View Full Version : Query: Local Benefits of Wind Power
Tubthumper
21-Jul-09, 20:15
Letter by Mr T Pottinger, in today's Scotsman, as pointed out on the .org front page:
'Energy-related opportunities presented by Scotland's natural capital have the potential to create tens of thousands of green jobs, providing a significant boost to the economy.
Wind farm projects we are working on in Caithness, for example, with Statkraft – Europe's largest generator of renewable energy – will provide considerable economic opportunities both for the local area and nationally.'
As I find myself in two minds about wind power, could one of the org's pro-wind lobby please give me some details of where the tens of thousands of jobs are and what the local area's economic opportunities are please?
Thanks in anticipation.
magtomich
21-Jul-09, 21:57
The economic benefits include about £350,000 per annum to Tom Pottinger and thats about it
Green_not_greed
22-Jul-09, 12:50
Today's Scotsman online has three letters in reply.
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/opinion/Overoptimistic-vision-of-wind-farms39.5480339.jp
The author doesn't actually claim that Baillie Wind Farm would contribute in any way toward meaningful long-term employment or meeting government targets. It won't.
What he does say is that wind turbines are part of an essential mix of technologies to meet government targets. I wouldn't argue with that. He also mentions tens of thousands of green jobs from "energy-related opportunities". Again I wouldn't argue with that.
However, when you look at what Baillie would bring in terms of employment and investment for the region, thats when things start to get put in perspective.
The letter infers that Baillie would provide many jobs and investment which is good for Caithness. At the PLI it was stated that there would be approx 5 full time jobs, many of which are expected to come from retrained workers already on the farm. If that's the case then those existing jobs would be lost. The only investment would be into short-term construction and transport. Once operating, the owners and investors would be the ones making money. Those living nearby (150+ homes within 3km) would get nothing in return for their detriment.
The main investor Statkraft is the Norwegian state-owned energy company. If Baillie goes ahead, UK Government subsidies, raised by taxes and higher electricity prices on us all, will be getting paid to a foreign government! It doesn't seem right somehow.
5 full time jobs for the Baillie windfarm seems to be about right to me, and a £100,000 per annum injection into the local economy seems to be an honorable proposition as well. Reay Hall has never received a penny from the nuclear industry but the renewable industry will make sure that our community is far more the richer at no cost to the environment.;)
silverfox57
23-Jul-09, 05:58
Today's Scotsman online has three letters in reply.
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/opinion/Overoptimistic-vision-of-wind-farms39.5480339.jp
The author doesn't actually claim that Baillie Wind Farm would contribute in any way toward meaningful long-term employment or meeting government targets. It won't.
What he does say is that wind turbines are part of an essential mix of technologies to meet government targets. I wouldn't argue with that. He also mentions tens of thousands of green jobs from "energy-related opportunities". Again I wouldn't argue with that.
However, when you look at what Baillie would bring in terms of employment and investment for the region, thats when things start to get put in perspective.
The letter infers that Baillie would provide many jobs and investment which is good for Caithness. At the PLI it was stated that there would be approx 5 full time jobs, many of which are expected to come from retrained workers already on the farm. If that's the case then those existing jobs would be lost. The only investment would be into short-term construction and transport. Once operating, the owners and investors would be the ones making money. Those living nearby (150+ homes within 3km) would get nothing in return for their detriment.
The main investor Statkraft is the Norwegian state-owned energy company. If Baillie goes ahead, UK Government subsidies, raised by taxes and higher electricity prices on us all, will be getting paid to a foreign government! It doesn't seem right somehow.
Could anyone tell me how to make a claim and to who
as my house is only 2.5km from wind turbines ?
Could anyone tell me how to make a claim and to who
as my house is only 2.5km from wind turbines ?
You are having a laugh right? Look at Halkirk for a role model to see how those most affected by the windmills benefit. HDCBF members hang your heads in shame.
