POLL: Would you support the development of a community-owned windfarm?
Councillors discussed a report this week which considered ways to ensure the community reaps the greatest rewards from future energy development.
As well as seeking community benefits payments from developers, the report also considered community ownership of projects.
It said this approach could produce the “highest value and maximum economic returns” – on average 34 times greater than the payments achieved through community benefits agreements.
The report gave the example of the community-owned Garth windfarm, which it said provided similar returns to the North Yell community as Viking Energy provided to all of Shetland – around £2.2m – despite generating just one per cent of its power.
Funding from the Garth windfarm has been used to support the development of Cullivoe Industrial Estate, North Yell Marina and even to provide financial incentives to encourage families to more to North Yell – helping to save Culliove Primary School.
Given the number of windfarms already built or approved in Shetland, some councillors discussing the report suggested it may have come too late.
“The horse has already bolted.” said North Lerwick and Bressay councillor Stephen Leask.
Shetland Greens member Alex Armitage also acknowledged the strength of feeling against Viking.
However, he suggested there could still be support for renewables projects if they were developed in a similar way to the Garth windfarm – with community ownership and far greater rewards.
What do you think? Take part in our poll to let us know your thoughts.
Steven Skahill
An absolute waste of time, effort, and money.
Jim Ivens
Given that, due to the destructive nature of the technology, I do not support on shore windfarms in any form, I cannot support a community owned windfarm. A community owned tidal farm is, however another question.
Martin Wilson
It is well known that turbines last 25 years in good weather.
This means expenses for maintenance increase over time. That’s when the original investors start selling their shares early as the price begins to increase hence leaving it for suckers to buy them and it’s not long for the share price to plummet leaving the costs for the late entrants.
It’s a CON.
ian Tinkler
Extraordinary, how the something-for-nothing brigade supports these monstrosities. Greed Trumps all, no pun intended, however, the idiocy blends in well and seems appropriate!!!!