Shetland windfarm - Viking Energy

[ChristopherWilliamThomson]

The Global Warming Policy Foundation is a fossil fuel funded lobbying group dedicated to the cause of denying Global Warming and protecting the global fossil fuel industry.

 

Every word they produce is dedicated toward that cause. They are not a credible source of information about the science, or the economics.

 

If that's where you're getting your information, then I'm not surprised you're a denier. It's pure propaganda.

 

If you want an honest source of information, try here: http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

 

Work your way through those points and if you still have a problem with the science, get back to me.

 

Actually, that's just the site that came up when I googled looking for the BBC article (which I couldn't find again quickly, given that I was posting from an iPhone) that it reposted. Never been on the site before, and never heard of it either. Now I'm on a PC, here's the BBC link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-12597097

 

...

 

You should perhaps examine your own rhetoric before calling me a 'denier'!

[Ghostrider]

Its only taken....several years, but I've finally found a positive and beneficial aspect to VE's proposal.

 

The brucks of the windmills will maybe among them make a half decent piltock meath of two, and anybody that's still in Shetland in 50 years or so, after all the money has been sunk in them and precious little has come back, will probably be very glad again of a few piltocks for their dinner, as there will little other way of putting food on the table.

[ArabiaTerra]

If that's where you're getting your information, then I'm not surprised you're a denier. It's pure propaganda.

 

If you want an honest source of information, try here: http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

 

 

But is this not just more propaganda from the other end of the spectrum?.

 

The truth is usually somewhere in the middle...

No, Gorgo, that site is based on the science. It's not discussing opinion, or politics, or economics, it's discussing the science, the facts, reality.

 

You should perhaps examine your own rhetoric before calling me a 'denier'!

Work your way through the skeptical science list. If you still have a problem with AGW then tell me about it and I'll try to help.

 

If you don't have a problem, then you're not a denier. If you don't look through the list then you are.

 

The thing about being a denier, is that if you don't accept reality, if you don't believe in the very reason that the windfarm is being proposed, then you are not capable of reaching an informed conclusion about the windfarm.

 

After all, how can you assess the economic case for the windfarm, if you don't believe in climate change and are therefore incapable of honestly assessing the economic cost of climate change?

 

Do you see what I'm getting at?

 

Your first post was questioning the economic logic of this windfarm, and of all windfarms. But the whole point of building windfarms is not economic, it never was. It's about de-carbonising our economy to save the planet. The economics of it are entirely secondary.

[PJ of Hildisvik]

What a load of crap AT.

This windfarm has only ever been about the money, and sod all to do with saving the Planet GET REAL!!!!

[paulb]

wrong thread go to the warming one.

well it would be a bit silly building them if they were not going to earn money.

[Gorgonzola Butt-cheese]

AT

I do admire your total conviction regarding AGW.

And I am with you in your desire to leave the planet in as good health as we found it.

But....

 

It is you that is in denial, I have recently listed various example of massive global fossil fuel extraction projects that will be going on from today to well over 10 years time.

 

Like a religous man being informed that god does not exist , you just ignored those facts and carried on with your fanatical ravings.

Pure denial at its best....

 

Do you really think that global windmill coverage will make oil , gas and coal obselete within this 10 years to save the world scenario you are peddling?.

 

I welcome the transition to a clean energy future, but step number one, of which knowbody talks , is that of simply reducing our present energy consumption rates which could easily be done without any significant reduction of living standards,

much more readily achievable.

 

Green energy needs to be developed in as near harmony to the environment as possible, that means getting the most reasonable amount of energy generation for the least consumption of resources and ecological disturbance.

Viking Energy doe not meet this criteria and will not save the world.

[Ghostrider]

well it would be a bit silly building them if they were not going to earn money.

Then the SIC/SCT best get out PDQ, while they still have our shirts on their backs, their track record stretching right back of handling finance makes depressing reading.

 

How anybody can have trust and faith in the same crew who's trail is littered with such financial gems as the Bressay bridge, David Clark, Judane, SSG etc, and have been at odds more often than not with their auditors throughout their existence, to successfully run almost half a windfarm, to my way of thinking, beggars belief.

[Gorgonzola Butt-cheese]

And it will only make the money if the dodgy subsidy holds up,

 

It might hold up long enough to make the sharks who are directly involved stinking rich but that will be about it.

 

Oh yes and all the contracters involved will make a decent enough pay during the building process.

 

In fact the " jobs for the boys" during that period is the only good thing that I can see in it.

[Ghostrider]

AT

I do admire your total conviction regarding AGW.