You are having a laugh right? Look at Halkirk for a role model to see how those most affected by the windmills benefit. HDCBF members hang your heads in shame.
Why should they hang their heads in shame?
silverfox57
23-Jul-09, 10:10
David,agree with your on halkirk and there windmill benefits.
or lack of them .
as we have now 6 turbines in bilbster area
and at least one is approx 1,5 km from my house
not 2.5km as stated in above post,must check as have
measured on google maps got 1.7. and read on
some web site that house-holders can make a
claim if turbines are under 2km from house.
as it is one up against the big boys would never
win,so will just have to live with it.
Tubthumper
23-Jul-09, 12:40
Thanks for the info. I'm interested in the nature of the 5 jobs likely to be created locally. From experience elsewhere, are these highly-technical and well-paid jobs (e.g. maintaining and adjusting the turbines,repairing where necessary) or lower-paid jobs and less-technical jobs (checking the doors are locked, cutting the grass, picking up dead birds etc).
Also, who installs the turbines? Is it local contractors doing more than just the access roads, founds and crane hire?
There seems to be a bit of grunting regarding the distribution of the causewaymire community funds to halkirk: Is some form of community fund usually set up when a windfarm is opened? And is there usually bitterness about the disbursement of the funds?
Also very interested in the bit about local residents within 1.5km getting a share of the profits. is that true?
Why should they hang their heads in shame?
How about the 15k granted to floodlite the Ross Institute and Church-a real waste of money obtained from green energy.
The Ross Institute looks great lit up, really smartens the village up. Well done who suggested it.
How about the 15k granted to floodlite the Ross Institute and Church-a real waste of money obtained from green energy.
And one not even using green energy! :roll:
How about the 15k granted to floodlite the Ross Institute and Church-a real waste of money obtained from green energy.
What about the money for the school trip?
Why dont you apply to see if they will give you something towards your croft?
David,agree with your on halkirk and there windmill benefits.
or lack of them .
as we have now 6 turbines in bilbster area
and at least one is approx 1,5 km from my house
not 2.5km as stated in above post,must check as have
measured on google maps got 1.7. and read on
some web site that house-holders can make a
claim if turbines are under 2km from house.
as it is one up against the big boys would never
win,so will just have to live with it.
Silverfox I have pm'd you.
Just a question: why does wind power have to be part of the national grid?
To really test it let's have some volunteers, erect wind machines at the designated area from their homes and then take readings and monitor the peaks and troughs.
Their current form of heating would be suspended for the duration of the experiment.
That way we would get the results in terms of the family and we can all appreciate that I am sure.
Should the experiment succeed then we could see more and more people getting off the grid for cheaper and less environmentaly damaging forms of energy.
As matters stand this is a rich man's game and a less than convincing one when the case is being made by Norwegian statistics. Dead parrot, anybody!
Personally I look forward to reclining in my rocking chair on the porch watching my windmills heat the house with narry a landlord to be seen. On the other hand if the scheme is excessively successful we might all be evicted by the Duke of Sutherland or John Wotshisname...
Cinderella's Shoe
23-Jul-09, 19:35
David,agree with your on halkirk and there windmill benefits.
or lack of them .
as we have now 6 turbines in bilbster area
and at least one is approx 1,5 km from my house
not 2.5km as stated in above post,must check as have
measured on google maps got 1.7. and read on
some web site that house-holders can make a
claim if turbines are under 2km from house.
as it is one up against the big boys would never
win,so will just have to live with it.
Could you please give us the link about the claim which can be made within 2km of turbines? Thanks.
What about the money for the school trip?
Why dont you apply to see if they will give you something towards your croft?
What about the money for the school trip? Why don't you see if they will give something towards your abode? I am sure given your post,it must be as humble as my build or do you lack any further intellect to enable you to argue on a more constructive level? Why not apply for a coal powered electric generating station or even a store for community use. Why not just bury your head in the sand and pretend all is okay like most folks.
The Ross Institute looks great lit up, really smartens the village up. Well done who suggested it.
