Shetland windfarm - Viking Energy

[PJ of Hildisvik]

Paulb...as i've said before i do not speak for Sustainable Shetland on here.

 

In AT's Utopian World, the burning of fossil fuels has ended.

This is never gonna happen til the last egg cup full has been sucked out of the ground. When ever that will be.

 

Iam opposed to industrial windfarms on peatland, regardless of there size.

They contribute to Global warming / climate change.

Peat and blanket bog is a natural carbon sink and should be left alone.

 

AT says that the gas turbines at Sullom are old and would need replacing at great expense., how much for a new high polluting power station then?

Using gas is better than the alternative power station, it would be a major start in reducing Shetland's footprint.

Like i said earlier , Humans will keep on using fossil fuels, i don't like it either but there is nothing anybody on Shetland or elsewhere can do about that.

 

I can't make comments on the new gas plant, cos i have not had time to analyse all the details, but any removal of vast amounts of peat is bad, but i doubt i could stop the new gas plant from being built. Sullom Voe has been there for a long time, the VE proposal to industrialise the landscape has not, and this is my main concern.

 

Anyway, why don't the pro windfarm / stop using fossil fuel group oppose Sullom Voe? surely you have to .

[trout]

^^ Besides. Should the SIC be determined to enable Shetland to become a 'centre of excellence' in IT through their venture into connecting to sub-sea cables etc. etc. with Føroya Tele and creating points of presence - they are going to definitely need power redundancy! Lerwick power station by iteself ain't going to cut it! Grid power back up this cable and or from Sullom Voe too is a necessity!

 

Well interested to see the result of this report they've commissioned. Anyone know who's doing it anyroad?

[paulb]

pj i understand what your saying and i have some sympathy for it. however the argument about sullom being old won't wash. the new plant is on separate land.

 

maybe you could ask Mr fox why they are not. by the way who has funded all the adds in the papers. was it funded by members donations or gifts from others. i don't know how much a full page add would cost but a few lines cost us £50.

 

will the waste gas from sullom be exported now instead of being burnt off. how many tons of co2 have the flares produced over the years.

 

yes there is an issue over the pro Eco save the planet folks benefiting from sullom but as I'm pro both i don't mind. I'm looking keenly into a 12-20 kw turbine. with grants and loans they seem to be able to break even within 5 years.

[petrocelli_]

In AT's Utopian World, the burning of fossil fuels has ended.

This is never gonna happen til the last egg cup full has been sucked out of the ground. When ever that will be.

 

You and I, and AT for that matter, know fine well that fossil fuel dependency will exist for a good while to come. What we should be striving for is to ensure dependency lessens sooner rather than later. In turn this will reduce emissions and stabilise energy markets.

 

Iam opposed to industrial windfarms on peatland, regardless of there size.

 

Liar, liar bums on fire PJ! If the hills planned for VE's windfarm where made up of anything but peat you'd still be against it, or would you?

 

They contribute to Global warming / climate change.

 

Do you mean a windfarm built on peat would contribute to "global warming/climate change", or, do you believe that wind turbines on the whole contribute to global warming?

 

Like i said earlier, Humans will keep on using fossil fuels, i don't like it either but there is nothing anybody on Shetland or elsewhere can do about that.

 

In the words of Barack Obama... "Yes we can!" We could have an island group completely fossil fuel free (apart from an oil/gas terminal feeding the world with the stuff:lol:) within the next 15-20 years if, we embrace renewable energy projects such as VE's windfarm.

 

With a sub-sea inter connector we would be able to embrace other renewable technologies. None of this is going to happen if we maintain the status quo. A status quo which you, and others like you, seem happy to accept.

 

I can't make comments on the new gas plant, cos i have not had time to analyse all the details, but any removal of vast amounts of peat is bad, but i doubt i could stop the new gas plant from being built. Sullom Voe has been there for a long time, the VE proposal to industrialise the landscape has not, and this is my main concern.

 

If you refer back to your previous statement:

 

"I am opposed to industrial windfarms on peatland, regardless of there size.

They contribute to Global warming / climate change.

