Letters / Lesser of two evils
In reply to John Tulloch (Nanny knows best; SN 31/6/13):
So what? I think you are missing my point. SuS and Mr Tinkler are harping on about disturbing the peat which releases C02 as a reason not to build VE.
Yet here’s a government study showing Shetland already has one of the worst carbon footprints in the UK without taken into account Sullom Voe oil terminal.
Total are now building a hydrocarbon processing plant which will burn off gas further increasing our C02 emissions yet…. they are OK with this?
And this is my point. Where is the consistency? It’s called cherry picking and it can’t be taken seriously because they are simply ignoring what they are preaching.
1) I completely agree with you about climate change, I believe that we are seeing natural changes that there is very little we can do about. The government and agencies should be trying to record what we are seeing to gain understanding rather than telling us they know what is happening.
2) A project like this is called an investment. As an investor myself, whether it be the stock market or into the fishing industry I do not believe an investment will instantly return money (unless you are very lucky).
I look at investments as a five to 20+ year plan. It’s easy sitting in the back seat pointing out what someone has done wrong or what they should of done, but not easy when you’re in the driving seat and this is why I previously raised my point about First Group Transport.
Had SCT invested £10 million in FGP they would have had over £3 million wiped off the value of their investment two weeks ago and had their dividend cancelled. They also would have had to pump further money into FGP due to a share issue to maintain their investment value.
Would there have been the same outcry?
At the end of the day the investment would have served no benefit to SCT and the community.
3) Shetland’s tourist industry has bigger problems than a windmill project, the biggest one being the cost to get here. I do not see any evidence that this industry will be affected and Norway are of the same opinion as demonstrated by the Havøygavlen project in the north of the country.
4) I totally disagree that any local referendum is required. If there had been a major outcry regarding this project, the likes of SUS would have presented an overwhelming majority of Shetland’s population to the SIC and they have failed to do so.
I also believe that SCT are entrusted with looking after the money that was gifted to the communities. Are you requesting a referendum for every investment SCT carries out? Should there be a referendum about Cullivoe’s wind farm?
John I do not religiously believe that this is the saviour of the Shetland Islands. I’ve previously said it before and I’ll say it again, I believe that SCT investment into Viking Energy is the lesser of two evils for the communities, just like Total’s new gas plant.
If SCT had not invested, I believe a consortium of major companies would be building this project and Shetland would see very little benefit like many other UK communities.
Craig Johnson
Northmavine
Become a member of Shetland News
Shetland News is asking its many readers to consider paying for membership to get additional features and services: -
- Remove non-local ads;
- Bookmark posts to read later;
- Exclusive curated weekly newsletter;
- Hide membership messages;
- Comments open for discussion.
If you appreciate what we do and feel strongly about impartial local journalism, then please become a member of Shetland News by either making a single payment, or setting up a monthly, quarterly or yearly subscription.
Already a member? Sign in to hide this message.