Yeah, great. how did we survive the last 100 years without these buildings being floodite. And the street lights in very close proximity should really just be pulled out of the ground-Ah but wait... That would be saving energy. The person who suggested this idea needs to get a grip and the committee who passed this idea should resign as a matter of urgency.
Tubthumper
23-Jul-09, 22:52
Obviously there is a fair bit of disagreement on funds disbursement. But what about these jobs - am I in with a chance of a well-paid techy job at Baillie, or will I simply be greasing the door hinges?
scottygirl
23-Jul-09, 23:32
I think the chances are that the jobs will not be all that well paid and that it will be very general maintenance with just watchkeeping duties so don't get your hopes up.
Personally, hate them and detest coming home and seeing them blot the landscape.
Can't see how they will benefit the community that they sit within and as someone who used to live near the proposed Baillie wind farm, I was against it. Mr Pottinger always made out he talked to the locals about it but had a petition in his favour signed by folk in Inverness. Great. That kind of says it all really. I never heard from him once when I lived there and he certainly never rang/turned up at my door.
Only the land owners benefit from these things and they can go live elsewhere whilst the folk round about live in the shadows of the huge things.
Wave power, now there is something which should be researched more fully. Tide goes in and out without fail.
Yeah, great. how did we survive the last 100 years without these buildings being floodite.
Because they built buildings like that back then, now they don't. It's great that Halkirk can show its own gem of a building 24/7:lol:
Tubthumper
24-Jul-09, 12:27
I think the chances are that the jobs will not be all that well paid and that it will be very general maintenance with just watchkeeping duties so don't get your hopes up.
Wave power, now there is something which should be researched more fully. Tide goes in and out without fail.
Cheers for that. It would appear that the much-vaunted employment claims (whether national or local) are a bit ambitious. However, I'm sure the community funds distributed do a lot to imprve the general well-being of local areas. Can anyone tell me, apart from the Causewaymire/Halkirk arrangement, where do funds from the other windfarms in Caithness go to?
Because they built buildings like that back then, now they don't. It's great that Halkirk can show its own gem of a building 24/7:lol:
So your previous posts re global warming can be forgotten then, because of how they built buildings years ago. Poorly insulated, draughty,hard to heat etc. Or is the Institute any different? Maybe have been better to spend 15k on upgrading the buildings thermal efficiency rather than floodlighting a building which can only be seen from the Ulbster or Comm and which has street lights present anyway. The way I see it the HDCBF should poll the community to see how much support is generated from these madcap ideas. Seems to me the windmills were put up with little public consultation and now the money from them is being spent with little consultation either.
Green_not_greed
24-Jul-09, 14:20
Can anyone tell me, apart from the Causewaymire/Halkirk arrangement, where do funds from the other windfarms in Caithness go to?
Community benefit from wind turbines is not mandatory - it is purely voluntary on behalf of the developer. I remember when the Buolfruich wind farm at the back of Dunbeath got the go ahead there was outburst from the local community council when it transpired that they were to get absolutely nothing. Unless things have changed (and I'm prepared to be corrected here BTW), as far as I am aware the Buolfruich developer has never paid one penny of community benefit.
Promises are one thing - actual payment is a whole new ball game.
And as discussions here on the .org have shown, there are restrictions on what can be done with the money. IMO everyone within a distance from the turbines - say 2km - should have their electricity or council tax or both paid for by the operators. This would be a far fairer system on those who disbenefit from having to live near the turbines. It may also regain the wind industry some public support - as at present the only beneficiaries are the landowners and investors who rarely live anywhere near the turbines.
GNG
The Ross Institute looks great lit up, really smartens the village up. Well done who suggested it.
I thought you were genuinely "green". How can you possibly justify this appalling and completely unnecessary waste of energy?
As many have said in response to the Govt.'s latest effort, we need far more emphasis on energy conservation and less on generation.
