ForArgyll.com: Argyll's online broadsheet.

This makes it sound as if plonking monopiles …

Comment posted Now see for yourself: For Argyll challenges anyone to say SPR plans for Argyll Array at Tiree are acceptable by Robert Wakeham.

This makes it sound as if plonking monopiles (or whatever) all over this stretch of seabed is almost guaranteed to cause widespread damage to a valuable ecosystem, so has this been picked up in the environmental impact study (or am I being naive?)

Robert Wakeham also commented

  • Is there not still the hope that hydrogen generation would be the most likely ‘battery’ – if it can be made to work in practice.
  • ‘..if most of that output is produced overnight..’ is there any evidence that most of a windfarm’s energy is produced ‘overnight’? (other, of course, than when there are more hours of darkness in winter months, when it could be argued that in northern Norway in mid winter all the energy is produced overnight)
  • It would seem that the practicalities of installing and operating the Sound of Islay turbines are being refined with the experience gained with the test turbine of the same type that’s operating in Orkney waters – and that’s been featured on BBC news in the last few days. So how closely the environmental impact of the multiple Sound of Islay turbines will mirror that of the Orkney machine remains to be seen, as there must surely be limits as to how closely the effects in one location will be replicated elsewhere.
  • Malcolm, ‘I would think now that discussions have taken place as to where it is coming ashore the estimate is now very much higher’ is rather an opaque statement, but do you mean that the proposed length of the undersea section of the Tiree array power connection has been substantially increased? Has the length been defined, and are you now able to suggest a cost by direct comparison with the length and cost of the Shetland connection?
  • Malcolm: It’s just that you’re sometimes very careless with your ‘facts’ – the undersea section of the Shetland HVDC interconnector will be 320km long, and the total cost (including shore links and converter stations) is estimated at just over £300 million. Your suggestion that the undersea stretch of the Tiree Array cable will be half that length is surely quite misleading, as is the suggestion that the cost estimate for the Shetland link is £650 million – as far as I can see it was originally costed by National Grid at around £500 million, but this has been revised downwards. My point is that if you want to make sensible comments you should be more careful with your facts.

Recent comments by Robert Wakeham

  • ForArgyll on Pause
    Just for the historical record, ‘A Salmon’, can one assume that by now you’ve consumed your bonnet?
  • ForArgyll on Pause
    MM – lies coming from Obama? – I seriously doubt it, perhaps you’ve got him confused with Trump?
  • ForArgyll on Pause
    ‘Shear arrogance'(sic) is over-egging it by a long way, Malcolm, and remember just how much vindictive sniping there was by people without the guts to identify themselves.
    I think that the For Argyll folk deserve great credit for tolerating all the garbage in the interests of free speech – I would have been sorely tempted to ‘out’ some of the more vicious commentators (and recommend they seek counselling on the state of their mental health, before they get into real trouble).
  • SNP MP backs call for CalMac to put MV Coruisk back on Mallaig-Armadale service – and is to go direct to the Transport Minister
    So, if I understand you correctly, different Calmac ships require different, mutually incompatible, linkspans.
    A polite response is ‘Oh dear’ but there are far less polite reactions that would surely be in order.
  • ForArgyll on Pause
    It’s Buckfast, not buck fast – and is named after a Benedictine abbey (also known locally in South Devon as ‘Fast Buck Abbey’).

powered by SEO Super Comments

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·


Related Articles & Comments