[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


News Home

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Stuart threatens direct action  

Pete Bevington’s report ‘Viking Offers Millions On Land Rent‘ pedals a number of incorrect assumptions however, two immediately spring to mind which may be of interest to those attending Vikings Land meetings next week.

Are you aware that even a single 2 MW turbine (much smaller than those proposed by Viking) operating at 30% factor (Viking propose 50%) receives a subsidy from Government (ROC, Renewables Obligation, Climate Change Levy which will all double the costs that consumers will pay for energy from wind power) of over £235,000 every year, times a higher figure for the larger turbine by a charitable 163 over twenty five years. It’s an aweful lot more than Viking are apparently talking about. That’s just the start of the renewables gravy train.

Given the figures Pete Bevington is peddling (provided by Viking presumably) the question is where is the vast fortune of subsidies going then? The answer is an easy one, it is in the pockets of the energy provider Scottish and Southern Energy they are the people pressing for this huge development to fill their coffers. To subsidy they will add increased charges to consumers for the electricity itself as well as recouping the 1 billion or so set up costs.

Pete Bevington asserts that ‘Opposition to the windfarm has so far been sporadic and disorganised, expressed by individuals voicing feeling rather than through an organised lobby.’ SAWG does not have the finances of 4 1/2 million pounds as does Viking nor access to a number of consultancy firms in double figures. However, the organised lobby of which he speaks will come when we have something concrete (forgive the windfarm metaphor for peat degradation) to write and campaign and complain about.

The landowners at their meetings should be aware that direct action may well be part of that campaign. Supporting destruction of the environment has its consequences, turning a whole area of our islands into an industrial estate is not an acceptable development plan.

I am, Yours sincerely,

Stuart J. Dobson.
Shetland Against Windfarm Group.

The Shetland News

9 February 2008

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.