Shetland windfarm - Viking Energy

[Skunnered]

I'd much rather have a nuclear power station than this wind farm!

If you would care to send your address to EDF/Centrica, I'm sure they would be delighted to build a nuke in your back garden, just behind the potting shed!

[jaydee67]

We need to do something, but what to do? I've long been an advocate of a small scale combined approach at the community level, combining wind, solar and tidal with additional energy from heat pumps. It won't make Shetland any money but it will reduce our individual load on the available resources. Naive maybe, but I believe we need to take personal responsibility for our own energy demands.

 

Here, here!

[swc123]

Did anyone attend the public meeting tonight? If so how did you find it? I was not there and was just wondering if it is worth attending later ones if I have already made my views known to both the Energy Consents Unit and my local councillors.

[jaydee67]

I was there. So was my husband, my son and a visiting friend who worked here as an archeology student at the Scatness dig and wanted to come back and see the Shetland she remembered. She spoke up to say she thought windfarms should be local to need and didn't want her energy in England supplied by the desecration of Shetland.

 

After several requests and nearly 2 hours of folk putting forward their opinions for and against (no debate or Q and A) Hazel allowed a show of hands to record the feeling in the room. Several people had left by this point.

 

Results:

For the proposed windfarm: 18

Against: 58

Undecided: 5

 

There were 2 lasses with mikes circulating around the room for folk to speak into, with the proceedings being recorded through them and by a minute taker.

 

I went because, although I had signed the petition and made a written protest to the Energy Consents Unit, I felt that I needed to show that I would make further effort to make my opinion known rather than sitting home talking about it.

 

Please go - even if it's just to speak and be counted. We were told no analysis of numbers for/ against would be made as any part of the write up of the consultation, thinking about it I would like to know why not?

[Muppet]

That's quite a clear indication of the feelings of those who attended. I wonder if the Councillors for the area will now represent their constituents wishes?

 

It'll be interesting to see how the other meetings go. I would expect Aith to be fairly similar to Brae, but which way will Dunrossness and Lerwick go?

 

And will anybody take any notice anyhow?

[Muppet]

We were told no analysis of numbers for/ against would be made as any part of the write up of the consultation, thinking about it I would like to know why not?

 

I just noticed that part of your post. That's a tad nonsensical is it not? It's basically saying 'we'll have public consultation, but we'll not take any note of the outcome'

[OriginalUsername]

^ I think that just taking "blind votes" isn't the best method - despite Sustainable Shetland's pushing for this.

 

Listening to the reasoning behind the votes and recording those reasons makes a lot more sense because, let's face it, a lot of people have an opinion on the project but are misinformed about various facts regarding it.

 

If someone said "I'm against this because it will only export power to south with nothing for Shetland" or someone else said "I'm for this because it will only be in the Kames and nobody likes the Kames" - then the council will know that the reasoning behind these opinions is not entirely reliable. In my opinion, a show of hands means that "unreliable" opinion is recorded.

 

There is an argument that every opinion counts regardless of what it is based on, but I guess I figure that if these two hypothetical people found out that what they thought was true is in fact, untrue, they might change their minds. So we might as well try to find out why it is that people are deciding this or that about the project. This also gives the council an idea of what information is not getting through to the public and what is.

 

That's why I'm quite happy with the council opting for a more detailed analysis of public opinion than a show of hands. This way they can actually analyse the arguments behind the opinions.

[sjeunson]

Listening to the reasoning behind the votes and recording those reasons makes a lot more sense because, let's face it, a lot of people have an opinion on the project but are misinformed about various facts regarding it.

 

That's why I'm quite happy with the council opting for a more detailed analysis of public opinion than a show of hands. This way they can actually analyse the arguments behind the opinions.

 

Fully agree with these points. Some people (or lots) when given all the facts still choose to believe rubbish sometimes.

[ArabiaTerra]

And so we return to the original argument. Nuclear/Coal/Diesel/Gas are viewed as too 'dirty' or unsafe so green solutions are needed but no-one can agree what green solution to use and spend their time slagging each other off while the natural resources are expended.

Err, not quite. Everyone knows what the best solution is. It's just we've got this noisy bunch of nimby's who seem to have no idea why this windfarm is even necessary and are determined to stop it at any cost.

We need to do something, but what to do? I've long been an advocate of a small scale combined approach at the community level, combining wind, solar and tidal with additional energy from heat pumps. It won't make Shetland any money but it will reduce our individual load on the available resources.

As I pointed out in the answer to Njugle's post earlier. Going the small scale, community route is about the most expensive and inefficient way to do it. As you say, it won't make Shetland any money, but it will use up the oil money quite efficiently (that's assuming it's even possible).

Naive maybe, but I believe we need to take personal responsibility for our own energy demands.

