There is nothing substantively new in this report …

Comment posted Marine Scotland identifies 15 new Scottish sea areas for offshore wind by robtrythall.

There is nothing substantively new in this report than was not in the post adoption report March 2011.

Reminding the Renewables Industry at the EWEA conference in Amsterdam was hardly co-incidental, coming as it did in the week that the host nation’s government announced a slow down in off shore development, due to its cost, and the current international economic crisis.

It’s a wake up call. The entire WC Scotland, one of the world’s s most stunning marine environments is up for grabs, and Scottish Government is the pimp (that is not an OTT reaction).

The mantra of self-justification by Govt spokesmen ,is becoming increasingly vacuous, eg nonsense like ” reindustrialisation of Scotland’s communities” What is Lochhead talking about? If he only looks at his own windfarm development maps, he will understand that most of the impacted communities were never industrialised.

In a similar vein Alex S recently alluded to that Kenneth McKELLAR favourite “The Song of the Clyde” and its line “…But from Glasgow to Greenock, in towns on each side,
The hammers ding-dong is the song of the Clyde” .

Wonderful, romantic, evocative stuff, but in the recently published(NOV 2011)“ Wind in our Sails- The coming of Europe’s offshore wind energy industry”( a report by the European Wind Energy Association), hammers ding-donging on the Clyde, let alone the WC of Scotland,does not get a mention!!

This nonsense aside, what is lost in this debate, to the politicians delight,is the subsidy costs faced by Scottish Taxpayers to finance SNP policy whereby Scotland will generate 100% more than its electricity requirements. This extra production is for export to make Scotland the Saudi Arabia of renewables(SNP Manifesto).

Where is the research to support this business plan? How is the export pricing mechanism going to work. No-Tiree-Array (NTA) has asked Alex Salmond this,and many other re related questions. NTA still awaits his reply.

Go to www.no-tiree-array.org.uk

Recent comments by robtrythall

  • BBC indy debate: incoherent uncontrolled unedifying bear pit
    Alex S and John S,with their endless repetition of their “no currency deal no sharing of national debt “, are now sounding like a stuck record on the currency issue.

    Manifestly this indicates their increasing intellectual bankruptcy on the issue, and in defending their intellectual bankruptcy ,they have only exposed their profound financial illiteracy.

    Regrettably some commentators to this blog, who support the Salmond- Swinney mantra, have also revealed their profound financial illiteracy on the currency issue.

    Douglas Fraser Business and Economy Editor of BBC Scotland has published this article on the BBC website:-
    Scotland Decides: Mandate with Destiny
    ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-28943634)

    It offers a very balanced perspective on the issue.

    It should be compulsory reading for any voter prior to Sept 18th

  • BBC indy debate: incoherent uncontrolled unedifying bear pit
    Last night was a bear pit that added nothing to the debate .
    But possibly we all have forgotten the wording of the referendum question? It requires a simple Yes/No to :-
    ++
    Should Scotland be an independent country?
    ++
    This implies no more than asking the voter to express an opinion. It does not imply that Scottish G is bound to deliver/create an Independent Scotland.

    Therefore Alex S, and the SNP, in the event of a Yes vote, should they fail, in any subsequent transitional negotiations, to secure what they deem efficacious to sustain an independent Scotland, eg a currency union, can simply walk away and declare the Independence project untenable.

    Similarly, in the event of a Yes vote, and it then transpires that the SNP’s timescale of 18 months for EU is wrong,ie the timescale for an Independent Scotland application for EU membership is 5 years as per the non –partisan advise on this issue, then one assumes that Scottish G can once again temporize the Independence project.

    Such a time frame would also clarify rUK’s membership, and its implications for an Independent Scotland all of which the SNP,and YES campaign, have ignored .

    In the event of a Yes vote, and rUK subsequently decides to leave the EU, does an Independent Scotland temporize its application to join the EU?.

    Self evidently an application from Independent Scotland in a currency union with a non EU member, will not be acceptable to the EU. In such event it is more than likely an Independent Scotland, to gain EU membership, will be required to accept the Euro.

    But the SNP has said it will not accept the Euro.

    The only credible solution for an Independent Scotland is to create its own credible independent currency which meets all the governance criteria of the international financial, and currency, markets, These require a Reserve Bank.

    The SNP rejects this option, with Alex S claiming last night that a YES will give him a mandate to demand sharing sterling whilst rejecting rUK’s right to give a mandate, to its political parties, to reject a currency union with an Independent Scotland.

    The SNP position currency is ill-conceived and a political nonsense.