Community benefit from wind turbines is not mandatory - it is purely voluntary on behalf of the developer. I remember when the Buolfruich wind farm at the back of Dunbeath got the go ahead there was outburst from the local community council when it transpired that they were to get absolutely nothing. Unless things have changed (and I'm prepared to be corrected here BTW), as far as I am aware the Buolfruich developer has never paid one penny of community benefit.
Promises are one thing - actual payment is a whole new ball game.
And as discussions here on the .org have shown, there are restrictions on what can be done with the money. IMO everyone within a distance from the turbines - say 2km - should have their electricity or council tax or both paid for by the operators. This would be a far fairer system on those who disbenefit from having to live near the turbines. It may also regain the wind industry some public support - as at present the only beneficiaries are the landowners and investors who rarely live anywhere near the turbines.
GNG
I completely agree with you.:D
It has recently come to my attention that caithness is surrounded on two sides (at least) by sea.
So why dont we use some of this water - which is doing nobody any good except for a few fish- and use it to produce STEAM!!!!
Caithness could well become a leader in steam propulsion vehicles.
Steam rollers perhaps would give us the idea for a model. Certainly it would take a bit of an effort to convert all that water into steam but nothing Caithness ingenuity could not overcome.
Admittedly the ORD might cause a few difficulties either going up the one side or down the other (There might be a role here for horses!)
I envisage a vehicle consisting of three parts.
1) A boiler full of water.
2) A couple of Clydesdale horses
3) Some sort of a sail to be used either to slow down the vehicle or to speed it up.
And lest I forget 4) cinema type seats for the third class passengers, chaise longues for the fist class toffs. In keeping with Highland transportation tradition of no second class.
I myself look forward to becoming a sheik of steam with billions of dollars gained from the limitless energy reserves of the Pentland Firth.
Why not join me? For more info. I can be contacted at The Elm Street Club, Upper Canada. Cheques and postal orders please make out to Rich)
So your previous posts re global warming can be forgotten then, because of how they built buildings years ago. Poorly insulated, draughty,hard to heat etc. Or is the Institute any different? Maybe have been better to spend 15k on upgrading the buildings thermal efficiency rather than floodlighting a building which can only be seen from the Ulbster or Comm and which has street lights present anyway. The way I see it the HDCBF should poll the community to see how much support is generated from these madcap ideas. Seems to me the windmills were put up with little public consultation and now the money from them is being spent with little consultation either.
The energy required to illuminate the Ross Institute will be a drop in the ocean. I wonder if the money came from the nuclear industry would you be voicing the same concerns?:confused
I think lighting the Ross Institute with green energy is a whole lot better than with dirty coal or nuke energy. That is what is at the bottom line here. If people thought we can't have the nice things in life if we go down the green energy road then there wouldn't be any support for green energy!:roll:
Tubthumper
24-Jul-09, 21:18
Gosh! So can we take it that the two windfarms on the Wick/Thurso road, the Forss windfarm and the Builfroich one are giving absolutely nothing to the local community except a bit of basic construction work for the installation, the odd janitorial job and the benefit of the view? And all the dosh from the power generated goes straight into the hip pocket of the developers and landowners? And we taxpayers actually subsidise this?
Halkirk, you are very lucky to have such community funds available at all, regardless of how they are spent!
But all this kind of flies in the face of the claims about wind power being a great thing for local communities. Please tell me someone's got it wrong.
EU targets are actually mandatory so we must meet them or face penalties if we don't. The net result is that we either plough money into our communities by having renewable energy projects on our doorstep or pay greater penalties to foreign powers that don't have the renewable resources via the EU . Your choice, be rich or be even poorer...
Tubthumper
24-Jul-09, 22:18
EU targets are actually mandatory so we must meet them or face penalties if we don't. The net result is that we either plough money into our communities by having renewable energy projects on our doorstep or pay greater penalties to foreign powers that don't have the renewable resources via the EU . Your choice, be rich or be even poorer...
