Shetland windfarm - Viking Energy

[crofter]

You say the windfarm won't help against climate change, yet you offer no evidence to back up this claim

 

Yes I did, last year I pointed out that VE were exaggerating the CO2 "savings" by a factor of two (which they have since admitted, and now only claim half as much) more recently I showed that they are exaggerating the CO2 "saved" by Burradale by claiming it is 6000 tonnes when in reality it is only 4000 tonnes. I have also posted calculations for road construction, concrete, peat disturbance and the copper mined for the interconnector (!) but you continue to blindly swallow the VE line that it will result in reduced CO2 emissions

 

To be honest, I don't really know whether it will result in more or less CO2 emissions. Nobody does. But I am very wary of the financial projections coming from VE because of the way they have spun the CO2 numbers. To my mind, we should only build the windfarm if there is going to be a decent return on the investment of our cash, and there are still a lot of unknown unknowns in the assumptions.

 

 

 

, examine every claim, for or against. Make up your own mind.

 

Agree with you there!

[Malachy]

You're rather stretching the definition of the word 'lie' here AT. All Sustainable Shetland have said, or at least all I've hear them say, is that the Charitable Trust might have to sell their share in the windfarm because of the colossal investment required. And, quite understandably, Bill Manson and co have confirmed that they can't rule that out, for the same reason. So I'm not entirely sure what this lie might be.

The first time I heard this "lie" was months ago, maybe more than a year. Nothing like it had been said by any of those involved in the project, it was simply a claim made by, one of the "sustainable" Shetland representatives in a letter to the Times or Shetland News. They definitely repeated this when I was talking to them at the VE roadshow thingy in Islesburgh. Before this it had never been mentioned by anyone. They just made it up. That pretty well fits my definition of a lie.

 

Well, they made it up in the sense that they looked at the facts and surmised that it was a possibility. Bill Manson has since confirmed that it is, indeed, a possibility. So, not a lie then. Rather, an accusation, now admitted.

[Njugle]

You know, AT, you've turned this into a pseudo-religious issue.

 

You have blind faith in the salvation for one and all from VE, without regard to the details of what they propose, or their holistic integrity.

 

You are dismissing, perhaps even defaming the opposition though they themselves are reasonable intelligent individuals who do have some valid opinions, confirmed by both VE and other relevant organisations.

 

And your counterpoint is a vision of hell, the prophesy that fishing, fish farming and the oil industry are all finished and without selling our souls to VE we are all damned to suffer eternal purgatory of reduced lifestyle and services expense and the 'sinful' torment of not having done everything we could have to done to save humanity.

 

Seems all a bit familiar, no?

 

A little compromise wouldn't go amiss, dare I say it

[engineer21]

Just been re-reading the paper today and kept reading same thing the interconnecter cable will allow shetland to produce other forms of green energy i.e wave, tidal but no one has mentions Nuclear? could a redundant sullom voe site be used for Neuclear power station?? perfect if you ask me not that i want it mind but if the goverment wanted too go that route when SVT is finsihed whenever that may be then with the cable shetland would be a good location - away from main population?

 

Just a scary thought and i havent seen it mentioned!

[sheepshagger]

It's already been mentioned but AT assures us it won't happen, so of course it won't

[ArabiaTerra]

You know, AT, you've turned this into a pseudo-religious issue.

You have blind faith in the salvation for one and all from VE, without regard to the details of what they propose, or their holistic integrity.

Egads! I certainly wasn't trying for that.

You are dismissing, perhaps even defaming the opposition though they themselves are reasonable intelligent individuals who do have some valid opinions, confirmed by both VE and other relevant organisations.

I am dismissing the opposition because I think their arguments are selfish ("the windfarm will spoil my view"), exaggerated ("the windfarm is going to destroy all the peat hill in Shetland", "building the windfarm on peat is equivalent to cutting down the rainforest to grow biofuels") and just plain wrong (the windfarm will make no difference to CO2/global warming).