And I am with you in your desire to leave the planet in as good health as we found it.

But....

 

It is you that is in denial, I have recently listed various example of massive global fossil fuel extraction projects that will be going on from today to well over 10 years time.

 

Like a religous man being informed that god does not exist , you just ignored those facts and carried on with your fanatical ravings.

Pure denial at its best....

 

Do you really think that global windmill coverage will make oil , gas and coal obselete within this 10 years to save the world scenario you are peddling?.

 

I welcome the transition to a clean energy future, but step number one, of which knowbody talks , is that of simply reducing our present energy consumption rates which could easily be done without any significant reduction of living standards,

much more readily achievable.

 

Green energy needs to be developed in as near harmony to the environment as possible, that means getting the most reasonable amount of energy generation for the least consumption of resources and ecological disturbance.

Viking Energy doe not meet this criteria and will not save the world.

 

Well said. If we only have 10 years to save the earth, we're already doomed, unless Flash Gordon comes along.

 

In a local context, tidal is probably the greenest source we could hope to pursue. Yes, the technology isn't there yet, but I'd rather we wait until it is. If that's too late, well, like I said, its already too late anyway.

 

In fact there is at least one tidal source we could possibly be using right now, the technology for it does exist. Granted it would cause ecological disturbance, but only a small percentage of what VE will, and it would be limited in output and duration, but it at least, being tidal it would be consistent, reliable and predictable. Gremista could know days and weeks beforehand at what time, for how long, and by how much they could power down.

 

No, I'm not going to divulge what it is, for its staring a good percentage of the Shetland population in the face regularly, and pretty much everyone else, who if they've not encountered it at least a few times its times in their life, have at least heard about it. Its time folk started thinking laterally and outside the box.

[mogling]

Interesting article in the Daily Mail today:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1361316/250bn-wind-power-industry-greatest-scam-age.html

 

"Why the £250bn wind power industry could be the greatest scam of our age - and here are the three 'lies' that prove it"

 

 

 

"...the penny is finally dropping for almost everyone — except our politicians — that to rely on windmills to keep our lights on is a colossal and very dangerous act of self-deception."

[Seaflech]

Interesting to see that SSE have abandoned their plans for a windfarm in the sea off Kintyre, stating that the location was " too close to local communities and Campbeltown airport and it would disrupt recreational sailing."

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-12610901

 

Given that similarity to the VE proposal, I'll sit with my breath held waiting for SSE to announce the same for the Shetland project.......

[ArabiaTerra]

Interesting article in the Daily Mail today:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1361316/250bn-wind-power-industry-greatest-scam-age.html

 

"Why the £250bn wind power industry could be the greatest scam of our age - and here are the three 'lies' that prove it"

 

 

 

"...the penny is finally dropping for almost everyone — except our politicians — that to rely on windmills to keep our lights on is a colossal and very dangerous act of self-deception."

That's just the same article which was posted here a couple of days ago by Voice of the Mysterons

 

This is what I said about it then:

Hmmm, another propaganda piece by the anti-windfarm lobby.

 

Just a couple of lies in it this time, the rest of it is just mostly extreme spin.

 

The lies are: "...those gas-fired power stations wastefully running 24 hours a day just to provide back-up for the intermittency of the wind,"

 

Err, wrong. Gas fired power stations will not need to run 24 hrs a day as back-up.

 

and: "In Germany, having built more turbines than any other country in the world, they are now building new coal-fired stations like crazy."

 

No they aren't. When Merkel came to power, She had a manifesto commitment to close down Germany's Nuclear Stations. This meant building Coal stations to replace them. This policy is now under review due to the impact on the climate of new coal stations.

 

I was going to comment further on this article, then I noticed it was written by Torygraph columnist, Christopher Booker. This man has no credibility on this, or any other subject related to the climate change debate. He is a known, repeated and unrepentant liar. Nothing he writes should have any attention paid to it except to point and laugh.

[paulb]

http://www.shetland-news.co.uk/2011/March/news/Putting%20Shetland%20on%20marine%20energy%20map.htm

how is this going to help shetland we will get nothing from them.

[PJ of Hildisvik]

Wave power is a total waste of time.

Tidal turbines fine, but years from large commercial developments due to ALL the public's money going to useless industrial wind factory's needing fossil fuel backup.

[PJ of Hildisvik]

And another thing.. i wonder how much the Shetland public forked this time for Simpson and Black's "jolly" to London??

Just another back handed way to beg the need for the bloody interconnector / windfarm