Peat and blanket bog is a natural carbon sink and should be left alone."

 

then, logically, if you replace "industrial windfarms" with "gas plants" then the same would apply. Get objecting, PJ, or are the rules different for gas plants.

 

It is of no surprise that we haven't heard a single peep out of Sustainable Shetland on the Total gas plant as they are fully aware how this untimely situation weakens their whole argument.

 

Anyway, why don't the pro windfarm / stop using fossil fuel group oppose Sullom Voe? surely you have to .

 

If we were making that argument then you'd be right. However, as I've stated already we aren't making that argument. We appreciate that fossil fuels still have a huge part to play but we have to start reversing that trend with schemes such as these.

[Carlos]

Iam opposed to industrial windfarms on peatland, regardless of there size.

They contribute to Global warming / climate change.

Peat and blanket bog is a natural carbon sink and should be left alone.

Can I ask how you view the proposals for 5 turbines on the peaty hills west of Culivoe?

[falkner]

Peat and blanket bog is a natural carbon sink and should be left alone.

 

 

True. In an ideal world. Or in the world before we started burning fossil fuels and spewing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Now we are looking over the precipice of runaway global warming, runaway as in nothing will stop it due to the chemical properties of planet. Peat is a natural carbon sink but rising temps are causing release of carbon and that sensitivity is far greater than previously realised.

"Extrapolated to the total northern peatland area, the results suggest that climate warming of 1 degree Celsius over the next decade might lead to a global increase in respiration of 38-100 million tonnes of carbon per year."

(Nature.com 30.07.09 blog by Q. Shiermeier)

The peat in Shetland is already seriously eroded by centuries of grazing, human activity, including stripping God knows how much to build Sullom Voe, new roads etc and now 350,000 cubic metres for planned gas turbines. Doing nothing will not save the peat. Or the wildlife that lives there. Warmer temperatures and heavy rainfall are turning these carbon sinks into carbon emitters. This is already happening and will continue- no way of stopping it. There is only one thing to do- stop burning fossil fuels asap and try to keep the global temp from rising beyong our control. Right now, right here, that means wind farms.

[petrocelli_]

From the Windfarm Supporters Group:

 

"Two managers who built Europe's largest on-shore windfarm are speaking next week

at a public meeting in Shetland to explain their work.

 

The meeting is organised by the Windfarm Supporters Group and is intended to

help answer questions local people have about environmental, engineering and

other aspects of how large windfarms are built.

 

The Whitelee Windfarm near Glasgow is Europe's largest on-shore development.

It was built for ScottishPower by Morrison Construction and two of its managers

will be speaking at the meeting in the Sound Hall on Tuesday 3rd November,

starting at 7pm.

 

Alan Chesney was the environment manager for the project and Tony Windle was the

project manager.

 

A spokesman for the Windfarm Supporters said they will talk about the problems

they faced and answer questions about how the windfarm was built and the

measures taken to protect wildlife and the environment - such as tackling the

problem of deep peat, building roads, protecting birds, wildlife or water

sources, or other engineering issues.

 

The spokesman said the meeting was open to everyone, whether they supported,

opposed or were undecided about the Viking Energy project.

 

Since the Windfarm Supporters Group started they have been pressing Viking

Energy to improve its public relations and information to the local community.

In particular the group asked Viking Energy to provide professional expert

speakers who could answer islanders' questions - rather than always using

company representatives. The lead environmental consultant for Viking Energy,

Dr Peter Cosgrove, has already held a very productive meeting with group

supporters, but unfortunately it was not possible to organise a public meeting.

 

"We hope next week's meeting will be the first of several public meetings where

people can question independent professional experts about windfarms or the

Viking Energy proposals. We have asked Viking Energy to provide a speaker on

peat and hope Dr Cosgrove will also speak on the environmental and habitat work

he and his colleagues have undertaken in Shetland. The meetings will allow

people to find out the facts from people with direct professional experience."

[petrocelli_]

Total - they ain't bankrupt on paper like the Scottish power company is (who have debts of more than what the company is worth). Granted, I haven't read yet the environmental impact but it is existing technology but I will read it all in detail.?

