Your friend sounds like a bit of a …

Comment posted on RSPB Scotland ‘disappointed’ by Scottish Government consent to Shetland Viking wind farm by Scots Renewables

Your friend sounds like a bit of a hypocrite.

Scots Renewables also commented

  • We use the figures from all of Irelands wind farms as they are readily available – and what wind blows over Ireland comes to the North of England and Scotland.

    A sweeping generalisation, like many of your statements.

    You have still not explained what you propose to use in place of wind to reduce the CO2 emissions of our electricity generation.

  • Malcolm,

    What about the CO2 emissions of these gas turbines you are so keen on? You seem very reluctant to discuss this issue.

    There is a lot more than conventional economics in the renewables versus gas equation.

  • We all know you are a climate change denier. I was asking Malcolm.
  • What a weird post. Have you ever been to Shetland? I guess not. It is a thriving place that has made very good use of the ‘penny on a barrel’ tax concession it secured from the oil companies bring oil ashore at Sullom Voe. As a result Shetlanders enjoy an excellent infrastructure and quality of life. In fact it was voted best place in Scotlnad to live recently.

    With the volume of oil coming ashore through Sullom Voe set to decine fairly rapidly this new form of energy and the money it will provide is very timely. The £30 million this project will generate for the comunity over 25 years will, I can assure you, be easily spent in the islands and will, I am confident, be put to good use.

  • No reply yet. Come on Mr. Kirk – out of the closet with you . . . do you believe we need to decarbonise our energy supply by 2050 or not? Time for the climate change ‘sceptics’ on here to put their cards on the table so we can see what this blanket opposition to wind energy is really about.

Recent comments by Scots Renewables

  • Russell admits vehicle element of former Dunoon ferry was indeed publicly funded
    A threnody is a song, hymn or poem of mourning composed or performed as a memorial to a dead person.

    Quite appropriate. The promise that was the original ForArgyll is indeed quite dead.

    I think I will stick to the Cowal Courier from now on. That’s a proper news site that seems to have your measure.

    Toodle pip!

  • Russell admits vehicle element of former Dunoon ferry was indeed publicly funded
    Oh do cheer up Newsroom! The hybrid ferries are non-military ships being built on the Clyde. Surely something to cheer about?

    Re. your concerns about staff training – I think you will find that staff require retraining whenever a new vessel is brought into service . . . each boat is different.

    And please do stop all this ‘we hear rumours’ rubbish. No-one believes you. Come up with facts and their sources like a real journalist or stop smearing doom and gloom. Less fuel is less fuel. And the new ferries are also designed to have lower maintenance costs.

    Now, here’s some more potential good news on the ship technology front for Scotland . . . CMAL has been commissioned to carry out a feasibility study for Scottish Enterprise to evaluate the technical and commercial possibilities of using hydrogen fuel cells to power zero emission ferries. If this goes ahead it could put Scotland at the forefront of another new technology, with the consequent design, development and manufacturing of hybrid engines being located here. Great news – though I expect ForArgyll will want to talk it down.

  • New Mobile Theme for ForArgyll.com
    The mobile version isn’t triggered by my iPad, which is a good thing – but it does come up in an iPhone emulator I tried.

    Strangely enough specific mobile versions of websites (as opposed to apps – which are here to stay) may be a relatively short-lived phenomenon. As bandwidth on phones increases dramatically and most displays become HD 1024 pixels wide or more so standard websites become more and more useable. I don’t come across many that don’t display well on the iPad.

    A mobile version was far more essential on older 320 pixel devices like Nokias, but these will die out. The non-mobile version of this site (for example) is quite useable on a new smartphone once it is rotated horizontally.

    Apps that do specific things on mobile devices are another matter – they are definitly here to stay. And for blog sites like this the mobile version definitley increases useability (but see below).

    Some feedback – I couldn’t view the comments on the mobile version, but I was using an emulator rather than an actual smartphone. Can other people view and post comments OK on the new mobile site using an iPhone or Andriod phone?

  • Clyde shipyards at risk – news by year end
    Just testing the comments function on the mobile version of the site.

    (Using an online iPhone emulator)

  • Scottish Conservatives underline common ownership of Saltire
    It is Scottish Labour that really needs to up its game dramatically if it wants to keep a credible presense in Holyrood in the 2016 election. What Ruthie and the Scottish Conservative Party do is of little relevance.