That, my friend, seems to me to be quite pish. You're trying to convince me that mandatory EU targets mean we (ie local community) will get penalised (exactly how?) for not allowing large corporations, ably assisted by plundering local robbers, to rip us off and dump large and (to some), unsightly industrial sites in our midst, whilst lying to planning enquiries about 'local benefits'?
I still don't get it. How does that work, and how exactly do we 'be rich or be even poorer', when there seem to be pretty much no local benefit?
Is someone else mad or have I missed something very vital?
The energy required to illuminate the Ross Institute will be a drop in the ocean. I wonder if the money came from the nuclear industry would you be voicing the same concerns?:confused
I think lighting the Ross Institute with green energy is a whole lot better than with dirty coal or nuke energy. That is what is at the bottom line here. If people thought we can't have the nice things in life if we go down the green energy road then there wouldn't be any support for green energy!:roll:
The bottom line is surely that the Ross Institute did not require to be floodlite from whatever energy source. You say it is a drop in the ocean, so how are we as consumers urged by the government to switch off lights etc when Halkirk is switching them on? The principle is simple here. We have a green energy source being used for a non green use, basically defeating the purpose. This was passed by a committee set up to administer these funds from the windmills. This is why I believe they should be doing something better with their time. BTW I have no direct connection with the nuclear industry.
The Village Council applied for funds for the lighting of the Ross Institute and the Church. Funding was granted and the VC then arranged for the lighting to be installed. Why dont you get yourself elected on to the Benefit Fund committee, and/or the Village Council and also the Community Council, Games Committee and any of the other organisations in the village. After all, the members on all of the committees give of their time freely and without any renumeration. They all do a great job for a little village.
Tubthumper
25-Jul-09, 11:58
The net result is that we either plough money into our communities by having renewable energy projects on our doorstep or pay greater penalties to foreign powers that don't have the renewable resources via the EU . Your choice, be rich or be even poorer...
I think I've figured it out! Now that we in Caithness have allowed a significant number of windfarm projects in our community, those foreign powers will have to give us the cash raised in fines from those who have not. That means, if our government makes arrangements for actual (as opposed to theoretical) local benefits, we will have enough cash to develop local services. Does anyone on here seriously believe that will happen? The wind lobby seem to simply be profit-focussed big multi-national businesses backed by local grasping greed. backed of course by the EU, with their own particulr brand of grasping.
By the way, although I didn't bother following the arguments, did our pro and anti experts ever agree on exactly what contribution wind power makes to servicing our national energy requirement? I'm still in two minds about it, and find it incredible that no-one seems sure, despite so much having been invested in the technology for so long.
What are they teaching our research fellows these days?
I think I've figured it out! Now that we in Caithness have allowed a significant number of windfarm projects in our community, those foreign powers will have to give us the cash raised in fines from those who have not.
A generating capacity of about 450MW would be suitable for a county the size of Caithness given the government targets and land area etc.
Tubthumper
25-Jul-09, 21:47
By the way, although I didn't bother following the arguments, did our pro and anti experts ever agree on exactly what contribution wind power makes to servicing our national energy requirement? I'm still in two minds about it, and find it incredible that no-one seems sure, despite so much having been invested in the technology for so long.
Cheers for the 450MW Caithness contribution estimate. Could you clarify whether that means 450MW of generatING capacity (ie what the turbines are capable of given 100% availability) and what the present Caithness generaTED contribution is (ie what they actually generate) please? Seeing as we appear to subsidise the ones which are already up, with sod all in return (except the warm moist feeling that comes from knowing we've done 'our bit' for the EU) surely there's a public interest in knowing just how well our investment is performing?
By the way, I really am in two minds about this. Renewables seem a grand idea, I'm just concerned that 'the greater good' is equating, (in the case of wind power) to large profits for some lucky types being traded off against compulsory public participation for some not so lucky types.
