Shetland windfarm - Viking Energy

[petrocelli_]

Been trying to catch up quickly with all that's been posted here, you guys have been busy!

 

Arguments for and against the Viking Energy have been continuing along the same lines for several months now, my feelings on a few are listed below:

 

Global Warming caused by carbon emissions

This is such a technical topic that I cannot even begin to research it to the depths that some have (AT and others for starters) but from what I have read or viewed the burning of fossil fuels cannot in any way, shape or form be good for the environment. It cannot be denied that the climate is changing, and it appears to be changing quickly, but this whole debate is highly contentious and I admit freely to not having done the appropriate research to back up my beliefs fully.

 

We could quote figures and estimates till the cows come home but there comes a point when, as an individual, you have to go with what your gut tells you.

 

For me, carbon emissions are having an impact on our environment - even if the issue was just pollution alone - and we need to tackle this the sooner the better.

 

As a community, building the Viking Energy Windfarm would be a worthwhile step in tackling this crisis at the same time generating community funds!

 

Wind as an energy source

Cheryl proudly states that she does every bit she can to help the environment by recycling, etc. She does such practices in the belief that every little helps, very admirable! It strikes me as odd though that she wouldn't want to extend those believes into the generation of power.

 

As an individual that's exactly how I feel about the windfarm, we'll be doing our bit to put things right and the fact that we could be producing 20% of Scotland's domestic needs is something that, if it became a reality, we should be extremely proud of.

 

The UK as a whole will not be "relying on wind" but it will play a big part, possibly as much as 20-30% on a national grid system which will become more and more flexible to accommodate different types of power generation.

 

There are possibly issues to be addressed on the national grid re. intermittent power sources but, IMO, there will come the day (possibly sooner rather than later ) when new storage technologies/grid systems will arrive, making wind an even better option!

 

By building the Viking Energy windfarm we'll be getting involved in a tried and tested technology which can, and does, provide a perfectly good source of energy and in return giving us good value on our investment.

 

Remember, "Burradale is one of the most productive windfarms (if not the most productive) in the world with a recorded capacity factor* of 52%". There is every reason to be confident that the Viking Energy windfarm would perform as good, if not better!

 

* Calculated from the original three turbines over a three year period. (From Burradle website)

 

Interconnector

Quite a lot of opponents to Viking Energy regularly refer to alternative renewable sources but the majority of these are still not totally proven although they will clearly be good sources of energy one day.

 

We need to build something asap to secure such a cable and only then will we be able to open up research projects into other renewables such as wave and tidal. With little or no capacity on our current grid this would mean that it would be highly unlikely that any research ventures would come this far north.

 

Once we have a connection then Shetland, with its high winds, strong tides and large waves:) could be an excellent test bed for such renewables and possibly even see the windfarm replaced by a 500MW tidal farm or wave farm when it comes to the end of its lifespan.

 

Of course no such cable will happen unless we create a demand, that's why I believe the Viking Energy windfarm is the best way forward.

 

Community Funds

We have a substantial infrastructure of services provided by the Charitable Trust from leisure centres, care centres, voluntary bodies, etc. etc.

 

Someone in this forum referred to a comment about care centres on the mainland which were run by local councils being equally as good. I beg to differ! If you compare like with like you'll see that Shetland's provision of care centres is vastly superior to anything you'll find on the mainland.

 

The same applies to leisure centres. At the 2005 Island Games I spoke to several visiting islanders who were green with envy at our facilities. Competitors from much larger island groups could not believe the condition and provision of leisure facilities within our islands. The provision of such centres has seen the Shetland community embrace sport and leisure pursuits at all different levels and from toddlers to senior cititzens.

 

This, however, all comes at a price and at the current rate that price will some day be to costly and cuts will be need to be made. Such cuts will obviously then have a drastic affect on our economy and for me it could be a case of ever decreasing circles.

 

Still with me?

 

Finally, for me building the windfarm could give us a steady return on our investment, and a more stable and ethical investment at that, rather than sitting on the volatile stock markets.

 

Anybody got any other ideas how we could invest our money more wisely?

 

P.S. Anybody seeen those pesky injuns?

[crofter]

Good to see you back...

 

 

Finally, for me building the windfarm could give us a steady return on our investment, and a more stable and ethical investment at that, rather than sitting on the volatile stock markets.

 

Indeed. That is what would swing it, for me.

 

Anybody got any other ideas how we could invest our money more wisely?

 

Spread the risk?

[Guest Anonymous]

Well petroceli , since you are in the know about how eficient the burradale windfarms have been , will you answer the burning question !

How much diesel does the lerwick diesel NOT BURN on a yearly basis since there construction ???????

I have been told it wouldnt add up to even 1 litre , which means that entire project has been about as much use as a fart in a space suit !!

Please enlighten us all .

[Gorgonzola Butt-cheese]

Now then AT , i am glad to see we did find some common ground on this topic regarding re - educating the masses to use less energy.