    According to Newsnet Scotland a recent poll shows Westminster voting intentions in Scotland as:

    SNP 39%
    Labour 33%
    Conservative 16%
    LibDem 6%
    Others 7%

    If this doesn’t ring alarm bells for Labour nothing will.

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

66 Responses to Your friend sounds like a bit of a …

    • Why not write another letter to the Oban Times about this to support the geezer who is, again today, taking somewhat of a pasting about his illjudged support for windmills?

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • W.S. – have you any constructive comments (positive or negative) on the Shetland story itself? Snippy anonymous comments and discredited viral cut ‘n’ paste from the many & various anti-wind websites doesn’t add value to the debate.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Why does Shetland need £30m a year? Hardly anyone lives there and the birds don’t need it! This is yet another case of exploiting the less populated regions to make money which will be spent elsewhere. The birds are the largest number of residents and they have no use for cash. Disgustingly short sighted as usual. There is not even consensus on the value of these monstrous turbines. How dare human beings think their needs come before those of all other species! Until we learn we a part of a whole system nothing will change. We will continue to wreck our environment and destroy other creatures.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • What a weird post. Have you ever been to Shetland? I guess not. It is a thriving place that has made very good use of the ‘penny on a barrel’ tax concession it secured from the oil companies bring oil ashore at Sullom Voe. As a result Shetlanders enjoy an excellent infrastructure and quality of life. In fact it was voted best place in Scotlnad to live recently.

        With the volume of oil coming ashore through Sullom Voe set to decine fairly rapidly this new form of energy and the money it will provide is very timely. The £30 million this project will generate for the comunity over 25 years will, I can assure you, be easily spent in the islands and will, I am confident, be put to good use.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  1. Why are our extortionate energy bills being used to subsidise foreign multinationals and millionare landowners to trash the finest landscapes in Western Europe?
    Has no one noticed the 14,000 abandoned turbines, rusting in the Californian desert? Why are we still building these antiques when there are much better modern “windblades” available that have minimal impact and a far greater output!
    What sort of green policy actually destroys the very environment it is supposed to be protecting!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • This wil be one of the most productive windfarms in the world. There will not be many days in a year when it is not producing enough to supply the islands.

      Right development, right place, right time. Well done Shetland.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. I read that the poor people of Shetland were not getting as much from Sullom Voe as they used to – I think I also read somewhere that they might not join in Mr Salmond’s calls for Independence – and lo and behold they have been handed £30 million a year !

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. Nothing matters except for money which is the driving force.

    Are you disillusioned by rising electricity prices, over dependence on the “green” dream [especially uneconomical and inefficient wind farms] and the destruction of our countryside then please add your support to get the Government to have a serious debate on this issue at

    http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/22958

    or by GOOGLING “E-PETITION 22958″ and following the link.

    Please pass this message on to Councillors, members of your community and anyone else you know to persuade them to sign up too. If you are really concerned about wind turbines please write a letter promoting this petition to your local Newsletter and to the Editors of your local newspapers.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. This is fantastic news for Shetland and for Scotland. This will be one of the most productive windfarms in the world, eliminating the dirty, inefficient and anachronistic diesel generator that currently provdes the islands’ power.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  5. Not fantastic news for anyone else though – especially all of us who use electricity in the UK because the subsidy to support this nonsense in Shetland is £40.5 million pounds per annum
    guaranteed each year, and every year, for 20 years. The subsidy for the mass of turbines potentially being built over Caithness and Sutherland is in excess of £100 million pounds per annum guaranteed 20 years etc.
    http://www.windfarms.me.uk/windfarmsgroup3.html

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Change the record Malcolm.

      Re. the RSPB statement – the key is in the comments about habitat enhancement. Windfarm developments can and have improved the habitat for wildlife in many areas.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • Not sure I follow you. Habitat enhancement in the case of offshore locations would be a completely different proposition. Onshore though it is commonplace.

          At Whitelee for example (Europe’s largest onshore windfarm) the removal 900 hectares of non-indigenous commercial forestry has allowed the regeneration of native moorland and blanket bog to benefit Black Grouse, Red Grouse, wading birds and other upland wildlife.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • Oh! That will be the wind farm that receives £35.25 million each year in Public Subsidies! I think we all know a few people with chain saws who could have cut the trees down for less – yes/no ?

