RSPB et al. Windfarm Petition (1 Viewer)

[nirofo]

Looks like RSPB have rejected it.
They are sticking to their "case by case" approach. :-

http://www.shetlandtoday.co.uk/Shetlandtimes/content_details.asp?
ContentID=20362

http://www.shetland-news.co.uk/pages/news%20stories/09_2006/little_flap_about_windfarm_plan.htm


Colin

It was to be expected, the RSPB is not run for the birds, it's management is run by a set of beaurocratic morons who's only interest is publicity and making money!

nirofo.

 

[Tyke]

money, money , money

You have said many true & interesting things on the wind farm thread VB-but I doubt if any of them can compete with the apposite nature of that remark.

Bear with me folks...

RSPB responded negatively to our petition for a strategic approach to wind farm siting , in the context of the proposed installation for Shetland. They have said in respect of the Shetland proposal :-

"We would not object on principle, although we may have to put in a conditional objection to keep everything legal."

The Shetland proposal is set out in considerable detail on the website of Viking Energy-the partner in the development consortium which represents the Shetland Island Council.

http://www.vikingenergy.co.uk/

These financial projections are taken from Vikings website :-

Proposed scheme -600MW gross output ( 200 plus turbines)
Load factor -min. 45% ( it's windy up there!)
MWhrs pa therefore-600 X 0.45 X 8760 =2,365,200
Revenue pa per MWhr.-electricity £30 plus subsidy £35 = £65
Revenue pa for the installation-2.365 million X £65 = £154 million per annum.
Profit after deducting interest on Capital costs, & other operating costs-£ 70 million per annum.
Shetland's prospective share of this would be 50% -or £35 million pa.

The load factor at Shetlands existing tiny wind farm is 50% plus.( not 45%) The total income for Wind generated electricity in 3rd qtr. 2006 was actually £90 MWhr.( not £65 MWhr.)

Factor these into the Shetland numbers & you get profits of £150 million pa-Shetlands share being potentially £75million pa.

Shetland's population is 22,000. It is declining. Their electricity needs are supplied by the small diesel power station at Lerwick.
The Viking Consortium proposal is for electricity to be exported to the mainland-it is not needed on Shetland. This is not a community scheme-it is a scheme to generate electricity for export & profits for the Shetland Islanders to compensate for their rapidly declining revenue from North Sea Oil at Sullom Voe..It will not proceed unless an undersea cable to the mainland is approved & built.

The Shetland Islanders ( Viking Energy) have a partner in this hugely profitable venture. It is Scottish & Southern Energy plc.( SSE)

SSE are also RSPB's partner in the latter's Green Energy Scheme.

http://www.rspb.org.uk/supporting/shopping/energy/index.asp

This scheme has persuaded 13,600 RSPB members to buy SSE's electricity or gas-for which RSPB has received a once off £ 272,000 plus £136,000 every year they continue to do so.

The Viking Energy website indicates that the EIA reports for Landscape/Ecology/Hydrology/Soil, Peat,Water/Cultural Heritage are not yet available for display-though most have been completed.
For the Ornithology study this comment is posted :-

"It has now been established that the proposed site supports several species of high nature conservation importance including: red-throated diver; merlin; golden plover; dunlin; whimbrel; common and artic tern. The breeding distributions of these species are likely to constrain the area within which turbines can be constructed"

Colin

 

[Tyke]

How much evidence do RSPB need ?

"An update of the number of WTE found dead in Norwegian wind farms:

In September a new adult WTE was found beneath a wind turbine at Smøla, in a weekly search for corpses by using trained dogs. Thus there are now ten dead WTE found at Smøla since August 2005. Post mortem on seven of these eagles (three still to be investigated) give no reason to expect other death causes then collisions with the wind turbines.


In August the remains (bones and feathers) of another dead WTE was found at Hitra wind farm by the staff of Statkraft and reported to us. Time of death is uncertain, but could possible be around April this spring. A search of the whole wind farm at the end of August by using the trained dogs revealed no other corpses in this wind farm."



