Malachy

I find it quite interesting that I was sent a ticket to go all the way to Canada earlier this year but nobody will pay my fare to Shetland!

Come on, sombody give the guy £50 to come up to Shetland. We could all share the price of his fare. It could be a Shetlink sponsored tour of the isles.

It wouldn't happen. I'm sure. For two reasons. One is expense - putting a nuclear power station in Shetland would cost far more than doing it south, simply in terms of getting materials, labour here, and putting in the neccessary cable.

 

The same argument re cost can be made against the Viking Energy project: why not build it somewhere in the North of Scotland? Also, if VE goes ahead, the cable will already be there...

But the Viking Energy project was instigated, at least in part, by people within Shetland, because Shetland has more wind than anywhere else in Europe. I don't think a nuclear power station ever would be instigated from here. Plus, as mentioned above, the VE cable will be able to carry the power from the windfarm and no more.

Concerning potential independence, so what if the entire Shetland electorate voted unanimously to be independent, where do we take it from there without UK cooperation, declare UDI? Raise our own military forces and prepare to repel boarders from the rest of the UK? I am very probably wrong, but I cannot think of any realistic options to enforce our wishes should Westminster decide to ignore us.

I suspect Westminster would have serious trouble trying to hold on to Shetland if the islands demanded independence. I really cannot see them sending in the tanks over it. These days they would be hard pressed to find an excuse for saying no.

what if the then nth Government decide that they're not going to waste all that money on a perfectly good cable and build nuclear power stations here and in the Western Isles as far away from London and the central belt as they can get! Handy that!

...

Governments work on scales of lifetimes for ideas. They know they're going to have to build nuclear - can't get away from the fact! Nice way to get it in the backdoor - what with the handy "green bandwagon" they're jumping onto with "the people" behind it all the way !!

It wouldn't happen. I'm sure. For two reasons. One is expense - putting a nuclear power station in Shetland would cost far more than doing it south, simply in terms of getting materials, labour here, and putting in the neccessary cable.

The other reason is that Shetland still wields a very important bargaining tool, which it has forgotten about in recent years, namely independence. Although the public support for Shetland independence or autonomy has never really been there before, if people were faced with the question: independence or a nuclear power station on your back door? I think minds would quickly change.

Let me get this straight.

 

The windmills create 2406MWh of useable electricity.

 

They 'sell' 2843MWh more than this, which they buy from the electricity company first, and them resell - presumably at a loss, as the wholesale purchase price is going to be higher then the retail price it costs them to buy it.

 

So why would they then sell the additional 2843 when it costs them money to do this? Why not just sell the 2406, and make more money buy selling less?

 

Is it me thats being daft here?

 

Not wishing to go back here - I'd like to hear greenheatman's answers too, but just to clarify this point ^^^

 

Power produced by windmills is worth more than power from elsewhere because you get ROCS payments for renewable energy. So if greenheatman is correct it is conceivable that they could take energy from the grid then sell it back and claim ROCS payments for it.

 

The purpose of these payments is obviously to make renewable energy more attractive as a business, because without them it is not very cost effective.

 

So, does that mean the VE scheme is not viable without the subsidy?

I'm afraid I don't know the answer to that, but I presume their financial projections must be taking them into account.

No not anymore! 18 for local council but 21 for Scottish Parliament!

 

Sorry I got this wrong its also now 18 for the Scottish Parliament!

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_of_scotland/6511111.stm

The person pictured in this story doesn't look 18, nor does he look much like a Charlotte.

I may be unfashionable here, but I'm not sure I would suggest standing as bigdancingman. It might work with Shetlinkers, but other folk might just think you're a bit daft.

Let me get this straight.

 

The windmills create 2406MWh of useable electricity.

 

They 'sell' 2843MWh more than this, which they buy from the electricity company first, and them resell - presumably at a loss, as the wholesale purchase price is going to be higher then the retail price it costs them to buy it.