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • Malcolm – I’m sure you are pleased that the government is proposing a 10% reduction in RO subsidies for wind power. Given that fossil fuel prices are remaining stubbornly high and likely to continue rising, we should see convergence between the costs of wind & fossil generation before too long, allowing subsidies to be reduced further and perhaps eventually phased out altogether.

            By that time the very low marginal generation cost of wind power will also be putting downward pressure on consumer electricity prices, more good news for you.

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  6. Tim – presumably we are stuck with paying the very high subsidy rate written into all the wind farm contracts at the moment – so there can be no savings on these. Given the fact that a large 2.3MW turbine can produce a clear profit of approx £56K, ten per cent is not going to stop them being built and us having to subsidise them. But, when the gas is released from 2 miles down – and it will be – then gas prices will plummet. Gas in the US cost a third of the price here. Nobody is going to pay for expensive heavily subsidised wind generated electricity. By the way – my apologies – I always try to glean correct information from reliable sources before posting – however on this occasion I made a mistake earlier- the subsidy for Whitelee per annum is not £35.25 million but £59.25 million – It apparently has been extended.
    So today we have added up £59.25 million + £40.5 million + £100 million annual subsidies guaranteed each year for 20 years for just 3 areas, and there’s dozens and dozens more.And of course none of this money is being taken from Politician’s purses, which is why they are so keen on them. The huge debts are being heaped on every poor soul who has to turn on a light or needs to boil a kettle. It is a fact, that if electrical power is required for homes or Industry, wind turbines will be found lacking.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Malcolm – no need to apologise, you were right the first time – the Whitelee extension hasn’t been commissioned yet. When it is, I’m sure your second figure will be correct, though I admit I haven’t checked.

      You are right I think that if gas prices collapse over the next few years, then wind power is going to look relatively expensive. On the other hand, if gas prices increase much further, wind power will soon look cheap by comparison. One thing is sure – as old coal stations retire and more gas turbines are built, we will rely increasingly on imported gas whatever the price. This isn’t good for either energy security or trade balance in my view.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  7. “This wil be one of the most productive windfarms in the world. There will not be many days in a year when it is not producing enough to supply the islands.”
    But there will also be plenty of days when it’s producing too much, forcing the turbines to shut down. Apart from anything else, it’s not designed to serve Shetland, but to export power to the Scottish mainland.
    And I believe you are being optimistic in the extreme if you believe that this project is going to replace the existing diesel station in Lerwick.
    Its rather counter-productive to argue in favour of wind power by describing diesel generation as ‘inefficient’; tit may indeed be anachronistic and dirty, but unlike wind turbines, tit can at least meet demand as and when required.
    And if you think that this project enjoys anything like wholehearted support from Shetlanders, have a look at the Shetland Times website, which is a pretty good barometer of public opinion in the Islands.
    Shetland has an economy greatly dependent on tourism, and irrespective of any arguments over visual pollution, a forest of wind turbines will do little to sell the islands’ image as an unspoilt tourist destination.
    And it’s also relevant, in terms of measuring public opinion, to note that in the last Scottish Parliamentary elections the incumbent Tavish Scott was run a very close second by a candidate standing on an anti-wind farm platform.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • You are out of date – yesterdays Guardian – against 2772 / for 1115 = 71%. Also found that the wind farm will cost £685 million but not mentioned earlier is that the grid connection to the mainland will be a further£550 million+.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • Once again you are being disingenuous with figures, Malcolm. The numbers you refer to in the Guardian are those who actually made representations to the planning committee, they are not the result of a poll.

            In the majority of planning applications most of those who bother to respond are objectors, not supporters. I found the number of those who had actually bothered to register support in this case quite impressive.

            Re. the HVDC interconnector to the mainland – perhaps you can tell us why you believe Shetland should not be connected to the National Grid?

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Bill – surely the fact that the project will export power to the mainland grid is the means by which it will earn the islands an income?

