Shetland windfarm - Viking Energy

[paulb]

of topic unlink. good try

[paulb]

is that the old version based on the 3.6 or the new 4. something.

[unlinkedstudent]

of topic unlink. good try

 

It is far from off topic. Many people thought the information being given out about Viking Energy was from Viking Energy. Ask yourself why a company that is NOT involved in the project has the website. Who gains from the information being spun? Ah yes, certain directors of a company who also own a company involved in Viking Energy.

 

Obviously Viking Energy don't have £100 odd to spare to have their own website.

[paulb]

found this should be able to work the maths out

 

Generalities

Wind farm name: Burra Dale

Country: United-Kingdom

County / Zone: Shetland (Scotland)

Total power: 4 MW

Estimated annual production: 9 GW.h (for an equivalent of 2,500 hours of full load/year)

Details

 

Part #1:

Commissioning: 2000/12

3 turbine(s) Vestas V47/660 (power 660 kW, diameter 47 m)

Hub height: 45 m

Total nominal power: 1,980 kW

Operational

Onshore wind farm

Developed by: Wind Prospect

Operator: Shetland Aerogenerators Ltd

Owner: Falck Renewables

 

Part #2:

Part: Extension

Commissioning: 2003/01

2 turbine(s) Vestas V52/850 (power 850 kW, diameter 52 m)

Total nominal power: 1,700 kW

Operational

Onshore wind farm

Developed by: Wind Prospect

Operator: Shetland Aerogenerators Ltd

Owner: Falck Renewables

 

 

Update for this sheet: 01/2013

 

so assuming these figures are correct

im coming out at something like 35% but im sure im wrong.

[paulb]

mmm im miss reading something here i thought Shetland Aero generators Ltd owned them but it turns out some italian company does.

 

if this is correct how did Shetland Aerogenerators Ltd get a loan from the trust in the past.

 

this smells a bit.

 

they seem to own a lot of stuff

http://www.thewindpower.net/owner_en_169_falck-renewables.php

[Fatal Paper Cut]

Wow, answering like a politician, a question with a question.

 

Which you yourself did up-thread. Your point? If indeed you have one?

 

Err, in all the Judicial Reviews and lengthy Royal Courts of Justice cases I've dealt with, I've never seen a QC/Barrister charge a retainer - are you saying that the Scottish system is different to that of the English?

 

My god. You might actually know something about what you're talking about for once. Changed days.

 

SS are going to have to pay their legal team. Who'll have to do more work if the UK Govt step in too. That will add to their costs.

 

Given that the Court has already agreed on a cap, it would usually follow they did the same again.

 

Possibly. Possibly not. One thing is certain though. Going to law is expensive and SS don't have that much money (otherwise they wouldn't be applying for caps and holding benefit gigs in the 1st place). They did say that if they hadn't had the cap, they wouldn't have gone ahead. Whether the cap will still stand if a new party is included remains to be seen.

 

The SS QC has an impressive track record - is that what you're afraid of?

 

And now you're clutching at straws again. Who said I was afraid?

 

Won competitions for chess.

 

Did you use scaremongering and witless bullsh|t to batter them into submission?

 

Edit: The other side could have raised the point earlier by approaching the bench, asked for a recess and/or discussion in the Judge's Chambers but didn't. They would have been aware of what was in the paperwork and the difference mentioned in Court as soon as the words were spoken but didn't - ask yourself why they didn't.

 

Still seems like a shot in the foot rather than a tactic.

[unlinkedstudent]

@ Fatalpapercut

 

Yes, I do know what I'm talking about with regard to the English legal system and I'll happily admit I don't know the Scottish legal system so well. There wasn't any need for your sarcasm but then it's what I've come to expect from you.

 

Yes, it will cost more in legal fees, not just for SS but for all parties involved. I wasn't aware that you knew down to the last penny how much SS have in their bank account. Come to think of it, just who is footing the bill for VE, given that they are not even a named party in these proceedings but have decided to be represented?

 

Given that you appear to be attacking the poster as opposed to having a debate in an adult manner without resorting to the childish comments you've posted, you are giving the impression that you are afraid.

 

Scaremongering and witless BS? Hang on, you just posted that it appeared I knew what I was talking about (according to you, just the once).

