25th May 2018
Established 1872. Online since 1996.

Straight into the gutter

The fact that Scottish and Southern Energy would be willing “to go it alone” without squandering Shetland Charitable Trust’s funds on the windfarm fills me with hope, in that the funds can be protected from this nonsensical project.

Let them get on with it and simply levy a charge per megawatt/hour installed (not generated) power, cheques payable to “Shetland Charitable Trust” or “SIC”.

While their chief executive was visiting Shetland last week, I was reading SSE’s interim statement, which showed a massive 20 per cent drop in like-for-like power generated from wind.

This was due to widespread reductions in wind over Northern Europe, knocking the rather silly “it’s always blowing somewhere” analogy straight into the gutter, and as it was during some of the coldest weather, a return to normal base-load generation was required.

The only question SSE needs to be asked is if it would continue with the windfarm without the massive public money subsidies enjoyed by no other form of power generation.

I feel confident every single reader has just answered this correctly, along with bankers/financiers throughout the land.

Douglas Young
Suilven,
Toab,
Virkie.

6 comments

  1. Bert Morrison

    I would argue the other way. The wind is nearly always blowing in Shetland (and when it stops there is still plenty of wind from windfarm supporters and opposers!). If there is anywhere in Europe that a windfarm can be efficient it is Shetland (Burradale is a proven case.). If SSE would go it alone on the proposed windfarm it speaks volumes about its potential. Why give our resources to a multi national and accept chicken feed back in return? Shetland should own as much of the future Shetland renewable energy infrastucture as possible.

    Reply
  2. Johan Adamson

    Do we know if, in this present ecomomic climate, subsidies to SSE for wind power would continue?

    Reply
  3. Sandy McMillan

    The simple fact of the proposed wind farms is, that they should not go ahead without the say so of the Shetland public, after all we are the ones that will have to live with these monstrosities, a vote of no by the public is the only way forward, so as to sort out what the nine councillors under handly did to there constiuents, infact they should be made to resign as they went against the wishes of the public.

    Reply
  4. Bert Morrison

    Perhaps Sandy would rather have a nuclear powerstation, open cast coal mine or an oil shale plant in his back garden? If not; perhaps it is time to put out the electricity and go back to the tilley lamp.

    Reply
  5. Ian tinkler

    How about a THE MAGLEV turbine. Put Viking in the trash can. Sorry Bert. New idears, tilley lamp went with your generation!!!!

    Reply
  6. Sandy McMillan

    Bert doos a man efter me ain heart, why did i no tink o da tilley lamp, better dan dis wirrly gigs.

    Reply

Your Comment

Please note, it is the policy of The Shetland Times to publish comments and letters from named individuals only. Both forename and surname are required.

Comments are moderated. Contributors must observe normal standards of decency and tolerance for the opinions of others.

The views expressed are those of contributors and not of The Shetland Times.

The Shetland Times reserves the right to decline or remove any contribution without notice or stating reason.

Comments are limited to 200 words but please email longer articles or letters to editorial@shetlandtimes.co.uk for consideration and include a daytime telephone number and your address. If emailing information in confidence please put "Not for publication" in both the subject line and at the top of the main message.