    Regretably the bear pit of last night did not address this very important currency scenario.

    CAVEAT EMPTOR

  • 19th September and after
    Have we all forgotten that the referendum question is simply :-
    ++
    Should Scotland be an independent country? Yes/No
    ++

    This implies no more than asking the voter to express an opinion. It does not imply that Scottish G is bound to deliver/create an Independent Scotland.

    Therefore Alex S , and the SNP in the event of a Yes vote, should they fail, in any subsequent transitional negotiations, to secure what they deem efficacious to sustain an independent Scotland, can simply walk away and declare the Independence project untenable.

    Alternatively negotiate the Devo-Max settlement that we all know is what Alex S prefers

  • Sir Ian Wood: Young voters must know Scotland will have little oil and gas output when they are middle aged
    I don’t know what ivory tower you live in, or what universe you revolve around but having read your asinine contributions over the last few weeks I have concluded you don’t exist, but are in facta computer virus emebedded by the cybernats on the FA w/site.

    Your bile and consummate ignorance is on a ‘loop’

    So, Sir Ian Wood who built up his OIL and GAS service company, from small beginnings in the 70′s, into one of the very few Scottish commercial enterprises of any international presence is spreading a “horror” story?

    Get into the real world

    Sir Ian Wood reserved his critical invective for the consultants to this report. The same consultants in 2012 produced a report for Scottish G on the earnings potential of offshore renewables.Its conclusions were also shear fantasy

    Alex S and Fergus drooled with excitement and anticipation as they,like Chamberlain returning from Munich, waved the report about.

    At the time in my capacity as chairman of No Tiree Array (www.no-tiree-array.org.uk) I asked Scottish Government,and the consultants,for their detailed analysis.

    No reply was forthcoming.

    Scotland still awaits any earnings from offshore renewables, and now Alex S has conceded that an independent Scotland will be dependent rUK’s subsidy to develop any earnings.

    Sir Ian Wood has got it right

  • Swinney urgent to find new owners for Ferguson’s shipyard
    What has your comment to do with the subject matter ie Fergusons?

powered by SEO Super Comments

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • LinkedIn
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Ma.gnolia
  • NewsVine
  • StumbleUpon
  • SphereIt
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • Print

23 Responses to There is nothing substantively new in this report …

  1. Sorry, but I have to say it.

    I can identify one. Any meeting of the ConDemAlls at Kilmory, or Inverary, or wherever else they can find a nice bar lunch.

    Plenty wind there.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Presumably the development areas on the map are ‘areas of search’ rather than areas considered ripe for completely stuffing with windfarms. I doubt even Ian Banks would have conjured up the latter option for one of his novels, and it would only be credible if the Crown Estate / Marine Scotland have decided that shipping in the Forth, the Cromarty Firth, and through the Minch is to be forbidden (by Royal decree?) and shipping between Europe and North America via the Pentland Firth can just jolly well detour further north of Cape Wrath – and traffic between Aberdeen and just about everywhere can also do a nice detour. The stone exports from Glensanda will no longer have the south option to the Irish Sea, and will all go up through the Minch and out north beyond the Butt of Lewis before turning east for the Pentland Firth or west outside the Hebrides. Traffic through the North Channel between Scotland and Ireland will be confined close to the welcome embrace of Rathlin Island – unless the Ulster equivalent of the Crown Estate / Marine Scotland produces a similar map, in which case the North Channel will be closed to shipping and everyone can jolly well go somewhere else. And the new marine wind farmers will harvest a rich reward – particularly when the wind’s blowing everywhere and they’re paid not to generate too much electricity – unless, of course, we dam each end of the central belt and turn it into a pumped storage reservoir.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. The other worrying thing about this development is that once again the develoment of offshore wind is being progressed entirely without reference to onshore wind developments. Consider the folk of the south of the Mull of Kintyre, already fighting a developers appeal against the rejection of their development at Kilchatten, with Scottish Power hovering in the wings with their Slate Windfarm plan south of Machrihanish and now a vast area from horizon to horizon filled with the expanded W4 offshore proposals. They will be utterly encircled because nobody at the centre is looking at the whole picture….until 30years down the line when Panorama is doing an expose on the blighted communities of West and NW Scotland….

