paid because the National Grid can't cope with existing wind turbines (at present) when the VE turbines aren't turning? That okay, is it?

 

Blimey, for some peep who think the VE debate is boring, you doing a good job of debating here! Why not hop over to the other thread?

[unlinkedstudent]

Assumptions are made when no actual evidence is there!

 

Sounds remarkably like VE to me. The interconnector isn't there. The market to buy the electricity isn't there - they are projecting a future market.

[Ghostrider]

That link provide by Ghostrider just proves my point about lack of construsction in regards to AHS.....who cares about road works in regards to this post?!?!

 

In the second part of your post, you are merely talking nonsense.....which takes me back to your link.....where again you are argueing a point to which you are not educated on.

 

Assumptions are made when no actual evidence is there! You, Ghostrider, have based everything on assumptions! I have given my opinions based on FACTS given by a variety of sources! You need to get your FACTS straight!

 

 

The link is to a page which contains a post stating "contractors were on site", that was the point in dispute, end of. What road works have to do with anything. You tell me.

 

Its no assumption that the SCT/Burradale own 50% of the proposed VE project, god knows we've heard it often enough. As an equal shareholder with their partner, their partner cannot force them in to doing anything they do not wish to do with the project, unless they have already signed away their rights to a blocking vote. If they have signed those away already, it is grounds to consider misconduct/maladministration on the part of the SCT, as it is no longer the 50/50 partnership we are so often told it is.

 

We've also heard often enough that the project must exceed a certain minimum size or it cannot justify the interconnector cable investment. The only way the whole VE project can go ahead against the wishes of the SCT/Burradale shareholders in VE but with the present financial involvement of the SCT/Burradale shareholders, and the interconnector investment be justifiable, is if the SCT/Burradale shareholders in VE have already signed committing themselves to the total spend for the entire VE project. This, according to the facts we have been spoon fed, is highly unlikely though. The three hastily arranged farcical and aborted SCT meetings during April would very unlikely have been necessary if it were. However, if it were the case that they have, again misconduct/maladministration becomes a consideration. Exploring probable sources of finance and including an allowance in future budget plans is fair enough for a project at the stage of VE, signing a cheque for the whole amount and leaving it lying to be picked up as and when certainly isn't.

[Ghostrider]

Money, is not the be all and end all of everything.

 

Yes it is when you are looking to make a viable profit!!! DOH!! Nobody is doing this for goody bags! If they could get away with building a nuclear reactor for a profit am sure they would do that too!!

 

Well, if you see the world as having "a price on everything, and everything has a price", thats fine, and your perogative. Not everybody sees through those same specs though.

[humptygrumpty]

Maybe , just maybe if the people of shetland were going to benefit from cheaper electricity as a result then a smaller scale windfarm would have been more acceptable.

 

But having in the past been assured that when oil came to the isles that we would have the cheapest fuel in europe because of it , and of course that never happened and we ended up with the most expensive fuel , maybe people are a bit more sceptical about this , and the probability that not only having this rammed down our throats , we will all have far higher electric bills as a result.

 

What I would really like to know is this , Say you have a house / built a house thats going to be close to one of these windmills , and you have no control over where they are being sited , what happens to the value of your , say £200,000 house that maybe now has a value of £150,000 or less , who is going to make up the diffrence in that value that you have lost through no fault of your own , VE ? , Scotttish gov ?

 

I see compensation claims looming..................

[ArabiaTerra]

Maybe , just maybe if the people of shetland were going to benefit from cheaper electricity as a result then a smaller scale windfarm would have been more acceptable.

 

But having in the past been assured that when oil came to the isles that we would have the cheapest fuel in europe because of it , and of course that never happened and we ended up with the most expensive fuel , maybe people are a bit more sceptical about this , and the probability that not only having this rammed down our throats , we will all have far higher electric bills as a result.

 

No we won't. As I have pointed out in the windfarm thread, the subsidy for renewable energy consists of a tiny fraction of your electricity bill. The allegation that this, or any other, windfarm will substantially raise your bill is a lie spread by anti-windfarm campaigners and the fossil fuel lobby.

 

The recent large increases in electricity bills have been entirely due to rises in international gas prices, not the renewables subsidy.

 

And if you're upset about subsidies increasing your bills, then why aren't you complaining about the £3 billion subsidy to the oil industry announced in the last budget? You do realise that a substantial part of the tax you pay on fuel goes straight back to the oil companies in the form of tax relief, don't you?