 

So why would they then sell the additional 2843 when it costs them money to do this? Why not just sell the 2406, and make more money buy selling less?

 

Is it me thats being daft here?

Not wishing to go back here - I'd like to hear greenheatman's answers too, but just to clarify this point ^^^

Power produced by windmills is worth more than power from elsewhere because you get ROCS payments for renewable energy. So if greenheatman is correct it is conceivable that they could take energy from the grid then sell it back and claim ROCS payments for it.

The purpose of these payments is obviously to make renewable energy more attractive as a business, because without them it is not very cost effective.

Nothing could happen. As long as you conduct a sensible campaign rather than personal attacks then you have nothing to fear.

^^^^^

that is the only reason that the interconnector is required from the Scottish Mainland - to supply electricity to the wind turbines' windings!

Read that sentence again. It simply doesn't make sense. Even if these mills do require some power to work, greenheatman is claiming that that is the "only" reason the interconnector is required. That is so outrageous a claim that I just can't accept that greenheatman is the only person in the world to have realised it.

One of the main reasons, despite a falling population, that more electicity is being generated is to supply the wind turbines with good quality grid electricity to allow them to work in the first place - I will not get into technical details, but that is the only reason that the interconnector is required from the Scottish Mainland - to supply electricity to the wind turbines' windings!

 

Now this is something that I want to read about! Not being savvy about the internal workings of these huge proposed behemoths - that is something that just hasn't been covered.

 

The connector cable as I've been fed is there to "export" electricity to the mainland. Is there a laymans guide anywhere on the Net about such things?

I may not be a windmill expert, but I'd say with some confidence that this is simply not true. The mills don't need the connector cable to power them at all.

Here in Fair Isle our power is provided by two windmills (one 60kw, one 100kw) and, when there isn't enough wind, by a diesel generator.

When it is windy, and the windmills are producing power, the generator is off. There is no power being supplied to mills at all.

Obviously the mills we're speaking about are much bigger, but I fail to see why the technology now would be so much less efficient than it was 25 years ago when our first mill was erected.

How much less oil has being burned at Gremista since the 'success' of the wind turbines at Burradale?

 

The answer is more not less!

 

I think you would need to provide some evidence for that statement. If it is true it is pretty shocking, but you can't expect just to be taken at your word with something as controversial as that.

I don't think it would necessarily be "pretty shocking" - if electricity consumption is rising in Shetland, then it could simply be the case that the wind turbines have slowed the increase of oil burnt at Gremista.

True, yes. Although if Shetland, with a decreasing population, is continuing to use more energy, that would also be shocking.

How much less oil has being burned at Gremista since the 'success' of the wind turbines at Burradale?

 

The answer is more not less!

I think you would need to provide some evidence for that statement. If it is true it is pretty shocking, but you can't expect just to be taken at your word with something as controversial as that.

(By the way, I sent a message to you, are you going to answer?)

i.e. when will it actually be green and when will it really become a producer of 25% of Scotlands green power - 5 years - 10 years ?

That would be an interesting thing to know: how long will it take for the windfarm to offset its own carbon emissions? I'm sure Viking Energy must have an idea about that, along with possible variables.

The concerning thing would be that if a much better energy source comes along in five, ten, even 15 years, the windmills might become obsolete, at which point we would be left with 200 useless mills, plus we would have contributed to rather than helped to reduce carbon emissions.

Well I suppose the answer is that the world needs green energy right now, urgently. In fact it needs it yesterday.

 

So we've been convinced to believe by the government.

 

The fact is that the world's temperature has risen and fallen over history. It has been much colder than it is now, but it has been much warmer also. The Global warming warning shouldn't be bought.

I'm sorry, but this global warming denial is not only nonsense, it is selfish, dangerous nonsense.