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. Pingback: A Moratorium on Industrial Wind farms is called for at Holyrood Debate | Communities Against Turbines Scotland

  5. Robert is quite right that the areas shown on the map are indicative only showing areas for “research” and NOT areas which will inevitably have windfarms. Indeed, this map should not have come as quite such a surprise to Newsroom, with their highly emotive and ridiculously OTT language “the recoil of a rape”, as this looks like a redraw of a map published last March by Offshore Wind Scotland, a consortium of HIE, SE and the Scottish Goverment: http://www.offshorewindscotland.org.uk/index.php/journey_to_2050/scotlands_offshore_wind_sites
    The new map enlarges some of the areas, especially in the Clyde, but the indication of joining Islay to Barra and blocking the north end of the Minch were on the earlier map.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • For Alex McKay – of course they’re indicative but, given the willingness to swamp Tiree as it is, with the Argyll Array, the identification of these areas as they are is an indication giving rise to entirely legitimate concern.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. Newsroom. I don’t deny you legitimate concern, but you appear to have decided when writing your article to assume that all the areas indicated would end up completely covered in turbines, which a reading of the whole report instead of a glance at just one of the maps it contains would have made clear, so in my view your language was unwarranted, e.g. “unhinged”, “brutalist”,”rape”, “effectively unnavigable”, Frankenstein deskbound madness”. Offshore wind developments are going to happen, and what this new report deserves is cogent argument and considered responses not an OTT reaction such as yours.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. Pingback: » Report first stage in developing new offshore wind energy sites in Scotland’s … – John O’Groat Journal » Energized Energized

  8. Pingback: ROCs explained – the driving force behind the rush for renewable energy! | Communities Against Turbines Scotland

  9. Pingback: Windfarm debate at Scottish Parliament 2nd Dec 2011 | No Tiree Array

  10. There is nothing substantively new in this report than was not in the post adoption report March 2011.

    Reminding the Renewables Industry at the EWEA conference in Amsterdam was hardly co-incidental, coming as it did in the week that the host nation’s government announced a slow down in off shore development, due to its cost, and the current international economic crisis.

    It’s a wake up call. The entire WC Scotland, one of the world’s s most stunning marine environments is up for grabs, and Scottish Government is the pimp (that is not an OTT reaction).

    The mantra of self-justification by Govt spokesmen ,is becoming increasingly vacuous, eg nonsense like ” reindustrialisation of Scotland’s communities” What is Lochhead talking about? If he only looks at his own windfarm development maps, he will understand that most of the impacted communities were never industrialised.

    In a similar vein Alex S recently alluded to that Kenneth McKELLAR favourite “The Song of the Clyde” and its line “…But from Glasgow to Greenock, in towns on each side,
    The hammers ding-dong is the song of the Clyde” .

    Wonderful, romantic, evocative stuff, but in the recently published(NOV 2011)“ Wind in our Sails- The coming of Europe’s offshore wind energy industry”( a report by the European Wind Energy Association), hammers ding-donging on the Clyde, let alone the WC of Scotland,does not get a mention!!

    This nonsense aside, what is lost in this debate, to the politicians delight,is the subsidy costs faced by Scottish Taxpayers to finance SNP policy whereby Scotland will generate 100% more than its electricity requirements. This extra production is for export to make Scotland the Saudi Arabia of renewables(SNP Manifesto).

    Where is the research to support this business plan? How is the export pricing mechanism going to work. No-Tiree-Array (NTA) has asked Alex Salmond this,and many other re related questions. NTA still awaits his reply.

    Go to http://www.no-tiree-array.org.uk

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  11. If anyone thinks that – in this context – the idea that ‘the Scottish government is the pimp’ is a bit OTT should consider Mr Salmond’s enthusiastic pursuit of Mr Trump up on the Aberdeen coast – although, to be fair, he was joined in the chase by local industrial and academic luminaries.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  12. There is such understandable anger all over the country…and I don’t just mean Scotland.

    Initially it seemed like the answer to the future energy needs,but time has moved on and so has our knowledge.

    It appears that ordinary citizens are having to “defend” their communities from greedy companies out for a share of subsidies that WE pay for through energy bills. How is that fair.?

    There are also cases of smaller “wind farms” being proposed with the “loot” heading everywhere except the local area! for e.g. absentee landlords.

    I have absolutely no problem with either communities or small concerns siting turbines on their properties for THEIR benefit. However,benefit should be just that…NOT a burden to all.

    And while I’m on my high horse!…we really need to be told, truthfully, of the noise,flicker etc impacts on everyone in the vicinity of these industrial giants.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  13. Can someone please explain me what the forecast for CONSUMER benefit is with all this green energy? There may be excellent job & business opportunities but energy prices are soaring and there’s never been so many turbines as we have now. I thought the whole idea was cheaper energy generated by FREE wind,waves & tides? Maybe that’s where my error lies, maybe the only point is to save other fuels like coal & oil???