Really? Wow, all of your energy demands? That's a lot of energy, the airline flights, the holidays, the car and the petrol it burns, all the food miles and goods miles and all the energy that's used building everything you own. A big windfarm, exporting power might just about do that. Community based schemes? Never in a million years.

I was there. So was my husband, my son and a visiting friend who worked here as an archeology student at the Scatness dig and wanted to come back and see the Shetland she remembered. She spoke up to say she thought windfarms should be local to need and didn't want her energy in England supplied by the desecration of Shetland.

The desecration of Shetland.

 

What a load of bollox. Do you think you could come up with some slightly more inappropriate words to describe it? Armageddon maybe? Holocaust?

 

How much do you know about climate change, Jaydee? That's where the apocalyptic vocabulary is appropriate. The Earth has a serious problem. It's caused by us and it will only get worse until we stop doing the stuff that's causing it. That means no more fossil fuels. That means replacing our generating infrastructure. This is going to cause major disruption and changes to the environment everywhere, including here.

 

Get used to it. (Or get off the grid!)

[unlinkedstudent]

AT, if I'm a noisy nimby then I'm proud to be one. However, to me, it is not a case of "Not In My Back Yard" but more a case of "My Back Yard Isn't Appropriate".

 

I'm wondering if Boots sell herbal tranquilisers because I personally find the way you tend to "have a dig" at peeps who disagree with you quite insulting and patronising.

 

For the record, I telephoned Viking Energy Project Officer yesterday and had a very civilised chat, without having to resort to name-calling which you seem particularly fond of.

 

He didn't answer all of my questions (namely what they will do with the peat). He did, however, state that as far as he was aware, all the lease agreements with the land owners were already in place but that the majority of the land required was owned by Shetland. He did state that Shetland would get the power first (I was quite taken aback by this). However, I have always had concerns over the fact that councillors are appointed to the Charitable Trust and what was to stop an ex-councillor becoming a major shareholder in Viking Energy. Theoretically, he replied, nothing. Now whilst the share division of Viking Energy is currently 50/50 (Scottish energy company/SCT), there is nothing to stop that to change in the future and he agreed.

 

Further, I asked him whether he thought any compulsory purchases would go ahead regarding houses within the EU guidelines on close proximity. He said it was not EU but some Scottish Act (he did quote it but I can't remember it) and that they were acting within the guidelines. However, he stated that an energy company did not have the right for compulsory purchase.

 

I also asked him about the fact that Shetland Council policy documents make reference to not siting wind turbines near main roads due to the reflection of the sun on the blades thus causing traffic accidents. He stated that they would have to go through the Planning application and that the software was very advanced and technical for this sort of thing but if need be, if it did not meet the Planning Department's guidelines then certain turbines would have to go/be re-sited. (Ha, that's the lot of them then I reckon).

 

I was polite, he was informative but I did point out I was still totally against the windfarm as it was far too large, etc. He did not, incidentally, say what would happen regarding the de-commissioning. Other points we touched on were the amount of publicity, how the energy company had originally wanted to go it alone (apparently the SIC said no to this). With regard to the meetings, he said that it was not going to be a show of hands and that the rumour about that was being put about by the anti-project brigade.

 

No name calling, no putting each other down but a perfectly reasonable, adult discussion.

 

Still against the windfarm but hey AT; whilst you have apologised to me in the past - tone it down a bit mate and just try and respect other people's view points - you might actually enjoy it!

[paulb]

at

these folks are pro wind/green power be nicer they may not want the full viking but they are supporters. why would a combined alternative supply not earn money we would still have to pay for power so they should earn money but on a smaller scale.

[paulb]

He didn't answer all of my questions (namely what they will do with the peat).

 

make it into furl pellets and either burn it or sell/give it to us poor folks who only have open fires to keep warm. its deemed renewable so its good

[Malachy]

Er, peat is not considered a renewable energy source. No more so than coal. Burning it would be the worst thing they could do.

[Caeser]

Has there ever been any thought given to what we (the collective Shetland community) are going to do if the wind farm does not go ahead?

 

Currently we are having to spend our capital to cover our ongoing costs. Revenue seems to have been forgotten about. For example, we are now paying our well off folk £300 to heat their houses from who knows where.

 

I was wondering what everyone on here thinks will happen.

 

I for example do not want the windfarm, because it will be the biggest eyesore in history, but do not see any other alternative but to have it, to generate the bawbees to pay for our out of control lavish lifestyle.

 

The aith folk for example are completely against it, but would they be happy to close the leisure centre, or the Walls care home when all our funds have been urinated along the chamber wall.

 

My solution is the reduce SIC spending first to whatever revenue can support, and keep the investment money in the bank.

[khitajrah]

The aith folk for example are completely against it

 

Um... I'm in Aith and I support the windfarm. ~ducks and runs~