Comment posted Wind energy may be controversial but the logistics and the skills are mesmeric by Tim McIntyre.
Robert – I think you are correct that sea transport has been used for some time – someone I spoke to in Campbeltown told me the re-modelling of buildings and roads on the sea front was to eliminate the need for the long-loaders to have to execute multi-point turns to get round the existing buildings!
Tim McIntyre also commented
- …and you will note that I used the words “This will almost never happen” in relation to the output of the wind farm exactly matching local demand. The grid is needed to provide power balancing and control of voltage and frequency. Of course it is possible to do this in a standalone system – e.g. Eigg, but only sensible where the much higher cost of doing so is still cheaper than a grid connection.
- Malcolm – the point is that the tiny extra amount on your bill is your share of the cost of generating clean, green electricity – the fact that the community benefits is because they are fortunate to live close to a windy hill, and it is only natural for any community to capitalise on whatever natural resources they have to hand.
Amusing that you should refer to the Lottery which, when it first appeared, was described by someone as a ‘tax on the poor, the stupid and the hopelessly optimistic’ – is it really a fairer way to fund community projects than renewable energy?
Happy New Year by the way!
- Allt Dearg, along with the various other generating plants in the area, feeds into the 33kV network radiating out from the Port Anne grid supply point. If the output from those plants exactly matches demand in the local network, there will be zero power transfer at the busbars in Port Anne – i.e. the local plant is supplying local consumers.
This will almost never happen. Most of the time the generators will be producing a surplus, in which case the balance is exported to the wider grid at Port Anne, or a shortfall, in which case there is net import. Robert is correct – the grid is not like a giant loch with pipes feeding into and out of it – it is a network with nodes where power flows can be measured. This means that locally-produced power will always go firstly to satisfy local demand, and only the excess will be exported to the HV transmission system.
- Malcolm – in your post 31, you demonstrate that wind power is currently more expensive than the average of power generation costs from other sources. This is not in dispute generally, although it does not take into account the heavy taxpayer subsidies for nuclear which do not form part of the electricity price to consumers.
I was specifically referring to your earlier claim to Norma that Scottish consumers ‘alone’ were paying the entire subsidy cost of all wind power generated in Scotland – nonsense, for the reasons Doc explains. Also, you claimed that building the Tiree Array would result in a trebling of our electricity bills – also complete nonsense, for the same reason.
Then earlier still you claimed ‘for those not aware’ that the subsidy costs were in ADDITION to the higher overall cost of wind energy, which you have yourself disproved with your calculations.
- Malcolm – come on! ‘Hard facts’? – such as “Norma, we in Scotland alone pay £400 million pounds in subsidies to onshore wind farms.” and “If the offshore Tiree Array is built then our electricity bill will treble to £1500 per annum as we are pledged to pay 3 times the going rate over and above increased subsidies.”
Those are not hard facts – they aren’t even remotely factual! You have made them up on the spot, and now accuse others, who quote academic, government department and respected media sources, of only supplying information from those with their ‘nose in the trough’!
Recent comments by Tim McIntyre
- New land reform proposals could intervene in inheritance of family home
Richard, I appreciate the point about property rights, the importance of which I am not trying to diminish, but why should these extend to total control of land & buildings from beyond the grave? Surely the concept of property rights should apply also to those left living, who have a reasonable expectation of a fair share in their parents’ inheritance.
It is a very long-established principle in Scots Law that a will which does not fairly distribute property amongst offspring is contestable in court, and all this current proposal says is that land & buildings should not be exempted from this requirement. Again, I can’t see what the problem is with that.
- New land reform proposals could intervene in inheritance of family home
The proposal is to remove the distinction between ‘moveable’ (possessions) and ‘heritable’ (land & buildings) property for the purposes of succession – something which the Law Society have long called for. This distinction is no more than a wildly anachronistic relic from the feudal era, does not exist in other European countries, and has no defensible place in 21st century Scotland.
In practice the change would mean that the children & spouse/partner of the deceased would be given the legal right to claim a proportion of ALL of the estate, and not just the moveable part (as at present).
So it’s not really the state ‘intervening’ as characterised here, but rather the transfer of some rights from the dead to the living, and the legally-mandated fair sharing out of property of all types. Not quite clear why anyone would object to it, really.
- Swinney revaluation of business rates puts Lorn Arc TIF project at risk
As you make clear with your ‘wet finger in the wind’ metaphor, the margin of error in any prediction of incremental increases in NDR resulting from TIF investments must surely be so large as to make a change of 5% insignificant, at least as far as the predictions are concerned?
I can’t see how you can square a description of the process as an ‘almighty punt’ (which it clearly is) with use of words like ‘calibration’ and quibbles over a few percentage points of income.
It’s also quite possible (conventional economic wisdom would suggest) that a that reduction of 5% in the business rates burden could encourage MORE businesses to set up within the TIF zones, and thereby create more income rather than less…
- Baillie scores off a penalty as Swinney wisely back tracks on stamp duty
“When needs she must, yet faintly then she praises,
Somewhat the deed, much more the means she raises:
So marreth what she makes, and praising most, dispraises.”
- (with apologies to) Phineas Fletcher
Of course it’s all moot, because the entire weight of the article rests on the premise contained in the first sentence, which is, er, entirely false. Ouch.
The Scottish Government’s Land & Buildings Transaction Tax received Royal Assent in July 2013, due for introduction in April 2015. John Swinney announced the rates and bands in October 2014 following several rounds of public consultation.
Chancellor George Osborne announced two months LATER, in his autumn statement, that he was reforming Stamp Duty, without any prior notice or consultation, to a fairly close imitation of LBTT – which as Swinney himself notes is the ‘sincerest form of flattery’.
I’m afraid Jackie Baillie’s smirking ‘penalty shot’ went about 6 yards over the top of the bar…
- Local MSP claims Argyll landowners ‘blight community progress’ and inflict ‘anti-democratic abuse’
Huh? It’s not 2 million for the Stonehenge tunnel, it’s 2 Billion, which makes dualling the A9 look like exceptional value for money… probably save rather more lives in the long run, too.
powered by SEO Super Comments