      I don’t know if the existing diesel generator will need to be retained for backup – presumably depends on how the new HVDC link is integrated into the island power network, and whether it can provide the islands with grid backup when the wind output is too low.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  8. There’s another factor in the Shetland electricity supply – a gas turbine plant that serves the Sullom Voe complex but also generates 43% of the grid electricity. With the ongoing Total gas processing plant development at Sullom, what’s the betting that the economics of running the Lerwick diesel power plant might become increasingly unattractive?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Interesting – Do you mean to say that at the moment 43% of Shetlands electricity supply
      is from cheap gas coming from a processing plant on its own doorstep ! If so, then why are we spending £1.23 Billion – yes £1.23 Billion – on this wind farm project when surely the output from the gas turbine plant could be upgraded at a fraction of the cost.
      Could it be that politically it would not make “headlines”.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • The info was googled, and I can’t be sure it’s up-to-date, but apparently the Sullom Voe power plant originally built by BP is now run by an independent Finnish company; the gas turbines must be getting pretty old but for all I know they’ve already been replaced, and I assume (but stand to be corrected) that this is a cleaner source of electricity than the Lerwick diesel plant. Incidentally, the latter is the site of a giant experimental sodium-sulphur storage battery of a type that recently went on fire at a power station in Japan. It’s cleverly sited next to the diesel fuel storage tanks.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  9. Malcolm,

    Why the obsession with gas?

    Have you actually heard of global warming? Have you ANY idea why we are decarbonising our electricity supply between now and 2050, or are you living in some strange, isolated bubble?

    Huge changes are coming in the way we produce, distribute and use energy. You need to get used to that instead of adopting a canute-like posture.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  10. Mr Bowles otherwise known as SR – you are becoming very like your boss in Edinburgh – when he is being bettered,like you,he also becomes offensive.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  11. Malcolm,

    I’m glad you think you are winning the argument and that you believe you have satisfactorily refuted all the points I have made, though I am not sure everyone reading this would score the debate the same.

    Now, a straight question – yes or no answer please:

    Do you believe mankind needs to reduce its CO2 emissions in order to keep the current global warming within tolerable limits?

    Just a yes or no, no waffling about gas or the Chinese or linking to pictures of lightbulbs.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • You’ve got this global warming obsession real bad. Remember; the jury is still out.
      Why bring it into yet another thread?
      Do you think that Scotland “decarbonising” (whatever that new buzz word means) will have about as much effect on CO2 in the atmosphere as my pouring a teaspoon of sugar into Oban Bay would sweeten the oceans.
      Do you not know of China, USA et al ?

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • You (what’s with the “royal we”) know nothing of the sort.
          Everyone, me included, knows climate changes naturally.
          I, and millions like me, deny two things:
          1. The influence of Man Made CO2 (<;0.5% of the total in the atmosphere) on climate. The totally overwhelming controller of our climate is energy from the sun.
          2. The usefulness of windfarms.
          If you can't understand that you shouldn't be contributing to this or any debate on renewables as a cure for socalled mmgw, nor should you be bandying about insults so freely as they rebound on you, not on your victims (see letters page of the Oban Times).

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • WS, you do not understand the physics of this situation. Human carbon dioxide emissions are completely overwhelming the influence of the sun. You appear to be picking and choosing what to believe to fit a preconceived opinion. That’s just wrong.

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  12. No reply yet. Come on Mr. Kirk – out of the closet with you . . . do you believe we need to decarbonise our energy supply by 2050 or not? Time for the climate change ‘sceptics’ on here to put their cards on the table so we can see what this blanket opposition to wind energy is really about.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  13. Tim asks me – ‘surely the fact that the project will export power to the mainland grid is the means by which it will earn the islands an income?’.
    The short answer is probably yes, but of course it depends entirely on who actually gains from the income, and whether it really benefits the community in the long term.
    And I think, to paraphrase WS, that the jury is out on that one, as it is on the whole philosophy behind wind turbines.
    As a matter of interest, I lived on Shetland for 12 years – in fact the first wind turbine I ever saw was an experimental one sited at Voe.
    I’m not about to get into this debate, which seems to be getting more acrimonious, and personal by the minute, but I do believe the comment in my previous postng re the result of the last Scottish Parliamentary election is a better measure of public opinion than snapshot polls.
    If a single-issue candidate can give the incumbent MSP such a close run for his money, then that is surely an indication that their is a strong groundswell of support for what he stands for.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Bill – the Shetland Charitable Trust’s website claims that their aims are to ” provide public benefit to and improve the quality of life for the people of Shetland, especially in the areas of:”

      – Social care and welfare
      – Arts, culture, sport and recreation
      – The environment, natural history and heritage

      Viking energy say that the trust is projected to receive 23m per year. You can always take the view that the ‘jury is out’ on any issue; does that mean we should never do anything at all until we can be ‘certain’?

      As far as the election result goes, I would agree that Billy Fox’s result was impressive, and that his opposition to the wind farm may have been a factor, but he wasn’t just a one-dimensional candidate. His website clearly mentions opposition to the wind farm but says it “…is only one issue of many facing us.”

