Jump to content

Shetland windfarm - Viking Energy


trout
 Share

Recommended Posts

Today's P & J headline shows that the proposed £3billion offshore windfarm off the coast of Caithness could be seen as far away as south of Orkney. There is no height of wind turbines given.

 

As the proposed VE wind generators, fully extended, are 149mtrs high, and set on top of Shetland's highest area of land, from what distance could they realistically be seen from - America?

 

Any research done on this?

 

as a rough guide it would be roughly 61km. thas based on a bit of the hill plus there height roughly 300m assuming they would on the top of the hills. also assuming that the area inbetween is flat. which its not so hard to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not a peered viewed article so has no standing. good try. try and source your stuff from proper journals and they may be worth the read.

 

Well, the BMJ HAVE published an article on the same lines (snippet only as you need an account for full):-

 

http://www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e1527

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Article re health issues and wind farms:-

 

http://eastcountymagazine.org/node/9425

 

It actually made fer quite interestin' readin'ðŸ˜

 

As fer not bein properly sourced, if ye are te read the articles an' papers quoted within, they have been written by folk with letters after their name. That's always a good indicator fer me that they may have done some small amount o' research inte their areas o' writingness. No? :?: and the ones I managed te find at least parts o were very interestin.

 

There was more than enough there te make it worth the read, an te show appreciation fer postin it up fer us, so...

 

Thanks! 😄

 

The issue o' inaudible sound concerns me. After all, this is an area o' science explored an refined as a weapon by them crafty wicked li'l black-suited leprechauns at DARPA, an the like. There's been ha-yowge issues around it arisin from the HAARP project, an the idea o buildin' networks o the bluddy things willy-nilly-silly-billy, all over the place, without the research inte this is frankly shuddersome. :?

 

As fer handin over this cash just afore he steps down, the cheeky beggar's playin slot machines with public funds fer his own gain, in my (admittedly manic) mind. He should be told te take a loooooong walk off of a very short an' high pier. If'n he's decided he no longer wants te be involved as a councillor or trustee, he should have the same say in it as the rest o' us. Exactly none!😡

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like pressure from somewhere.

Why the rush, I seem to remember them saying transmission charges would sway the go ahead and that has not been decided yet and also they would need more time to figure out if the smaller amount of turbines would really be cost effective.

I have never heard of any enterprise rushing ahead with a project when planning has made such huge changes to it without investigating costing and potential returns.

I never get worked up about much but if they push this through then I for one will be protesting to whoever I can to have it reversed as it is not in the best interests of Shetland or the new trustees.

I feel it has become the obsession of one person and looks like they are getting the headlight blinded flock to follow.

This is a matter for the new trustees and a few days is not going to make any odds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hope they get enough to make a decision and the decision is the sensible one to invest more so Shetland does not miss out.

 

I'm curious as to how you can come to that conclusion given that the full valuation report was not made public. If the entire valuation report had been published as opposed to just the 'pros' and listed all the risks also, do you think you would have the same opinion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not relivent to viking. its a shame there system is down but it will be up and working again. faulty hubs, faulty cables and switch gear. just unlucky.

 

Where do you get the bit about "faulty hubs"? This report says a blade on one bent in the wind at Christmas, so all three hubs were returned to the makers for upgrades. Note, the word is NOT "repair". In ley terms, the original heads, which were presumably ajudged by the makers to be sufficent to withstand the relevant weather conditions failed at the first hurdle, so they're getting superior once put on, How can that not be relevant to VE? Different windmill makers, possibly, but this was a system in to which Foula folk, who know fine well just how sh*te the weather can be, had a major input. If that cannot guarantee hardware that will withstand everything unless "once in 100 year" exceptional conditions, what chance does VE have of getting anywhere near close, where most designing and backing the set up, probably have never been on the hills in question in any weather, never mind a winter tempest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hope they get enough to make a decision and the decision is the sensible one to invest more so Shetland does not miss out.

 

I'm curious as to how you can come to that conclusion given that the full valuation report was not made public. If the entire valuation report had been published as opposed to just the 'pros' and listed all the risks also, do you think you would have the same opinion?

 

yes of course they are lying that makes sense not. if there reports which are sensitive docs so are confidential. told them it was a poor investment then they would drop it.

 

honestly unlink stop this wanting to see every single document. you say you worked in big buisness would your past employers have been keen on you wanting to see all there private docs. i bet the answer was no.

 

you lived in london are you honestly telling me that the turbines are going to be more damaging than that. because if you are your talking stoness,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill Manson and his cronies are now attempting to grap 6.3 million pounds of Public money three days before the elections.

Meeting to be held at Shetland hotel at 10.am

 

How low will they stoop in desperation, it makes me sick :evil:

 

Obviously running scared and crapping themselves in case the whole thing goes tits up on them with the new council.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hope they get enough to make a decision and the decision is the sensible one to invest more so Shetland does not miss out.

 

I'm curious as to how you can come to that conclusion given that the full valuation report was not made public. If the entire valuation report had been published as opposed to just the 'pros' and listed all the risks also, do you think you would have the same opinion?

 

yes of course they are lying that makes sense not. if there reports which are sensitive docs so are confidential. told them it was a poor investment then they would drop it.

 

honestly unlink stop this wanting to see every single document. you say you worked in big buisness would your past employers have been keen on you wanting to see all there private docs. i bet the answer was no.

 

you lived in london are you honestly telling me that the turbines are going to be more damaging than that. because if you are your talking stones,

 

Paulb, if you had worked for valuers and surveyors (or perhaps you have?), then you would know that there are professional guidelines in place. I posted a while back stating I had asked one of my clients for confirmation of such guidelines but he is away in Germany on business. When he reverts with the relevant guidelines, I'll post them.

 

To recap, it is standard NOT to publish just part of a valuation report which is what the SCT did concerning the valuation report. Valuers do not usually give permission for this due to it being against the guidelines.

 

You know full well I've lived outside of London too - why the interest? What's the relevance here? I'm not the only person, be it on this thread or elsewhere within the public domain that has made reference to the figures provided and the lack of seeing the entire valuation report.

 

Perhaps the question you should be asking yourself is why the SCT chose to make public only part of a report? You can't cherry pick; you either publish all of the report or none of it. If we are to believe VE (which personally I don't) that it is absolutely 100% guaranteed that loads of dosh will be made with little risk, then why not publish it all? Surely it would be in VE's interest to put people's minds at ease? Hiding behind 'confidentiality' is chicken. Other parties, if named within such documentation, can give consent - so why is the valuation report confidential? After all, was it not Bill Manson when speaking on Radio Shetland about the original agreement (separate document, I know), who said that we could ask any Councillor what was in it and they could tell us - RUBBISH! He knows full well that Councillors cannot divulge certain information, as I'm sure SP will confirm. So why say it? Because it is spin. Because he and his chronies have got in so deep, they don't know where to stop and don't want to lose face?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • admin changed the title to Shetland windfarm - Viking Energy

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...