Tubthumper
25-Jul-09, 22:06
As a side note, it seems worthwhile pointing out that while the nuclear industry (love it or hate it) may not have invested directly in Reay Hall, Reay itself and the County of Caithness can state that 50 years of 1-2000 well-paid and stable jobs has brought more than a few benefits to the area. Maybe we should be insisting that any nationally-subsidised infrastructure programme (which is what local wind power connected to our national grid seems to be) must offer substantial numbers of long-term and good quality jobs to qualify for subsidy, support and permission to function.
After all, there's not much point in generating electricty at all if no-one can afford to pay for it, is there?
Cheers for the 450MW Caithness contribution estimate. Could you clarify whether that means 450MW of generatING capacity (ie what the turbines are capable of given 100% availability) and what the present Caithness generaTED contribution is (ie what they actually generate) please?
You are talking here about load factor. You mention that renewables are a good idea so you aren't a Climate Change Denier which is good, but all energy generation including renewable generation suffers from sub capacity power outputs from their plated capacities. From what I gather from online sources, the most that the tidal schemes that Tocardo hope to achieve is 36%, largely unproven. Onshore windfarms have performed in Caithness up to 35%. Well above national average, so if there is anywhere to put up a wind farm then it is here. If we need to achieve our arbitrary national targets then the more windfarms we have here then it will mitigate the number that we need in Scotland as a whole.
As a side note, it seems worthwhile pointing out that while the nuclear industry (love it or hate it) may not have invested directly in Reay Hall, Reay itself and the County of Caithness can state that 50 years of 1-2000 well-paid and stable jobs has brought more than a few benefits to the area. Maybe we should be insisting that any nationally-subsidised infrastructure programme (which is what local wind power connected to our national grid seems to be) must offer substantial numbers of long-term and good quality jobs to qualify for subsidy, support and permission to function.
After all, there's not much point in generating electricty at all if no-one can afford to pay for it, is there?
You could say the same about farming. Except that hardly anyone is employed in farming these days.
Just a question: why does wind power have to be part of the national grid?
To really test it let's have some volunteers, erect wind machines at the designated area from their homes and then take readings and monitor the peaks and troughs.
Their current form of heating would be suspended for the duration of the experiment.
That way we would get the results in terms of the family and we can all appreciate that I am sure.
Should the experiment succeed then we could see more and more people getting off the grid for cheaper and less environmentaly damaging forms of energy.
As matters stand this is a rich man's game and a less than convincing one when the case is being made by Norwegian statistics. Dead parrot, anybody!
Personally I look forward to reclining in my rocking chair on the porch watching my windmills heat the house with narry a landlord to be seen. On the other hand if the scheme is excessively successful we might all be evicted by the Duke of Sutherland or John Wotshisname...
Where I used to live we had a 2.5KW turbine grid connected to a caravan and although it didn't, unlike the biggies, cut out at high windspeeds, we only saved about a quarter to a third of our electricity bills. It cost, after grants about £7500, and the option not to be grid connected but use battery banks would have cost more. A genny as backup instead would have been cheaper but wouldn't have been particularly green.
Tubthumper
26-Jul-09, 13:22
Letter by Mr T Pottinger, in today's Scotsman, as pointed out on the .org front page:
'Energy-related opportunities presented by Scotland's natural capital have the potential to create tens of thousands of green jobs, providing a significant boost to the economy.
Wind farm projects we are working on in Caithness, for example, with Statkraft – Europe's largest generator of renewable energy – will provide considerable economic opportunities both for the local area and nationally.'
As I find myself in two minds about wind power, could one of the org's pro-wind lobby please give me some details of where the tens of thousands of jobs are and what the local area's economic opportunities are please?
Thanks in anticipation.
Some interesting information offered. Summing up: The local community gets sod all except an enhanced view and that warm moist feeling. But it's all for the greater good, so that makes it OK.
Some interesting information offered. Summing up: The local community gets sod all except an enhanced view and that warm moist feeling. But it's all for the greater good, so that makes it OK.