The most impressive achievement of the oil industry lobby has been to convince people that there is still some scientific debate about climate change. This is not true. There is no debate amongst scientists. The only people who disagree with the consensus view are non-scientists, the same people who are advocating "intelligent design" as a credible alternative "theory" to evolution.

An interesting fact: There have been a total of 928 peer-reviewed scientific papers about global warming. Guess how many of them disagreed with the consensus position...that's right: none. Zero! Amongst real scientists there is no debate. They know the answer. Similarly, the IPCC have given a 90-95% certainty rating on the human causes of global warming. That may not be 100% but it is good enough for me.

There have, as you say, been vast changes in the earth's temperature throughout its history. But these changes have generally been caused by slight adjustments in the orbit of the planet over time (as well as very occasional super-volcanic eruptions etc). This warming is different as it is caused by a buildup of greenhouse gases, which human beings are partly, though certainly not entirely, responsible for.

Human civilisation has only existed for a short time in planetary history, and during this time the climate has been very stable. The changes that many scientists are predicting are beyond anything that civilisation has had to cope with before, and to sit back and do nothing about it would be to condemn future generations to a terrible world. If mankind is prepared to do that, despite all the warnings, then perhaps it deserves everything it gets.

If we all held our breath for 30 seconds every few minutes, that would a good reduction in CO2.

the world needs green energy right now, urgently.

 

Not if the net economic and environmental benefits are zero or, worse, possibly even negative.

 

Alternatively, we could stop squandering the energy we already over-consume...

Absolutely agree 100%. I think the government must get harder on people and force them to save energy. The public are proving themselves utterly incapable of saving energy.

Well I suppose the answer is that the world needs green energy right now, urgently. In fact it needs it yesterday. That is the argument for making such a big windfarm and also the argument for going with wind rather than undeveloped wave power.

I'm not sure it is the gamble that is the problem with the Viking Energy project. We know the technology produces electricity, and would make money. It is simply a matter of weighing that against the negatives, such as disruption to the landscape.

Perhaps the biggest risk would be spending the money and then finding out that a better technology is available in a few year's time, but there is always that risk, whatever choice you make.

EDIT: too late

http://www.greenheating.com/Resources/Image42.gif

 

The image shows the comparison with the Lunar Energy's 2MW machine in a very high tidal regime, Petit Passage, Bay of Fundy.

 

All the image shows is that you've taken the graph showing their output and then drawn a more impressive line over the top of it. That's just silly.

So, dear forum members, you are content to believe and TRUST the lying dogs who represent the wind turbine industry, but you do not trust me and want proof that my system works as advertised.

 

Well, you are a bit late, because another island community will be first to benefit from GENTEC venturi and it these people that will grow very wealthy - Shetland has had its chance and for the price of a lousy boat ticket worth under a £1000 you will be able to buy a few hundred beers into which you can weep at what might have been

Excuse me if I don't keel over with regret and try to beg you to reconsider, but somehow your post here and your previous letters to the Shetland News do not suggest that you are a sensible, reliable person that any council would want to do business with.

If your invention is so wonderful then I am sure you will have no trouble finding a company willing to make it for you (I presume GENTEC venturi exists only on paper, yes?) and then you will be a very wealthy man.

However, I would suggest that if the invention is as good as you say it is, you would probably be wise to try and sell it to lots of people, rather than just one island. I'm no businessman but I'd say that would be the way to go.

Your post here and your various sites and letters all seem designed to impress or baffle, with vast lists of numbers and statistics, for which you offer no evidence. I think perhaps you would have had more chance of being taken seriously if you had gone about your business in a more sensible way.

PS I live on an island with a windmill that provides power about 50% of the time. So there!

http://homepage.mac.com/danielmartin/Dylan/images/jpg/cds/1965-Highway61.jpg

Ok, last one. Definitely.

http://www.megalithrecords.com/store/images/toasters-dub56-cover-us.jpg

I'm getting bored now...

Ok I missed the bit about no multiple posts. Sorry. I've given up now anyway.