      Tavish Scott’s party, meanwhile, had its worst-ever election result in Scotland (I think I’m right in saying that he was one of only two constituency LibDems elected that night) so the national swing against them is bound to have played a role in Shetland. Interestingly the other LibDem MSP (in Orkney) suffered a similar swing away and was also run a close second by an independent.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  14. Well done ! yes the terrain is 1000:1 and the turbines100:1. You probably also noticed that there are no hills and the earth is apparently flat. It’s what’s called an illustration. If anyone wants to provide the funding to purchase the digital OS contour maps, I will make the ‘real thing’ !

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • What interests me, as wind farms proliferate, is not just their impact on the view from inhabited areas and main roads but also the impact on your surroundings if you venture into more remote areas – the degree to which you see them not as the odd cluster in the landscape, rather as a horde of different clusters closing in on you from different directions – threatening to overwhelm the environment. Perhaps I’m getting paranoid.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      • Hmm. Pylons. Land-rover tracks. Random agricultural buildings. Forestry. There’s a lot of messy intrusions into remote areas already. Is there anything qualitatively different about wind turbines?

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

        • However, this is indeed the nub of the question. I have little time for those decrying wind turbines as a technology but I have some sympathy for those asking how many and where.

          Good thing about turbines is that they are easy to remove if and when we find a better way of producing enough renewable energy. I quite like turbines from a visual viewpoint(whereas I detest pylons) but there is a genuine question as to what is an appropriate impact in areas of existing low visual intrusion by man-made structures (note that I don’t say “natural” – there is virtually nowhere in Scotland that is truly natural).

          What is really needed is a national plan that dictates the ground rules between the national need for renewable energy and the national need to maintain areas of “wilderness”. I know SR suggested the National Park embargo was sufficient but there are plenty of areas in Scotland that don’t have National Park status but are areas of outstanding beauty.

          It is also important to put things into perspective: on the rail journey between Oban and Glasgow I was on the other day, I only saw turbines once and that briefly. I, however, saw lots of roads, pylons, other railtracks, houses, military bases and canals. As Stephen says: what is different about turbines?

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

          • I think their scale is different – they really can dwarf a landscape in a way that I don’t perceive in ordinary roads or even power pylons, unless you can only see them from afar.

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Malcolm – aside from the missing hills & curvature, which is fair enough if the terrain maps are expensive, why have you chosen to show the turbines at ten times their actual size relative to the landscape? Is it because otherwise they’re almost invisible ? :-)

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  15. The map at 1000:1 scale looks up to the tip of Scotland a distance of 120Km – of course even a 125m wind turbine would hardly show up at that scale – the sizes are so obviously different that it is hard to believe that anyone could take it the wrong way ( well except for him who is away for the weekend). What it does show is that any tourist taking a holiday snap in Caithness or Sutherland will having difficulty in not including a wind turbine in the picture even at true scale, and of course Hollywood Movies will be out. But if you are pro wind farms and don’t mind subsidising what’s in this picture to the tune of over £100 million per year then I have well illustrated where your money will be going. So pleased both sides this time ! ! ! I have a video of the wind farm proposed for my area which is to true scale – you only have to watch the first 65 seconds – the rest may offend :- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uakeH9C92u0

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  16. As a general rule I tend to be wary of responding to the proclamations of climate change deniers (something along the lines of painting the Forth Road Bridge….)

    However on this occasion I am sure W.S. would wish his earlier post to be corrected, in case his basic errors should cast doubt on the veracity of his other comments.

    The actual amount of CO2 in the atmosphere (from all sources) is slightly less than 0.04% by volume.

    Pre-industrial levels of CO2 were around 280 ppm and the most recent figure is slightly more than 390 ppm, thus the percentage of ‘man made’ CO2, as W.S. describes it, is approximately 28% of the total (to date), considerably more than his ‘<0.5%'