West Caithness Community Council were offered partnership in the Baillie Windfarm where they could directly take profits from turbines and place it directly into local community projects. They declined and the leading members decided to object to the scheme instead.
Who needs enemies eh?:roll:
IMO everyone within a distance from the turbines - say 2km - should have their electricity or council tax or both paid for by the operators.
GNG
I have to disagree with folks getting their electricity paid for - free electricity just means you will use more electricity, defeating the purpose of having turbines to start with. Energy tends to fill gaps and has vacuum-like properties. For instance, if you have a business and you suddenly get much cheaper electricity, you will have less overhead and more profit, therefore you will expand your business, therefore you will use more energy.
Conservation is where it's at. So you should actually be rewarding people who use the least energy by giving them cheaper rates, but what energy company with shareholders is going to do that?
I have to disagree with folks getting their electricity paid for - free electricity just means you will use more electricity, defeating the purpose of having turbines to start with. Energy tends to fill gaps and has vacuum-like properties. For instance, if you have a business and you suddenly get much cheaper electricity, you will have less overhead and more profit, therefore you will expand your business, therefore you will use more energy.
Conservation is where it's at. So you should actually be rewarding people who use the least energy by giving them cheaper rates, but what energy company with shareholders is going to do that?
You could say the same about conservation, then expand your business and use more energy. You will use your energy more efficiently but you can't escape using more energy as a business grows. However, under a carbon trading system, home users will still face a penalty for using more energy even if it is free from their supplier. I think that is where we are heading, a sort of electricity rationing.
Green_not_greed
27-Jul-09, 15:30
Reay Hall has never received a penny from the nuclear industry
I checked this out and have been assured that Dounreay has supported Reay Hall with many donations over the years. And has only recently approved another donation to the Hall Committee.
What Dounreay - along with the Council - have done for Thurso Town Hall is excellent. According to DSRL's recently published annual report, they provided over £81,000 to charities and local groups in the past year.
This is real funding and has been well established for many years. Caithness - especially West Caithness - would be a far poorer place if Dounreay had never been here in the first place.
Tubthumper
27-Jul-09, 18:27
West Caithness Community Council were offered partnership in the Baillie Windfarm where they could directly take profits from turbines and place it directly into local community projects. They declined and the leading members decided to object to the scheme instead.
Who needs enemies eh?:roll:
That puts a slightly different complexion on it. However, was the reference to enemies really necessary?
I checked this out and have been assured that Dounreay has supported Reay Hall with many donations over the years. And has only recently approved another donation to the Hall Committee.
My source of info was the Reay Hall committe chairperson at the time when I was on the Reay Hall committee 2008-2009.
Tubthumper
27-Jul-09, 18:38
My source of info was the Reay Hall committe chairperson at the time when I was on the Reay Hall committee 2008-2009.
Whoops!
Anyway, it seems as though the majority of people in West Caithness were against the Baillie project, so how do you think the Comm Council should have voted? It would have looked a bit strange to have supported or negotiated with something the people were against, wouldn't it? Or perhaps we should just dispense with the consultation process altogether.
Whoops!
Anyway, it seems as though the majority of people in West Caithness were against the Baillie project.
The majority of people in West Caithness who took part in the ballot were against the scheme.
Margaret M.
06-Aug-09, 14:05
I try to understand the whole wind turbine thing but like so much that goes on, it is very difficult to find information or get a straight answer. Are any local folks employed during the installation process -- I don't think so? I understand that Halkirk is having difficulty finding ways to spend a very substantial amount of money but what is the point of giving it if the manner in which it can be spent is so restrictive? It just seems disingenuous to offer these rewards to communities knowing full well the money may never be spent due to the restrictions. Now if the money could be used to bring every school in the county up to a decent standard or if it meant a reduction in taxes for all the people in Caithness, I could probably find a little more beauty in those massive erections.
The majority of people in West Caithness who took part in the ballot were against the scheme.
If you can't be bothered to vote, whatever the ballot is for, you forfeit your right to a say.