Although I must disagree with you putting me down in the Nimby camp .

I am all for renewables in Shetland , Scotland and the wider world .

Only I am simply not for reaching that goal in the most wasteful and gargangtuan manner .

This whole V.E. plan is a monstrosity , and you should read Ian Taits article " The (wind) power of money"in the summer issue of the new shetlander.

Back to the Nimby bit , well I live in a part of Shetland quite remote from the proposed site as do you . And it as an eyesore does not even register in my arguments not to site this monstrosity here .

The complete destruction of what is left of Shetlands savings is a big one .

And all the speculation about all the money that wil be made is just that speculation .

The fact that I am convinced every body in the uk could be turned on to greener energy in a less expensive and enviromentally disruptive way is my main reason for objection .

And back to places like the sahara , you have millions of square miles of desert , totelly barren , perhaps a few lizards and scorpions etc , and ideal for the sighting of solar arrays (its already being well thought out), and yes a few bedouin may object but these people have virtually nothing apart from the camels and tents they haul around with them , of course that doesn't make there right to object any less , but very sure they would accept the benefits more readily .

Of course I understand you are deeply convinced and entrenched in your view that this V.E. project is the only way , same as trying to tell a devout christian that there is no GOD , its not going to happen as you could deeply upset them and perhaps tip them over the edge.......

 

And back to that most important of facts , will it reduce co2 emmisions??

Well we must have thousands , perhaps 10's of thousands of windmills worldwide by now and guess what .... We as a planet are still burning over 80 millions of crude oil every day ... China leading the way on renewables , a billion tones of coal yearly , evrybodies desire to have a beefburger .. that's a tremendous power of methane (the worst of the lot i'm told....) and excuse me I just let one go my self ( and I assure you can be glad your not in the room with me right now as the methane andrsulpher content seems quite high , it's a good job I dont smoke!)

So to top it all off

1.) Saving the planet - Not a chance , this form of energy will only supplement our continual thirst for mor energy , of course we may become to rely on such types solely in the future but alas it will be a different world by then and we will all be long dead .

2.) Making Shetland rich - Hugely guessed speculation , I would just as soon get the charitable trust to buy a million lottery tickets every week .

3.) Ruining the landscape - For many people yes

4.) The best way to bring green energy to the masses - NO NO NO !

 

As so as I move to a more rural location , perhaps not in Shetland if this goes ahead , I intend having my own small windmill , oh and I read a very interesting article on how to build a special type of septic tanc from which you can harness the gas and use it for cooking , I fancy building one of those to .

Although my wife is not so keen on eating sausages that have been grilled on turd gas , there is no pleasing some people !

[petrocelli_]

^^^^

The projects which are been looked into in the sahara (as I've said before on here) are quite brilliant but they are not the solution for the UK, are they?

 

How much diesel does the lerwick diesel NOT BURN on a yearly basis since there construction ???????

 

Hands up, Droilker, I have no idea! That said, why would SSE pay Burradale tens of thousands of pounds each year if it didn't pay for them? The only way it would make sense would be if they were burning less fuel, yes/no?

 

If we take these two possible scenarios for energy generation, ask yourselves which world would you rather live in. Admittedly, there would be sacrifices in both but you can give me your own views on that.

 

Scenario 1

These guys has a vision that there going to dig coal, pump oil and gas and then burn the stuff to supply energy to the masses. They develop the relevant techniques to do such work and, hey presto, they meet their target and produce energy.

 

Scenario 2

They have a vision where they harness natural forces such as wind, tide, solar and wave power to supply mass power to the masses.

 

Both worlds achieve their goals but after a period of time not all is well in World 1 as they are starting to run short of resources and there is a suspicion that all this smokey stuff is having an effect on the health of mother earth and also the health of the population.

 

They dig the coal, pump the oil and gas then export it all over the world in large ships which are powered by oil, gas and coal. They have wars which revolve around the very supply of such fuels and also have many incidents where spillages and accidents have grave ecological consequences.

 

Meanwhile, in World 2 they have issues re. intermittency but resolve these with storage etc. and eventually everything is tickety boo as they're happily whirling along within their sustainable world. Power is sourced and fed down the lines of supply to wherever the demand is. No pollution, no oil slicks, no cancerous substances. Admittedly, there might have to be sacrifices made in World 2 but how great would they be in comparison to the sacrifices of World 1?

 

Granted, this is a very simplistic example but I think it sums up where we are today but, I would hope that most would agree that World 2 would be the preferred option.

 

As butt-cheese says we're not going to "save the world" with this windfarm but it'd be one step along a very long path to doing so.

[Pooks]

Have you been watching 'Fringe' by any chance petrocelli_?

 

I can't see the windfarm ever getting the go ahead on the scale that is proposed at the moment. For Shetland, tidal or even offshore windfarms would be a more sensible option to look at. I asked a while back why the council and its cohorts are so far behind the likes of Orkney which is already testing possible uses of tidal/wave energy (I forget which now).

