Jump to content

Shetland windfarm - Viking Energy


trout
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

Since you are well off topic I would suggest ad nauseum

 

That comment reflects the way you were brought up.

 

Oh, don't forget the others too, no singling folk out now.

 

Regarding the planning, if permission cannot be granted or can, within a preordained time scale, the developer can appeal directly to the GOV or SGOV. What would happen then is the planning committee would have to hear the application and give the points for or against. This is to help the appeal process.

It will cost quite a tidy sum, of which, the S.I.C. will have to pay if it is the same as here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^^^^

Sp – you haven’t got a clue what you are on about.

The windfarm planning application is with the Energy Consents Unit who will pass on a recommendation to the Scottish Energy Minister. Following the recommendation of the ECU, the minister can either: accept the application; reject the application or (most likely) order a Local Public Inquiry. The SIC has no role other than advisory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now den, you may be wrong with your statement there, well you are.

 

My statement is correct and true, but may not fit the specific topic, but I would think that S.I.C. would not only be involved as an advisor, but there will be other requirements with this project to do with planning.

Alas though I am your target for ridicule amongst these other game of similar nature (earlier posts).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Turbines are a 'public menace' and wind is the 'least efficient' renewable power, National Trust says

 

here here

 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2100259/Wind-turbines-public-menace-wind-efficient-renewable-power-National-Trust-says.html

 

Oh, National Trust, well know for their 'expertise' in this matter?

And their findings being quoted in a foreign 'publication' not fit for toilet paper.

Their so called jounalist appears to have done little accurate research - need a headline - few quotes - job done. Total London Newspaper rubbish. These guys are worse than bankers they all deserve to be locked up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Para... turbines are a public menace, or will be if built nationally in the numbers expected over the next 10 years.

 

Here's another article from another daily in the "'Total London Newspaper rubbish' Group" about the tactics of the wind industry http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/windpower/9076458/Wind-industrys-extensive-lobbying-to-preserve-subsidies-and-defeat-local-resistance-to-turbines.html

 

This about sums it up for me...

 

"Very high subsidy levels have resulted in an overheated market and a rush of development that is inappropriate and environmentally damaging, as well as being extremely expensive for the consumer."

 

If the columnists of the Daily Mail are worse than bankers then those in the wind industry behind these lobbyists must be at least their equals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This could be the same newspaper (Sunday version) that commissioned a survey and did not publish it. In all fairness, it should have done.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2011/dec/14/british-public-support-renewable-energy

 

Though for some reason the YouGov link is damaged. Just a note, YouGov was run by a now elected Conservative. Nadhim Zahawi still claims an interest in YouGov, but seems to be busy elsewhere. Though he does hold a Directorship in Great Windmill St in London, on a lighter note. He is also linked with the missing £30 million raised for Kurds.

 

With the MPs who wrote to the PM regarding their opposition to wind power, it would be interesting who sponsors who, like The Marginal Magic Club to name one. Nadhim Zahawi has sponsored at least one Conservative MP who signed the letter and has signed the letter himself.

 

There are many links with all of this...so, where could we really turn for the right advice?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are many links with all of this...so, where could we really turn for the right advice?

 

I guess it all depends what you are asking. If you are asking, do you think increased use of wind power is or is not a realistic way of combating climate change?, you might say yes, but that doesn't mean that you would support any and every windfarm proposal.

 

In 2007, 70%-80% of the local people attending the 5 or so VE public meetings were opposed to the proposal. Most of these people were local, not a random national sample or vocal, media-driven opposition, and they were asked to respond to a very specific question. This statistic was never published as far as I know. The right advise about VE is that there is a majority opposition amongst the section of the informed public whose opinion really matters.

 

If developers/supporters don't like the truth, they ignore it then, it seems, go to incredible lengths to get the answer they want... at considerable expense (examples in the aforementioned links).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^^ Ched, why don't you tell us about the results of the Shetland Times polls, which were properly weighted random samples, instead of the self selected biased polls at the public meetings? There is no majority against the windfarm, there never has been and if you and PJ continue to insist there is, you're* lying.

 

And as for Donald Trump, the guy is a climate change denier who doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. I spotted at least three lies in that statement right off and I suspect I would find more if I could be bothered to look.

 

On the subject of subsidies, please google fossil fuel subsidies. The only reason windfarms need subsidies to make them economical is because of the massive subsidies fossil fuels already receive.

 

* bolded for the grammar Nazis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

those are smal domestic turbines. lots of them were not built to cope with very strong winds maily cheap ones. the ones that viking will build will be designed to cope with our wind speeds. its ike saying all houses are unsafe because a garden shed blew down in glasgow.

 

sorry but I would not trust viking to make a sand castle never mind the involment of councillors who are all in it to fill there own back accounts

[sarcasm]Yeah, just look at how often they've had to rebuild the Burradale turbines!!11![/sarcasm]

 

This about sums it up for me...

 

"Very high subsidy levels have resulted in an overheated market and a rush of development that is inappropriate and environmentally damaging, as well as being extremely expensive for the consumer."

If the columnists of the Daily Mail are worse than bankers then those in the wind industry behind these lobbyists must be at least their equals.

[more sarcasm]Yeah and the oil, gas and coal industries never employ lobbyists to promote their interests.[/sarcasm]

 

And then you post a quote from the Renewable Energy Foundation (REF), a think tank opposed to onshore wind farms, who are, by definition, a lobby group.

 

Irony much?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • admin changed the title to Shetland windfarm - Viking Energy

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...