Shetland windfarm - Viking Energy

[crofter]

From all 4 meetings:

 

Total for: 96/444 =22%

 

Total against: 334/444 = 75%

 

Total undecided: 14/444 = 3%

[peeriebryan]

^ Interesting. When compared to the Shetland Times research....

 

For:

Shetland Times = 31%

Consultation meetings = 22%

 

Against:

Shetland Times = 48%

Consultation meetings = 75%

 

Undecided:

Shetland Times = 21%

Consultation meetings = 3%

 

I consider the Shetland Times findings to be more robust, considering the larger sample and the methodology used. So proportionally, a larger percentage of people who are against Viking attended the meetings than those for

 

The above should be factored into the results of any qualitative findings from the consultation meetings

[Guest Anonymous]

Interesting that the against figure is what I expected.

But it's all entirely irrelevant, given what some earlier posters have said, that the numbers for or against don't matter. It's going to happen anyway.

 

Malachy said earlier that reasons not numbers are all that is being looked for. That may well be true, but behind the reasons are a helluva lot of numbers which the government deem to be important. And all the numbers they are interested in are the numbers which make them look good with respect to carbon emissions, renewables, etc.

 

Anyway, I'm not clever at all these arguments, for or against, but here's another question which I'm sure some of you sharp witted individuals will be able to answer instantly:

 

When the majority of the people are against something, and the government ignores them, and pushes it through anyway. Is that the point where democracy becomes a dictatorship?

 

If so, then there is only one option left to the majority.. I'll let you guess what that is.

[paulb]

again i would like to know are the antis going to oppose the new gas plant. if not is it because its hidden away. if the damage by the terrible wind turbines is so bad then this building is worse. so pj and the rest what do you say.

 

after all sullom was built in a very sensitive marine area. with some very rare mud flats and other marginal water thingies. what about all the birds this building is going to disturb. so the deathly quite tells us that they are ok about the oil/gas folks polluting and damaging our environment but not the green lot. is this an oil conspiracy.

[Talpa]

 

I consider the Shetland Times findings to be more robust, considering the larger sample and the methodology used. So proportionally, a larger percentage of people who are against Viking attended the meetings than those for

 

Or more and more people are coming out against it?

 

This may be to do with the way the process has been carried out i.e. consultation after the main planning process closed (the main deadline for comment having been the 28th of July)

 

Hazel Sutherland says this is because of “of the constitution of the Viking Energy proposal. " Shet News

 

I have increasingly heard it said (from both sides and the middle!) that this has been engineered to create exactly the sceanrio which is unfolding i.e. Peter Peacock MSP "said that should the development not go ahead in partnership with the community, it was almost certain that a purely private project would take its place." also Shet News

 

This can only happen if planning is granted. Perhaps people objected to the planing via SIC consultation on the grounds that if planning goes through they will have a limited choice? VE or no community benefit?

 

The thing that strikes me is having listened to both 'sides' they are both saying the same thing (climate change is a massive issue, Shetland can and wants to do something) with the one huge difference - whether or not VE is the right proposal.

 

Had PROPER consultation occured earlier VE may have had support or alternatives may have been sought, but the 'VE constiution' prevented this?

 

The partners (SIC/ VE) will not make the VE/ SSE partnership agreement public - perhaps people would agree if they knew what they were agreeing to?

 

The vast, vast majority of the community seems to be in favour of a windfarm with community benefit. This could have had community backing but it does not. And now could be divisive for generations.

 

If the "VE or no community benefit " scenario becomes the ultimate/ only choice it could go either way for current objectors/ undecided:

 

A - resignation/ acceptance (it's not ideal but it's this or nothing)

B - mass rebellion - Shetland style (whatever people think about the VE proposal they certainly don't like feeling cornered or having things imposed on them from Edinburgh)

[khitajrah]

again i would like to know are the antis going to oppose the new gas plant.

 

I'm wondering why no one responded to your first post about this paulb. I've been waiting to see any responses.

[unlinkedstudent]

again i would like to know are the antis going to oppose the new gas plant.