 

I also have a big problem with the suggestion (made repeatedly on this thread) that the windfarm is some sort of conspiracy to rip off Shetlands oil money to line the pockets big business or a select group of locals (if that's not defamation, then what is?).

And your counterpoint is a vision of hell, the prophesy that fishing, fish farming and the oil industry are all finished and without selling our souls to VE we are all damned to suffer eternal purgatory of reduced lifestyle and services expense and the 'sinful' torment of not having done everything we could have to done to save humanity.

Have you looked into ocean acidification? If not I suggest you do. The implications are truly terrifying, not just for Shetland, but globally. And as for the oil industry, Sullom currently contributes around a million quid per year and falling to the reserve fund/charitable trust. The combination of de-carbonising our economy and the fields running dry mean the oil has 20-40 years left, max (despite what Sheepy says).

 

And as for saving humanity, can we, morally, do anything less than everything possible, we who have benefited so much from the very agent causing the problem?

Seems all a bit familiar, no?

 

A little compromise wouldn't go amiss, dare I say it

Ok, so maybe I do come across a little strong, and I'm sorry if I've caused offence by doing so but the problem is, no compromise is possible. If we don't build a big enough windfarm, the interconnector is uneconomic and without the interconnector, there is no future for anything more than maybe a couple more Burradales (assuming that's even possible with the limited size of the Shetland grid) and a load of personal schemes built by those lucky enough to be able to afford it.

 

Without the interconnector, there will be no tidal, wave or offshore wind, ever.

[ArabiaTerra]

It's already been mentioned but AT assures us it won't happen, so of course it won't

Actually, I suggested it, many moons ago.

 

I also suggested under Ronas Hill would make a great waste depository, stable geological formation and all that... (ducks and runs....)

[Njugle]

but the problem is, no compromise is possible. If we don't build a big enough windfarm, the interconnector is uneconomic and without the interconnector,

 

And that, I feel, is the crucial polarised point that think has been wholly misrepresented. For instance, there are other windfarm plans on the table, whether VE goes ahead or not. The interconnector deployment should be based on, not just VE but, the whole future energy potential of Shetland, which includes windfarms throughout the isles, tidal, wave, excess production from the power station at SVT and even the reduced cost of running the Gremista power station. Compile a complete overview of the other developments that will come, guaranteed, and re-structure VE to suit. You could probably knock off more than a third, perhaps more than half, of the turbines and still have the interconnector fully justified. Compromise. I would suggest anyone writing to the Energy Consents people emphasise this point and not these narrow and polarised accounts of the possibilities. In my humble opinion.

 

 

edit- And before anybody jumps up an down with "Money! Money! What about our money!", Shetland has negotiated ground-breaking and innovative deals to generate community funds in the past, a firm hand on the tiller and a clear and confident vision could easily conceive of a revenue based model for Shetland to adopt this time around too.

 

further edit - Perhaps this rumoured new turbine at SVT* is reason enough for the interconnector, VE or no VE.(*Tom Morton on speakeasy)

[cheryl.hughson]

Do you know what's getting me down about the whole thing? People who dismiss my point of view on the visual impact and nature impact among other things about the windfarm. People who brand me as narrow-minded merely because I have an opposing view to them. That's bullies, and that's all that the windfarm supporters have shown is arrogance lately.

 

Reading a letter of someone praising Craig Birnies blatantly ignorant and spiteful letter recently makes me think these people are made of something nasty.

 

At least have the good sportsmanship to refrain from making this debate personal by not passing derogatory comments at anyone who opposes your views. It makes you look like some sort of Jehovahs Witness who's deperate for people to believe in your God, but in reality those people are desperate for you to get out of their face.

[Infiltrator]

Oil in (and around) Shetland brought long term well paid jobs and therefore gave Shetland Uni graduates a reason to return to the isles. I can't see the wind farm doing this, unless the council continues employing 25% of the working population subsidised by the wind farm. The wind farm won't stop the population decline - may slow it a bit but it will still continue.