    The fact that even at 280 ppm, CO2 has made a powerful contribution to increasing global temperatures of what would otherwise be an inhospitably cold planet to the currently habitable climate of today perhaps hints at its effectiveness as a 'greenhouse gas'; and that changes in concentration of the order we are seeing need to be taken seriously.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  17. Tim: In the interests of accuracy, I never said or even implied that Billy Fox was a ‘one-dimensional candidate’.
    There is, as you are certainly aware, a world of difference between ‘one-dimensional’ and ‘single issue’, and it’s not uncommon for individuals to stand for election in the latter category when they feel strongly about local issues such as hospital closures.
    I happen to know Billy Fox rather well; he’s an intelligent principled and well-respected individual, and to tag him with such a description is highly insulting.
    It was in fact the BBC who described him as an anti-wind farm candidate during its coverage of the Scottish parliamentary elections, and to my knowledge he has never challenged that description.
    An unfortunate feature of postings on this website – apart from the ritual exchange of insults – is the practice of attributing quotes to people that they never actually said, and you do yourself no favours by indulging in it.
    Perhaps it’s germane to quote Billy Fox’s own view as chairman of Sustainable Shetland on the Viking project:
    “I actually feel ashamed that we are going to allow this to happen to our islands, and that there are folk that are prepared to desecrate their environment like this just to turn a penny, a very speculative and dubious penny at that.
    “They have no sense of what the hills or the environment mean.”
    This quote is from the online Shetland News website where the rest of the article may be found.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  18. Bill – with respect, I don’t think you read my post correctly. I described Mr Fox clearly as NOT one-dimensional (by which I meant exactly ‘single issue’) – how do you construe that as ‘highly insulting’?

    I do not know Mr Fox, but he comes across on his website http://www.billyfox.co.uk as an intelligent, principled and well-respected individual as you say. The quote I gave was not unattributed and appears on the home page of that site.

    As I’m sure you will agree, the advantage of posting under your real name is that it imposes a certain discipline NOT to indulge in cheap personal insults, something which I try to avoid and which I agree does the debate no favours.

    The point I made was that the Shetland election result was very similar to that in Orkney, and that therefore correlating it to the wind farm issue in the former is not as obvious as you were suggesting. Also, although Mr Fox came second to the winner, his share of the vote was 30%, pretty close to the ‘anti’ share in the wind farm opinion poll quoted somewhere above.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  19. “I don’t think you read my post correctly. I described Mr Fox clearly as NOT one-dimensional (by which I meant exactly ‘single issue’)”
    No you didn’t, Tim: You described him as “not JUST a one dimensional candidate’ which, as you are certainly aware, has a rather different meaning. If you meant ‘single issue’ you should have said so – there’s a world of difference between the two.
    And with equal respect, comparing the result of an opinion poll with the result of an election is hardly comparing like with like.
    Goodnight.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  20. Tim – I have learned from the comments above and in the interests of avoiding any further misinterpretation I am now using individual arrows to show the position and number of turbines when illustrating a map. I have just finished one this morning for the Galloway area and it says all I want it to say which is ‘ how many turbines there are/ will be, and where – and what heinous subsidies they will get paid by all of us.
    Bill – To finish off a topic raised above when the need for wind farms was queried because Shetland already had a gas turbine producing 45% of its grid electricity,could you ask Mr Fox if indeed that still exists and was consideration given to expanding that, rather than pouring a further £1.2 billion of our money into investors pockets.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Malcolm,

      What about the CO2 emissions of these gas turbines you are so keen on? You seem very reluctant to discuss this issue.

      There is a lot more than conventional economics in the renewables versus gas equation.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • We use the figures from all of Irelands wind farms as they are readily available – and what wind blows over Ireland comes to the North of England and Scotland.

      A sweeping generalisation, like many of your statements.

      You have still not explained what you propose to use in place of wind to reduce the CO2 emissions of our electricity generation.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  21. Just met with a friend who does not get up here as often as he would like – anyway he was telling me that through the docks business he owns down south, he is importing more coal than ever before – from all over the world -seemingly it is fairly cheap at the moment! He also said that in some areas of England there are posters going up saying support Scottish Nationalism – send them back where they belong – our ‘Dear Leader’ Salmond has really made an impression. RIP. Hopefully those of us who don’t have an inferiority complex about being part of the UK will prevail.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    • Never hide from the truth, Bob. The friend mentioned loves Scotland for all the reasons people / tourists have been coming here since Victorian times – for the clean air, wilderness, beauty, that ‘ get away from it all’ feeling. He is genuinely concerned about the future of our country. However, getting back to the theme of this forum, he also owns 2 large wind turbines ( on an industrial site ) which bring in a lot of money and helps to pay his bills in these stringent times. As a businessman he takes advantage of the system, as ever land owner can do legally, but at the same time he is totally mystified how anyone in their right mind could have come up with such a ridiculously expensive method of producing power!

      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.