 

In their last set of reports published on 31 March 2009, SSE have net liabilities of 14.7 billion and total assets of 17.7 million, giving them net assets of 3 billion. Was that your concern unlinked?

[unlinkedstudent]

Total - they ain't bankrupt on paper like the Scottish power company is (who have debts of more than what the company is worth). Granted, I haven't read yet the environmental impact but it is existing technology but I will read it all in detail.?

 

In their last set of reports published on 31 March 2009, SSE have net liabilities of 14.7 billion and total assets of 17.7 million, giving them net assets of 3 billion. Was that your concern unlinked?

 

It was obviously of concern to the Financial Analysts present at their press meeting when the figures were announced who, judging by the manner in which it was reported in the financial press (can't remember if it was the FT or Daily Telegraph) were concerned, especially when taking into account additional losses they expect to incur in the coming financial quarters. Whilst you may be of the opinion that they have net assets of 3 billion, I do believe I read that many of these assets are already "mortgaged up to the hilt" hence bankrupt on paper.

[paulb]

the word bankrupt is misleading. they are investing in lots of new projects this is an asset.

[petrocelli_]

Total - they ain't bankrupt on paper like the Scottish power company is (who have debts of more than what the company is worth). Granted, I haven't read yet the environmental impact but it is existing technology but I will read it all in detail.?

 

In their last set of reports published on 31 March 2009, SSE have net liabilities of 14.7 billion and total assets of 17.7 million, giving them net assets of 3 billion. Was that your concern unlinked?

 

It was obviously of concern to the Financial Analysts present at their press meeting when the figures were announced who, judging by the manner in which it was reported in the financial press (can't remember if it was the FT or Daily Telegraph) were concerned, especially when taking into account additional losses they expect to incur in the coming financial quarters. Whilst you may be of the opinion that they have net assets of 3 billion, I do believe I read that many of these assets are already "mortgaged up to the hilt" hence bankrupt on paper.

 

Sounds different from all the stuff am reading unlinked. Pre-tax profits are forecast to be 600 million up until end of Sept 2009, double for the same period last year.

 

A quick scan of share dealers recommendations has the vast majority of brokers recommending a buy or strong buy.

 

Christ, the amount I've paid the rogues this last year it's hard to believe they canna be makin a profit!!

[unlinkedstudent]

the word bankrupt is misleading. they are investing in lots of new projects this is an asset.

 

Ah but Paulb, you may consider it misleading in commercial terms but if one of us mere mortals owed £30k on credit cards, £10k on a personal loan, £15k for car on HP, a mortgage of £120k (that interest soon mounts up ...) on a house in negative equity now worth around £70k and had an annual income of say £20k and then toddled into the bank to ask for a loan of another £15k the answer would probably be no.

 

Why?

 

Because you would be bankrupt on paper. The electricity company may well be investing in new projects but they are using their existing assets as collateral. As was pointed out at the Ness meeting, the banks may well decide to call in their loans.

 

Hence, I don't believe "bankrupt" is misleading. Look what happened to Woollies and MFI.

[Njugle]

Article in todays Herald stating that cable plans to Shetland and the Western Isles have been shelved by Ofgen in order to focus on mainland infrastructure. Speculated to set back any plans for renewable developments in these areas by 5-10 years.

[paulb]

if it is so then the main shareholders in viking should stop spending money. if this is so this scheme is another bressay bridge. surly they would have some agreement in place that this would be built. oh hang on were talking about sct run by sic councillors.

 

unlink don't those debts become assets in book keeping terms. i seem to remember from a long forgotten course that a credit i.e a loan is positive in the ledger. seems to work well for the banks owe billions and they get lent even more. by the way were are all these dodgy American mortgaged houses i could just do with a holiday in the USA.

[PressedCurdsOfMilk]

Article in todays Herald stating that cable plans to Shetland and the Western Isles have been shelved by Ofgen in order to focus on mainland infrastructure. Speculated to set back any plans for renewable developments in these areas by 5-10 years.

 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/transport-environment/ofgem-to-inject-1bn-into-green-electricity-projects-1.930390