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  14. Roddy – There’s also the bizarre arrangement of paying wind farmers not to generate too much electricity when the winds are blowing really well, and there’s a power surplus. I don’t know if this is a rare problem, or whether it really adds a lot to the costs, but it seems to be down to a failure to provide energy storage and distribution to match the reconfigured generating pattern. It’s like farmers being paid to grow more food and then paid to throw it away when there’s a glut because no-one thought to build cold stores to cope with it. I thought we’d got beyond that stage.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Robert — I guess we can not store electricity very efficiently. I think the main rant seems to be that wind turbines are highly subsidized by the consumer, hence the rising lecky price. In other words, every and any party who decides to install a wind turbine actually scoops the business rewards from the consumer. The dosh is collected from consumer’s via pricing then passed to the operators via “schemes”. Schemes being the key word. There’s a gov e-petition on this: http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/22704

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  15. Pingback: Cleantech Project News (12 Stories) | PluginEurope.com

  16. Pingback: New No Tiree Array video | Communities Against Turbines Scotland

  17. Pingback: Cleantech Project News (12 Stories) | StigmaBot

  18. So it is confirmed – ForArgyll has hitched its star firmly to the currently popular turbophobic bandwagon, joining a merry band of right-wing Tories, climate change deniers and such media luminaries as the Daily Wail and the Torygraph in their campaign to rid us of the ‘blight’.

    There are so many inaccuracies in this report that it is impossible to know where to start criticising it. For now I will content myself with commenting from a yachtsman’s perspective. Offshore windfarms do not make an area ‘unnavigable’ – yachtsmen are quite capable of navigating between the turbines.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • This sort of autopilot slagging off – of those of us who are genuinely and openly working to tease out the issues and to enable informed thinking BEFORE we take irreversible steps – is a waste of time and space.

      There are very serious issues here.

      A big one is that wind turbines are far from clean green enery – as you MUST know and do not care to discuss.

      The magnets for the turbines require rare earths in their production, These rare earths are highly toxic and the process by which they are separated from each other create large volumes of fluid toxic waste.

      We buy our magnets – as does most of Europe – from China, where Mongolia has large resources of rare earths. The consequences of this production are not then to be found in our back yard.

      But our economic activity in the field contributes strongly to condemning the villagers At Baotou in Mongolia to the consequences – with a lake of toxic waste open to the elements, highly dangerous to breathe and lethal to come into contact with.

      In this area, wildlife has vanished, the water course has been contaminated, cancers are rife and villages have been decimated by deaths, And these people have nowhere to go.

      There is nothing right wing about concern for this reality in every respect – if there were it would dignify the right wing; and there is eveything irresponsibly unthought about an unchallenged commitment to an energy harvesting process which, in truth, is neither clean nor green.

      We have published in some detail on this matter – which may now actually come to a place near you: http://forargyll.com/2011/12/scotlands-should-think-hard-before-exploiting-its-rare-earths/

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  19. Newsroom,

    When one of your wild assertions is criticised (the use of the word ‘unnavigable’ in this intance) your reaction, rather than addressing the point raised, is to jump straight to another cherry-picked anti-wind objection, this time pollution from rare earth extraction in China.

    Before using rare earths as a stick to beat renewables with it is worth remembering that we are all guilty participants in this filthy industry. Neodymium magnets appear in products such as microphones, loudspeakers, in-ear headphones (ear buds and hearing aids), guitar pick-ups and the ubiquitous computer hard drives.

    There are cleaner sources of rare earths than China (indeed, we may well have deposits right here in Scotland) – but these are more expensive, and for consumers price wins out over the environment every time.

    As with everything in renewables, the situation is fast-moving and fluid. Siemens – major users of rare earths in their direct drive turbines – are looking away from China and are instead look to finance and develop new cleaner rare earth production sites across Australia, Russia, Greenland, and California. Vestas on the other hand are opposed to a move to direct-drive wind turbines largely because of its dependence on rare earths. Vestas claims that its geared generators contain a tenth of the quantity of rare earths found in direct-drive machines.

    Wind energy is remarkably clean compared to almost any other form of energy. However, cherry-picked factoids and emotionally charged phraseology have always commanded a premium over impartiality with the ‘popular’ media.

    The truth is that a growing number of people seem to be suffering from ‘wind turbine syndrome’, a strange psychological malaise where the very thought of looking at a wind turbine makes them feel ill.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


All the latest comments (including yours) straight to your mailbox, everyday! Click here to subscribe.