 

I'm wondering why no one responded to your first post about this paulb. I've been waiting to see any responses.

 

The end of the month/beginning of the month is always quite busy for me workwise - I'll have a look hopefully over the weekend at the proposals for the gas plant and let you know then what I think!

[Rasmie]

paulb said

again i would like to know are the antis going to oppose the new gas plant. if not is it because its hidden away. if the damage by the terrible wind turbines is so bad then this building is worse. so pj and the rest what do you say.

 

Don't know about the green/anti's but there will be less objections

a) as far as I am aware they are not requiring hand-outs from Shetland's purse

it would seem to offer a realistic chance of continued employement at Sullom Voe for many

[Styles]

I thought it was interesting hearing on the radio folk who had been dead against Sullom Voe having to admit that they had been wrong. Could the same not be true of the wind farms?

[paulb]

for anyone intrested

 

http://www.shetland.gov.uk/planningcontrol/apps/pdfs/2009_271_PCD/2009_271_PCD_Onshore-Environmental_Section_16.pdf

land habitat

 

those poor whimbrels and the red throated divers. odd that they could not see otters in the firth voe i used to see them daily. well my eye sight must be playing up.

 

http://www.shetland.gov.uk/planningcontrol/apps/pdfs/2009_271_PCD/2009_271_PCD_Onshore_Environmental_Section_7.pdf

 

they say there is no red grouse which is odd the wife ran two over near sullom a couple of years ago.

 

so come on then tell us the diffrence. why one gets rabid opposistion and the other nowt.

[paulb]

rasmie i have no problem with the plant being built and run. its just that those who claim the turbines will destroy the environment and run a massive campaign against it on the impact it will cause are silent and are not campaigning against this project. either the gas plant will damage the ecology and then should be campaigned against or there is other reasoning going on.

 

if the argument then is not about the impact on nature then its false to use it as a weapon. they can then only be bothered about the money side of thing and if so they should argue that.

[unlinkedstudent]

for anyone intrested

 

http://www.shetland.gov.uk/planningcontrol/apps/pdfs/2009_271_PCD/2009_271_PCD_Onshore-Environmental_Section_16.pdf

land habitat

 

those poor whimbrels and the red throated divers. odd that they could not see otters in the firth voe i used to see them daily. well my eye sight must be playing up.

 

http://www.shetland.gov.uk/planningcontrol/apps/pdfs/2009_271_PCD/2009_271_PCD_Onshore_Environmental_Section_7.pdf

 

they say there is no red grouse which is odd the wife ran two over near sullom a couple of years ago.

 

so come on then tell us the diffrence. why one gets rabid opposistion and the other nowt.

 

Paul, there are actually 127 files for this planning application. At least they include a clean-up section.

 

Total - they ain't bankrupt on paper like the Scottish power company is (who have debts of more than what the company is worth). Granted, I haven't read yet the environmental impact but it is existing technology but I will read it all in detail.

 

Mmm, whilst glancing through the planning applications though I note that Cunningsburgh Hall is applying to have a telecoms mast whacked on top of it by Cable & Wireless - is there one there already?

[Fjool]

they say there is no red grouse which is odd the wife ran two over near sullom a couple of years ago.

Last breeding pair?

[unlinkedstudent]

Lerwick results - 49 for, 106 against and 2 undecided!

 

I can't help but wonder if AT went to the Lerwick meeting - come to think of it, how many who post on here went to any of the meetings?

[Rasmie]

hi paulb, you said

if the argument then is not about the impact on nature then its false to use it as a weapon. they can then only be bothered about the money side of thing and if so they should argue that.

 

there doesn't seem to be a single united reason to support/oppose the VE project.

 

Some are for/against for green/environmental reasons

 

Some are for/against for economic/selfish? reasons - to make money/save money

 

Some are for/against on their vision of how they want Shetland (the aesthetic appearance?) to look for the next 25 plus years.

 

if people are for or against for any reason they will jump on any bandwagon available.

 

" my enemy's enemy is my friend"