 

I've been living away from Shetland for a few years now and when I make the trip back it's very clear that Shetlands attraction and beauty is in it's rugged unspoilt landscapes. Turning it into something that wouldn't look out of place on a Terminator film set will destroy the islands appeal to tourists - plus I couldn't see me moving back, it's not the sort of place I'd like retire to.

[crofter]

and just plain wrong (the windfarm will make no difference to CO2/global warming).

 

 

It won't. Even if the windfarm can save the equivalent of a few transatlantic flights worth of CO2, global warming is already happening - because of the oil and coal which has already been burned. It will continue to happen because even if there is a neutral carbon budget for everybody in shetland, and we can all feel holier than those heathens who still get there electricity from (spit) coal, the FACT is that world population will continue to rise, which will drive CO2 emissions higher and higher regardless of how many windfarms are subsidised by rich western nations.

 

It is you who is wrong.

[Girzie]

Why did someone/anyone (Cheryl Hughson) think Craig Birnie's letter was ignorant and spiteful? He's entitled to his opinion the same as anyone else. Isn't he?

[Fifi]

So try to take a breather and let other people have their opinion without sniping on this forum the whole time.

I can't, not while people like PJ and the rest of the nimby's are spreading their lies and people like you are believing, or at least, not questioning them. I believe passionately in this windfarm. I think it's the one and only chance Shetland will get to replace the oil income and cushion the devastation of the fishing, fish farming and tourism that's likely to result from global warming and ocean acidification.

 

When people stop posting lies, distortion and rumour I will stop exposing them, until then you'll just have to put up with me.

Are you passionate enough about it to put your name to your posts?

[Infiltrator]

^Maybe he's passionate enough to write letters in support of the wind farm?

 

Or is 'Onion St' a red herring? - if you get my drift..

[ArabiaTerra]

It won't. Even if the windfarm can save the equivalent of a few transatlantic flights worth of CO2, global warming is already happening - because of the oil and coal which has already been burned. It will continue to happen because even if there is a neutral carbon budget for everybody in shetland, and we can all feel holier than those heathens who still get there electricity from (spit) coal, the FACT is that world population will continue to rise, which will drive CO2 emissions higher and higher regardless of how many windfarms are subsidised by rich western nations.

 

It is you who is wrong.

And I think you are fundamentally misunderstanding the nature of global warming. It is not an on/off thing. It is a gradual process. Right now, we are pretty much committed to a warming of around 2 degrees by the end of the century. This will be bad, it will mean most of the mountain glaciers will disappear, weather patterns will shift, the Asian monsoons may change or stop. It will lead to the displacement of millions and many deaths because of this. It will also lead to a sea level rise of around a metre and may lead to the melting of the Greenland ice cap and the destabilisation of the western Antarctic ice sheet. These things we are already committed to and will have to learn to cope with.

 

However, if we don't get our emissions under control, if we haven't started making serious reductions in our CO2 output by 2020 then the prognosis gets much worse. If the temperature rise gets much more than 4 degrees by 2100 then all sorts of natural feedback loops start to kick in. Basically, all of the natural CO2 sinks, the rainforests, the peat bogs, the Arctic tundra will start releasing their stores of CO2 and methane and driving a natural runaway greenhouse effect which will be completely outwith our control, impossible to stop. The Earth will be completely and irreversibly changed beyond all recognition, beyond even my worst nightmares.

 

But we can still prevent this, if_we_act_now, not in 10 years time, not even in 5 years time, but now. I would love it if we could wait 5 or 10 years for some miracle new technology, solar panels you can print like wallpaper, invisible windmills, even nuclear fusion, to come along and solve our problems but we_don't_have_time. We have to go with the technology we currently have, and for Shetland, most suitable current technology is wind. The windmills will only be there for 25 years, the effects of climate change will last for centuries.