[shetlandpeat]

 

Given that you appear to be attacking the poster as opposed to having a debate in an adult manner without resorting to the childish comments you've posted, you are giving the impression that you are afraid.

 

 

Exactly what you have done in the past, as we all.

[unlinkedstudent]

 

Given that you appear to be attacking the poster as opposed to having a debate in an adult manner without resorting to the childish comments you've posted, you are giving the impression that you are afraid.

 

 

Exactly what you have done in the past, as we all.

 

Oh look, the troll has arrived. Any comments on the windfarm, SP, or just trolling? You really do appear to like to stir. I admit I've given you, SP, as good as you've given me. I can't be arsed to respond to any of your posts any more, SP, given that half the time I haven't a bloody clue what you're trying to convey.

[paulb]

you both love each other. your just shy in admitting it.

 

now come on both of you say it together

 

I luv you

[shetlandpeat]

Paul, you are not posting about the non-existent wind farm. I was a bit taken aback that the barrister decided not to stick with the script. As I have said, I am happy for the best result, though some of the arguments both for and against have been quite retarded when it comes to planning.

Ohhh, the price of copper, that will thwart them, nope, electricity will go up, bonuses will go down, price of copper will also go down.

Tis good fun reading this.

[Fatal Paper Cut]

@ Fatalpapercut

Yes, I do know what I'm talking about with regard to the English legal system and I'll happily admit I don't know the Scottish legal system so well. There wasn't any need for your sarcasm but then it's what I've come to expect from you.

 

How are comments like "Oh dear. You're obviously not very familiar with the tactics QCs use" and "Bet you don't play chess either" not sarcastic? You've certainly displayed a penchant for a sharp tongue in other threads, so you're hardly innocent in that regard. Methinks the lady doth protest too much. If you can't take it, don't dish out out, love.

 

Yes, it will cost more in legal fees, not just for SS but for all parties involved. I wasn't aware that you knew down to the last penny how much SS have in their bank account. Come to think of it, just who is footing the bill for VE, given that they are not even a named party in these proceedings but have decided to be represented?

 

Given that SS have admitted that they would not have gone ahead with legal action without a cap in place, have raised money through benefit concerts and are made up of a tiny percentage of the population of the islands, I'd say that guessing they're not dripping in cash was a pretty safe assumption to make, wouldn't you?

 

Given that you appear to be attacking the poster as opposed to having a debate in an adult manner without resorting to the childish comments you've posted, you are giving the impression that you are afraid.

 

I'm not attacking anyone. You're being a little over-sensitive here. I was suggesting that your assumption that SS' QC is playing a tactical game is open to question. My original comment wasn't addressed to you, but you chose to pick up on it. Quite how that gives you the impression I'm afraid of anything I'm at a loss to understand. But then, as we've already explored, your logic is seriously faulty.

 

Actually, this is something I have noticed with your posts more than once, You're quite happy to jump on someone or some little point and berate them. But as someone gives as good as you get and points out the (often) fundamental flaws in your arguments, it's all "Wah, they're picking on me." Quite honestly, it's both transparent, predictable and more than a little pathetic.

 

Scaremongering and witless BS? Hang on, you just posted that it appeared I knew what I was talking about (according to you, just the once).

 

I'm going on the amount of rubbish you've spouted here there and everywhere else. Usually the Mareel thread.

[unlinkedstudent]

mmm im miss reading something here i thought Shetland Aero generators Ltd owned them but it turns out some italian company does.

 

if this is correct how did Shetland Aerogenerators Ltd get a loan from the trust in the past.

 

this smells a bit.

 

they seem to own a lot of stuff

http://www.thewindpower.net/owner_en_169_falck-renewables.php

 

Could it be that they (certain Directors) are raising capital for VE project perhaps? When did they sell out to Falck Renewables? TBH, haven't really paid attention to Burradale.

[paulb]

would be worth having a look at what they own. they own a lot of SSE farms. why would the operators need to raise the building costs for someone elses property.

[unlinkedstudent]

@Fatalpapercut - I'm not your love and thankfully, I never will be. We hold opposing views. The way you come across though, perhaps unintentionally, is that nobody is allowed to have opposing views.

 

@paulb - steady there, you're saying what many of us have said for years (but sssh, wouldn't want anyone to think you were scaremongering).