Jump to content

Shetland windfarm - Viking Energy


trout
 Share

Recommended Posts

This was also in today's Shetland Times. To me it seems to be propoganda that the only way for Shetland to prospeer is allowing Viking to go ahead.

 

http://www.shetland.org/2030/gotn-a-grip

 

All the other suggested ways forward suggest Shetland will barely survive

"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future."

But I think the thread that those do cover is that reduced Council spending will hit the areas outside Lerwick harder, as per person spend there is inevitably higher. There are different possibilities, but we need to look at increasing income as well as reducing expenditure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are we all shouting about VE and arguing about there wind turbines ,when there is supposed to be huge wind turbines going up at the green head base why is no one asking about them ,i take it must be ok for them ones to go up

:?:

 

:)

 

The Greenhead scheme is a small well thought out scheme. The power generated will have a benefit for Shetland. It is not a huge out of proprtion scheme of doubtful benefit to the islands.

 

http://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/2010/11/19/three-huge-wind-turbines-at-heart-of-plan-for-gremista-thermal-store

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, Greenhead scheme looks like it has a lot going for it. Putting some power on to local grid (look, no interconnector!), using hot water in district heating scheme as a storage mechanism.

Being integrated with district heating it will help to contribute to a real reduction in the amount of diesel district heating needs to use in times of incinerator plant down-time or lack of stuff to burn.

Wind to heat may in the long term be a far more sensible use of the technology than trying to use it as a grid energy source.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, Greenhead scheme looks like it has a lot going for it. Putting some power on to local grid (look, no interconnector!), using hot water in district heating scheme as a storage mechanism.

Being integrated with district heating it will help to contribute to a real reduction in the amount of diesel district heating needs to use in times of incinerator plant down-time or lack of stuff to burn.

Wind to heat may in the long term be a far more sensible use of the technology than trying to use it as a grid energy source.

 

But schemes like the one at Greenhead will not keep any care centres running or leisure centres open when the well goes dry.

 

On the other hand, we could all keep our heads in the sand, like Unsustainable Shetland, and hope everything will be all right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's great having a pet troll. Just poke it and it will perform a series of amusing acrobatics.

Seriously though. The idea situation for community wind to heat schemes (or indeed other renewables) would be where you had some housing, a care centre and a leisure centre. Leaving aside all the subsidy payments, the actual provision of heat, and real (not theoretical) reduction in fossil fuel use is well worth investigating.

The trouble with some Viking Energy supporters is that they fear any alternative use of renewables, especially those which don't need an interconnector.

Two question to Stirrer,

1. Is the Gremista wind farm a bad idea?

2. Should the Charitable Trust reduce current spending for the next 5 years in order to afford a deposit on Viking Energy? (hint, they already reduced spending from £12m to £11m)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's great having a pet troll. Just poke it and it will perform a series of amusing acrobatics.

Seriously though. The idea situation for community wind to heat schemes (or indeed other renewables) would be where you had some housing, a care centre and a leisure centre. Leaving aside all the subsidy payments, the actual provision of heat, and real (not theoretical) reduction in fossil fuel use is well worth investigating.

The trouble with some Viking Energy supporters is that they fear any alternative use of renewables, especially those which don't need an interconnector.

Two question to Stirrer,

1. Is the Gremista wind farm a bad idea?

2. Should the Charitable Trust reduce current spending for the next 5 years in order to afford a deposit on Viking Energy? (hint, they already reduced spending from £12m to £11m)

 

1. Is the Gremista wind farm a bad idea?

 

No, it is a good idea, in its own context.

 

2. Should the Charitable Trust reduce current spending for the next 5 years in order to afford a deposit on Viking Energy?

 

I do not believe for one minute that is anything other than another scare story from Unsustainble Shetland, but if required, it may be a case of short term gain for long term gain.

 

One simple question to KTL,

 

1. If the Viking Energy windfarm is not built, how do you propose to pay for the continued service provision at the care centres, arts trust, amenity trust and recreation trust for the next 25-50 years ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

unless the interconnector is installed or the grid is seriously upgraded then there is no future for wind in shetland(daft as it sounds).

we have just spent over a year getting planning permission/having a turbine shipped up and then being refused a connection to the grid. the company even adapted the system to dump some of the load as hot water reducing it to 3kws they would have connected anywhere else including the western isles but not here.

 

its really annoying as were faced with 2600 a year lecky bills.

 

so unless you can get a system connected purly for heat you will not get any electrical supply from wind turbines on the grid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe questions like...

 

"1. If the Viking Energy windfarm is not built, how do you propose to pay for the continued service provision at the care centres, arts trust, amenity trust and recreation trust for the next 25-50 years ?"

 

...could better be put to the Councillors and/or Developers who weild most power in the SIC.

 

Regardless of whether planning permission gets granted (if or when that might be), then following a process of due diligence, if VE is not regarded as a good investment, then what will happen to the essential and non-essential services that you mention? What concerns me is the real possibility of a scenario where a windfarm is built because on balance there are positive financial benefits, however returns to the CT are actually less than adequate (much less than publcised, if not pitiful).

 

The feeling is that a lot should be done to ensure essential services are continued, regardless of VE. Recently, Jonathan Wills writes an intersting account - '"Opinion: A do it yourself disaster"' <<=== this describes the true meaning of "Unsustainable Shetland" to me and has nothing to do with objectors to VE and the continued, unconstructive counter arguments in this debate. Maybe we should be thanking Dr Wills for enlightening us as to the true meaning of Unsustainable Shetland (...not doing it properly is not living within our means!?). i.e. rather than wave the care home argument/ ultimatum in our faces perhaps you could direct your anxieties at the financial management of the council before using it as a justification for a questionable windfarm.

 

The question seems to imply that there are no alternatives to VE (either the interconnector and VE windfarm are built or it's the demise of services in Shetland and hence lots of miserable consequences)... this could be perceived as a pro-windfarm "scare story".

 

There are alternatives that bring benefits:

 

- Ideas like the Gremista windfarm are good. It doesn't have to be grandiose to give benefits to the community. MuckleJoannie explains it succinctly above.

- Wind to heat is a good idea.

- "system to dump some of the load as hot water" as an alternative to a grid connection as in paulb's case, if not the best, is still a beneficial idea.

- A "'Sustainable Shetland' Islands Council" financial/ spending policy is a good idea.

- Investing some public money in the planning of alternatives with equal gusto to VE would have been a good idea.

- Not gambling with significant sums of public money with eyes half shut is a good idea. Our eyes are half shut at the moment... we just don't have all the information.

- Not putting all your eggs into one basket is a good idea.

 

 

Sticking to the rules is a good idea and don't forget the miriad of valid non-financial concern relating to VE.

 

...I mean this is what it's all about isn't it, not believing all the hype and staying honest and level headed enough to make the right choices... or perhaps we'll never break out of 'Groundhog "silly season"' :? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
I wonder if VE have taken into account the rising cost of copper.

 

It currently stands around £6200 per ton, and set to increase further.

 

Oh silly me, we will be paying for it in our electric bills :roll:

 

Phew! i was worried there for a minute.

 

Not a problem anymore - apparently there is a new type of turbine in use at Burradale that does not require any wind to make it turn.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBsRomlYNus

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • admin changed the title to Shetland windfarm - Viking Energy

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...