Arne Follestad and Ole Reitan, Norwegian Institute for Nature Research

Colin

 

[nirofo]

It would be interesting to know who is doing the ornithological impact surveys for these proposed windfarms, what is their experience in ornithology and environmental survey's for that matter. Are they freelancers working for the windfarm companies and subject to their whim or are they employed by recognised bodies such as RSPB, BTO, SNH etc where proven survey guidelines should be in operation, (I say should be). Why are the results of these survey's, especially the ones conducted by recognised bodies never released to the public as a matter of course. What is the ornithological criteria for these survey's, especially the ones done on proposed windfarm sites condoned by the RSPB, or does the amount of money received from the Power Companies influence the criteria?

nirofo.

 

[Tyke]

The name of the organisation which is doing the ornithology study is on the Viking website:-

http://www.vikingenergy.co.uk/ornithology.asp


It's Natural Research ( Projects) Ltd.

http://www.natural-research.org/index.htm

They seem to major on wind farm studies. Their ornithology specialists are on their web site:-

http://www.natural-research.org/project_team_expertise.htm

I think the key question for all these environmental consultants is the one posed by you Nirofo :-

" does the amount of money received from the Power Companies influence the criteria?"

So far as RSPB are concerned-I feel that there is a clear conflict of interest between their commercial relationship with SSE, and their conservation oversite of SSE wind farm proposals where these are sited in areas important for birds.Shetland is an example of this conflict-I guess we just have to hope that RSPB have built internal Chinese walls between their commercial arm & their conservation activities.

Coming back to the Petition , it seems to me incredible that RSPB can continue to pursue the "case by case" approach. A BF member who is involved in EIA's for wind farms described the cumulative effect as " Very important" in #2646 of the Wind Farm thread. But he also described the near impossibility of measuring it!

The petition for a moratorium pending a strategic study was always going to be a challenge-it would have brought industrial scale wind farm proposals to a standstill indefinitely.The question is whether this was a factor in RSPB's rejection.I cannot see the justification in arguing for "case by case" as more environmentally sound than " cumulative impact" though!

Colin

 

[Tyke]

.....But this is encouraging news:-

http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=1472282006

maybe the publicity from the Petition helped ?

Colin

 

[nirofo]

.....But this is encouraging news:-

http://news.scotsman.com/scotland.cfm?id=1472282006

maybe the publicity from the Petition helped ?

Colin

THAT'S GOOD NEWS!!

nirofo.

 

[Collster]

perhaps theres hope yet

 

[A CHAPLIN]

Hi Folks,

Next week Sunday 15th October Countryfile on BBC1 (UK sorry not Scotland) includes an item on the controversy surrounding the Isle of Lewis Wind Farm see TV Diary for more details.

Ann

 

[Collster]

thanks,should make interesting viewing

 

[David]

Hi Folks,

Next week Sunday 15th October Countryfile on BBC1 (UK sorry not Scotland) includes an item on the controversy surrounding the Isle of Lewis Wind Farm see TV Diary for more details.

Ann

Any chance of a v. brief summary Ann for those outside UK (i.e. me)?

I've now had a formal reply from RSPB Scotland to the petition. I'm only touching down briefly in Berlin en route to CZ and will publish the letter in full in the course of the week. The to-be-expected "we'll continue with our case by case approach" line I'm afraid. But we can keep them on their toes with follow-ups. Agreed?

 

[David]

I've now had a formal reply from RSPB Scotland to the petition.

PS. Interestingly enough the petition, addressed to the Chief Executive RSPB but now delegated to Scotland HQ, stated:

... an immediate moratorium on all sensitively sited windfarm proposals in the United Kingdom ...

I would be grateful if Northern England, Wales and other affected regions would give me material so that we can pin them down a little and not allow all those south of the border, who effectively make the policy, off the hook.

 

[alcedo.atthis]

This story was in today's Press & Journal. Unfortunately, the map is not showing in the link:-

http://www.thisisnorthscotland.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=149235&command=displayContent&sourceNode=149218&contentPK=15638876&moduleName=InternalSearch&formname=sidebarsearch


But it is in this one:-

http://www.rspb.org.uk/scotland/policy/sensitivitymap.asp


Regards

Malky