10th December 2019
Established 1872. Online since 1996.

Council will not object to Viking Energy proposal

Councillors have opted not to object to a proposal to increase the size of the turbines which will form the Viking Energy windfarm.

This came after members of the SIC planning committee deferred a decision last week, citing confusion over the points they were being asked to consider.

Convener Malcolm Bell told members on Wednesday: “It does not matter what your opinion is on renewable energy. We must consider the facts in the report.”

The meeting was not an opportunity to revisit the issue of consent already granted in 2012, Mr Bell said. Instead, councillors could only discuss technical matters related to the firm’s proposal to increase the maximum size of the 103 turbines from 145 metres to 155 metres.

If councillors based their decision on something beyond this in scope the authority could be subject to a judiciary review, the convener cautioned.

He also reminded councillors that the SIC was a formal consultee only and that the final say on whether the project would proceed lay with the Scottish government.

This warning prompted Shetland Central councillor and vocal opponent of the development Ian Scott to leave the chamber. He said he felt he could not be objective.

West Side member Theo Smith also departed the chamber during the discussion, citing a long-held opposition to Viking Energy’s proposals.

Discussions were relatively stymied with councillors John Fraser, Allison Duncan and Stephen Leask all being reprimanded by the chairman for asking questions outside the scope of the report.

Shetland North councillor Alastair Cooper, a former director of Viking Energy, moved that the council offer no objection to the updated application. This was seconded by Lerwick South member Amanda Hawick.

After the meeting James MacKenzie, vice-chairman of the campaign group Sustainable Shetland, said he was “disappointed” with the decision but added that it was “not unexpected”.

“The council seems to be in a bubble,” he said. “They don’t seem to be listening to any kind of opposition.”

Viking Energy head of development and strategy Aaron Priest said: “Naturally, we are pleased that, as a statutory consultee to the application made to the Energy Consents Unit, the council does not object to us making this relatively modest but important change to our consent originally granted back in 2012.

“The next step is for Scottish ministers to consider the application and we look forward to the final decision.

“As well as the income from the community share of the project, Viking Energy has committed to paying community benefit of £5,000 per installed MW of capacity, which will provide an income of up to £2,285,000 per year for community projects in Shetland.”

• More in Friday’s Shetland Times

About Keegan Murray

Reporter for The Shetland Times. Interested in politics, literature and music. Born and bred Shetlander. Long suffering Newcastle United supporter.

View other stories by »

2 comments

  1. Ian Tinkler

    I forwarded to the SIC photos showing the dangerous state of the peat on the Mid Kames. I received a receipt from the Council that all Councilors would receive copies of these photos. (below)
    “General.Office@shetland.gov.uk
    To:ian_tinkler@btinternet.com
    20 Feb at 09:42
    Hi Ian,
    I acknowledge receipt of your email and attachments which have been forwarded to all Council Members Kind regards,
    Donna
    Donna Pottinger, Members Support Assistant Shetland Islands Council Executive Services Town Hall.
    I also forwarded Photos directly to every individual Councilor.
    I understand that debate or discussion about this issue was closed down by Councilor Bell. Now if this is true there is a gross breach of duty where public danger is an issue. There can be no argument against the absolute fact that larger Wind turbines will be, by definition, be far heavier than those originally planned for, A greater risk of landslip during there positioning is self-evident. I will advise a formal action with The Standards Commission for Scotland and whatever appropriate public bodies should be considered. Considered views and advice would be welcome. I have an electronic record of the above if necessary.

    Reply
  2. Ian Tinkler

    For those interested. The imagery of landslip Mid Kames was forwarded to VE who made no comment at the time of the slip. Non of VE’s own surveys disclosed the danger of landslip. I am aware of no further surveys regarding peat stability whatsoever since this landslip. https://www.facebook.com/ian.tinkler.5/media_set?set=a.984641608248796&type=3

    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.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.