Councillors press for community concerns to be considered in negotiations with big energy companies

The Viking Energy windfarm. 

The council has been urged to consider public opposition to massive windfarms when negotiating with developers.

Members of the SIC have today agreed a community benefit approach, which seeks to maximise the return for Shetland, as more renewables projects are brought forward.

But several councillors also called for a greater recognition of the community concerns around the expansion of the green energy sector.

The debate centred on an SIC commissioned report, which looked at ways for Shetland to capitalise on the emerging green energy “boom”.

It claimed future wind development, in and around Shetland, was likely to “dwarf” existing schemes and said there was a “moral argument” that a portion of the wealth generated should remain within the community.

It noted that the equivalent of 20 Viking Energy windfarms would be necessary just to meet the requirement of green hydrogen plans outlined by Statkraft and EnQuest.

North Isles member Duncan Anderson said it was “vital” Shetland received a fairer share of the energy generated in and around the isles.

But he was said he was “alarmed” by the impact of “massive projects” on the environment and existing industries, such as fishing.

Mr Anderson suggested the council would likely have “little or no” say on the development of offshore wind.

“That said, it would be remiss of us not to try to get some benefits,” he added.

Mr Anderson suggested the net zero agenda seemed to be making everyone other than energy companies poorer – and for “questionable environmental benefits”.

Environment and transport committee chairwoman Moraig Lyall also asked for greater recognition of the community’s concerns to be taken into account.

Her amended motion sought for other recommendations in the report be incorporated in the council’s energy strategy which is due to be approved later this year.

These include a recommendation that the council could consider a presumption against further large onshore windfarms, unless these demonstrated a “significant degree of community ownership”.

Mrs Lyall said she wanted the council’s approach to recognise that “not all of Shetland is happy to have yet more of our land and surrounding seas to be dominated by large energy projects”.

The report, produced by consultants, Aquatera, Voar and Community Energy Scotland, said shared and community ownership of future energy development could provide “maximum economic returns”.

But it also acknowledged community ownership may not always be feasible, or desirable.

In such cases, it suggested community benefits as an alternative – and this is what councillors approved today.

The proposed “ramp and floor” model would see Shetland benefit from new onshore windfarms at a rate of five per cent of gross project revenue, or a minimum of £7,300 per MW/year.

This would mean a minimum of £3.2m per year for the Viking windfarm.

For offshore wind, it suggests 2.5 per cent of gross project revenue or a minimum of £5,000 per MW/year.

Under this model the Arven and Stoura offshore windfarms would generate at least £14m a year.

Shetland Greens councillor Alex Armitage welcomed the report, which he suggest represented a “new paradigm”.

“The energy transition is not merely a transition from fossil fuels to renewables but must also be a transition of ownership, control and power from corporations to the people.”

He added: “My message to energy companies and governments that want to do business in Shetland is that we are a strong community that will always put the needs of our people first.

“The recommendations in this report demonstrate the bare minimum of our expectation from future developments.

“If you can’t meet these standards than you can go elsewhere.”

Presenting the report, economic development manager Tommy Coutts, recognised that community benefit was a voluntary agreement paid by developers – and there was no law legislating how it was delivered.

However, he said there was guidance on how it could be done.

And chief executive Maggie Sandision said energy companies understood they needed to take communities with them by offering benefits.

Lerwick North and Bressay councillor Stephen Leask suggested some of the recommendations seemed more of a “hope than reality”.

“But we have to have a bit of hope in our hearts,” he added.

There were discussions about how the council could fund its own energy projects, as it is precluded from borrowing to invest by regulations governing local authority finances.

However, development committee chairman Dennis Leask suggested there were options available.

Shetland South member Robbie McGregor suggested the council could consider setting up a limited company to invest in energy projects.