If you can't be bothered to vote, whatever the ballot is for, you forfeit your right to a say.
Perhaps your right, folks just aren't that bothered about wind farms to vote.
I have long been an interested supporter of wind power. I even think that wind farms look beautiful. However, recent accumulating evidence has demonstrated that there are some negative aspects with conventional turbines. The conventional type cannot be mounted on my property since other houses are too close.
However, I have looked with interest at vertical turbines. These are supposed to be much quieter and can be quite small. I have found a picture of one produced by a Canadian company and it resembles a cowling that is quite common on UK chimneys. Surely two features could be covered here - smoke extraction and power generation. The cost could also be more realistic than some of the high prices being charged at present.
http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h288/Ricco_T/mag_wind2.jpg
Tubthumper
07-Aug-09, 10:42
My source of info was the Reay Hall committe chairperson at the time when I was on the Reay Hall committee 2008-2009.
Did the Chairperson become an enemy? Is that what happens when someone 'comes out' for the anti-windfarm side?
Are there any grey areas permitted in the local large-scale wind power debate? Strikes me one is either actively for massive wind turbine farm erections or is branded a climate change denier/ luddite saboteur. While those who don't commit themselves by voting are assumed to be passively for the developments.
I've missed this debate. I'm still in two minds.
I've missed this debate. I'm still in two minds.
Lets discuss both minds.
If we think we can get away from using large onshore wind then where do you think we can get that amount of energy from seeing as we will also be using other non-fossil energy sources like nuke, off shore wind, tidal, wave, solar to the max hopefully.
http://www.inference.phy.cam.ac.uk/withouthotair/c2/page_22.shtml
Tubthumper
07-Aug-09, 16:09
Lets discuss both minds.
Mind one - If we (myself included) wish to continue using electricity, alternative sources must be found as the traditional fossil fuels will run out (as has been discussed since I was at school some 30 years ago). I support the drive to develop these alternatives commercially, with the emphasis on minimising impact on all aspects of our world as far as is practicable. I am not a NIMBY, neither am I a climate change denier. However those who agressively bang on about impending disaster, while sanctioning the bypassing of political process, exaggerating the benefits/concealing the impacts or simply lying about them get right on my wick and put me off.
Mind two - Encouraging large-scale onshore wind development which benefits multinational companies and (apparently) greedy local partners without enforcing the same emphasis on small-scale generation (wind, hydro etc) or local grid arrangements, or by forcing those with huge empty swathes of windy land given over to deer or grouse is wrong. Especially when there appears no equity between those gaining from the power (partners & shareholders whether they be landed gentry, greedy traders or pension fund managers) and those making the sacrifice (ie those with dirty great fans on the horizon). AND I'm still being robbed by those who sell me the electricity!
By the way, what is the opposite of climate-change denier (and I'm looking for a term that is as approximately the same in dismissive nastiness!)
Mind two - Encouraging large-scale onshore wind development which benefits multinational companies and (apparently) greedy local partners without enforcing the same emphasis on small-scale generation (wind, hydro etc)
Haven't you just created an illusion that there is a decision being made against small scale renewables?
I'd also like to say that achieving large-scale renewable projects without the assistance of multi-nationals will be impossible. You also drew scorn on 'greedy' locals. Quite a polarising viewpoint with little leeway for progress in between these extremes. Business is business it is only immoral or greedy if you disagree with their field. Again you've created an illusion.
Tubthumper
09-Aug-09, 11:10
Ahh! You're right, it was all just an illusion. Just like the illusion of lots of employment and local prosperity from large-scale wind farms.
Exclusively Renewables, Social Environmentalist
Ahh! You're right, it was all just an illusion. Just like the illusion of lots of employment and local prosperity from large-scale wind farms.
Exclusively Renewables, Social Environmentalist
Since prosperity is directly related to performance then you can't have it both ways, they are either produce lots of electricity per person employed or they don't. If they don't then they won't fare much better than nuclear.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.