Long life predicted for Sullom Voe terminal
Rosalind GriffithsThe future is looking positive for Sullom Voe terminal, with a projected life until 2050.
Speaking at a meeting of the harbour board, infrastructure chief Maggie Sandison said that she and council convener Malcolm Bell had met the BP chief executive and senior management in London last week, and now a “much better understanding” existed between the two sides.
Mrs Sandison said it was clear that BP had a long-term commitment to the terminal, which was part of BP’s “strategic planning” up to 2050. The meeting had been “extremely positive”, she said, BP was committed to working closely with the council.
The fears that Shetland had been frozen out of recent talks about Quad 4 and Schiehallion were unfounded, it turned out, as different parts of BP, such as the exploration and terminals, did not communicate.
The Clair field west of Shetland was coming on stream and replacing the North Sea business, Mrs Sandison said, and in an effort to extend the life of the east of Shetland operations, charges were being lowered for this business, while charges were being increased for west of Shetland.
However, for the first time ever, Sullom Voe harbour is facing a loss and tanker charges will have to rise sharply.
Mrs Sandison said the projected loss in March next year would be £1.3 million, due to the fall in oil price and fewer tankers using the terminal.
The harbour was in a “state of flux” and the losses would have to be built into next year’s harbour dues, which is likely to mean harbour dues being increased by “more than 50 per cent”.
John Tulloch
Two small points from above:
1. “The future is looking positive for Sullom Voe terminal, with a projected life until 2050.”
Or more accurately: the future of the terminal is looking exactly the same as it was the day after BP’s announcement.
2. “The fears that Shetland had been frozen out of recent talks about Quad 4 and Schiehallion were unfounded, it turned out, as different parts of BP, such as the exploration and terminals, did not communicate.”
Oh well, that’s ok then, isn’t it? No, it isn’t. Hundreds of millions down the drain because two parts of BP allegedly didn’t communicate!
And neither did the SIC communicate the problem loudly enough or clearly enough.
Never mind, the meeting was “extremely positive”, so everything’s fine?
Duncan Simpson
I agree with John Tullochs comments.
Different parts of BP do not communicate? They are not terrorist cells, the different organisations within BP MUST communicate on some level as they are part of the same Company.
The senior management at SVT perhaps did not know what was to come but surely the chief executive and senior management did?
I get the impression they have just wined and dined them in London then fobbed them off with excuses and promises of another 35 years of SVT (whether the SIC makes any money directly or not).
ian tinkler
Now is it any wonder BP are avoiding landing oil on Scotland. Another magnificent example of why Shetland needs the SNP like a hole in the head!!
“This referendum is about power, and when we get a Yes majority, we will use that power for a day of reckoning with BP and the banks. The heads of these companies are rich men, in cahoots with a rich English Tory Prime Minister, to keep Scotland’s poor, poorer through lies and distortions.
Jim Sillars’ threat of a ‘day of reckoning’.