 

I am sure that there are many ins and outs to it all (tidal after all) but surely it is worth looking at rather than making the vast majority of Shetland a construction site for something that has a lifespan of 25 years.

 

Shetland will end up with a nuclear power station within that time anyway. No matter which way you look at it, the council will dither and dather until the economy is so screwed that they need to take whatever option is thrown at them.

[petrocelli_]

Have you been watching 'Fringe' by any chance petrocelli_?

 

I'm a huge fan of "Lost" but would you believe that I haven't watched one single episode of "Fringe" yet! Why, is there something I've touched on in that series? I'd be interested to know if there was.

 

Shetland will end up with a nuclear power station within that time anyway. No matter which way you look at it, the council will dither and dather until the economy is so screwed that they need to take whatever option is thrown at them.

 

As mentioned on here before, Pooks, it would make no sense to build a nuclear power station on Shetland. A windfarm with the potential to achieve world record output levels (50-60% of capacity) would be a different story though!

[Malachy]

why would SSE pay Burradale tens of thousands of pounds each year if it didn't pay for them? The only way it would make sense would be if they were burning less fuel, yes/no?

 

Surely that's to do with SSE's renewable obligations isn't it, rather than the amount of diesel they're saving? They have a legal obligation to support an ever-increasing number of renewable projects. And those projects can be third party if SSE is financially supporting them. I presume that is what the payments are for.

[Pooks]

I'm a huge fan of "Lost" but would you believe that I haven't watched one single episode of "Fringe" yet! Why, is there something I've touched on in that series? I'd be interested to know if there was.

I'll not spoil the fun then.

As mentioned on here before, Pooks, it would make no sense to build a nuclear power station on Shetland. A windfarm with the potential to achieve world record output levels (50-60% of capacity) would be a different story though!

 

Maybe an oversight on my behalf but I have yet to see any figures that take into account the annual results of a windfarm of the scale proposed. 50-60% of capacity sounds great and yes, Shetland does tend to have wind all the time. My worry is that there are many occasions where the wind is too strong to actually use. On these occasions, it is probable that a turbine of the proposed size could also suffer from damage due to the high winds. Catch 22.

[Infiltrator]

Question for the supporters..

 

Much of the recent debate has been around CO2 emissions so...

 

would you still support the development if it was fully funded and operated by one of the energy companies and none of the profit found it's way back to the islands economy?

 

I'm assuming the staunch environmentalists are only concerned about reducing emissions - so who funds and benefits financially isn't a concern to them.

[khitajrah]

^ I fall into that category. You can't eat money, after all.

[Pooks]

http://blog.r4nt.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/pirates_gold_chocolate.jpg

Yum!

[petrocelli_]

Question for the supporters..

 

Much of the recent debate has been around CO2 emissions so...

 

would you still support the development if it was fully funded and operated by one of the energy companies and none of the profit found it's way back to the islands economy?

 

As you may be aware I'm not in the staunch environmentalist camp so the answer would be a NO from me.

 

Why? For me the Shetland community, especially the communities in close proximity to the windfarm need to receive considerable financial benefits for any inconvenience suffered either during erection stage and also during the lifespan of said windfarm.

 

I don't think this would be the case if it were done by an external source alone.

 

I'll not spoil the fun then.

 

Oh heck! Am going to have to watch it now! I did have a quick skite at wikipedia to see if there was anything obvious but none that I could see. Where should I start... at the beginning?

 

why would SSE pay Burradale tens of thousands of pounds each year if it didn't pay for them? The only way it would make sense would be if they were burning less fuel, yes/no?

 

Surely that's to do with SSE's renewable obligations isn't it, rather than the amount of diesel they're saving? They have a legal obligation to support an ever-increasing number of renewable projects. And those projects can be third party if SSE is financially supporting them. I presume that is what the payments are for.

 

That's true, Malachy, but without any insider information I wouldn't have a clue what those figures where. Do you think it actually increases SSE running costs to buy Burradale's renewable power though? Be a bit of a bumper if it was!

[Malachy]

It might well increase their running costs, but on the other hand it is almost certainly cheaper than the fine they'd get if they didn't meet their ROs.

[Njugle]

^I've said it before and I'll say it again, SSE reps made no bones about the fact that VE will increase the cost of electricity in Shetland. I was there and heard it with my own lug-holes. In reality it is probably as much the case that all the SSE windfarms will increase the price of leccy for everybody but, in the public meetings, that was how it was portrayed, locally.

 

Incidentally, there is an interesting side issue here as to how SSE lobbied for the ROC criteria to be amended, successfully, and further "downsized" some of their hydro schemes to fall with ROC amended criteria. Yep, that's right , they opted to produce less green hydro electricity so they qualified for ROC's, despite the historical success and profitability of these schemes.