Eishken windfarms

A really irate email from a friend in the anti-(onshore) wind farm camp arrived over the Christmas holidays.

The writer was obviously correct that the announcement of the approval of the Eishken wind farm over the Christmas holidays was shabby, transparent and pathetic.

The decision flies in the face of promises given by both MacNeil and Allan, and the MWT supporters are livid to say the least.

I was able to confirm that both these gentlemen actually opposed the applications from a position of technical ignorance, short-term local political advantage and in complete contradiction of party policy (albeit with a temporarily derogation from Salmond).

But was the decision the right one?

Actually, I think not; mainly due to the excessive delays and the absence of any support for any inter-connector to take the power from the proposed wind farm to the grid.

Never mind, instead of providing power to home, and instead of meeting the national objectives for renewable energy, it has provided a tangible economic benefit for the tax planners and financial wizards of London.

I opposed Lingerbay because it provided no immediate benefit to the local population.  The SNP Government have granted approval to a scheme that will provide no immediate benefit to the community but lots of immediate disbenefit.

That makes it the wrong decision.

The decision was inept; due largely to the fact that MacNeil and Allan do not understand renewables and do not have the slightest understanding of how this will impact the community.  The have not engaged with the Minister since the knew that the decision was for approval; so they will deny involvement and blame others for their failing.

If it is any consultation for MWT, the grid connection will probably still sink the proposal, but not before planning blight affect Pairc for another decade.

Eishken windfarm

An anonymous wellwisher advises me that the windfarm at Eishken has been sold; lock, stock and wind tower to EDF (Électricité de France).

Update: I'm told the E in EDF is wrong.  I must be being stupid, but ???????

I'm told that the missives are being concluded currently, and that they will be signed off shortly with transfer expected on 1 August.

If true, given the vast sums required to develop windpower, this shouldn't come as any surprise as the risk/reward trade off must be very high for any individual.  Especially with the huge probable costs and legal issues involved in constructing any power cables from wind farm to grid connection.

The EDF website makes it's wind strategy very clear, and with the pattern of consents seemingly being more valuable than the completed windfarms, it is likely that the buyers need renewables to offset their other (nuclear and conventional) emissions.


The nature of this sort of transaction is that there are few if any footprints until the deed is done, but my delving shows that there have been some changes in the structure of Beinn Mhor Power and associated companies recently; which leads me to believe that something is in the offing.

Beinn Mhor Power has very recently appointed Ms Serena Oppenheim as a director, and issued some more shares (I haven't got round to finding out about these changes yet).  In the last month, Eishken Nominees Ltd has replaced the Nominee Shareholders at McLay Murray & Spens with Nick Oppenheim, Serena Oppenheim and Peter Smith - who I believe is the Estate Manager - and moved the Registered Office to Eishken.  All of which is indicative of some active plans being brought forward.

Update: Crionaig Power Ltd had 3 x Miss Oppenheim appointed as directors in February along with Marcus Trenick QC - of windpower fame.  Loch Sealg Power Ltd was incorporated in October 2010 and is dormant.

I'm sure there is still another company, whose name escapes me at the moment.

Of course, there could be another explanation, but my source is utterly convinced and convincing that a sale is to proceed, so only time will tell.  And where does this leave the Community Trust?

All will become clear very shortly, I suspect.

------


Reproducing this article is forbidden, without my permission and then only if your fully attribute the source.  Newspapers on Francis Street, Stornoway, should remember Johann Hari before plagiarising me.

Interconnected scrapped

The announcement that SSE are withdrawing the connection only to reapply later is a bitter, bitter,blow to the communities and economy of the Western Isles.

Where now for community schemes?

Where now for wave power development off the west coast?

Where now for the economic future of the islands?

Any re-application for investment might take another year, they say, but in reality it is going to be 5-10 years before anything come of it, buy which time the developments will have passed us by.


And, yes, let us point the finger at those whose opposition to the developments has been vociferous, systematic and pervasive; and which failed to even consider discussing the big picture in favour of a blanket unthinking nay saying at the highest levels.

And who refused to discuss anything beyond outright uncompromising opposition to wind power, whilst trying to pretend that community schemes could somehow justify a cable?  The same people who are happy to support pylons to carry the output from wavepower across the islands, but completely opposed the same pylons for windpower.

The same people who repeatedly refused to meet with the Council to discuss any sort of compromise support for modified Council aspirations, or try to find any middle ground between complete support and complete opposition. 

I refer, of course, to our MP and MSP who have sacrificed Galson, Pairc, probably Storas, Tolsta, Shawbost and Point on a course of action they wouldn't debate because they didn't want to understand it.  And I know, because I was there when they flaunted their prejudice and ignorance when workable middle-way solutions were proposed.

I am - as you might tell - disgusted, but the chickens have come home to roost, as I - and many other Councillors have warned.

Hopefully, I can be more optimistic about our future when I next blog.

Wind farms - yet again

No matter how I try to avoid this topic, it keeps coming back around.

That might be due to the great fudge of 2003 when the SNP simultaneously promised support for and opposition to wind farms. 

Amec, or more accurately Amec and EDF, have now submitted a revised plan for a large scale windfarm in Lewis.

They have identified an area previously identified by the SNP Government as being suitable for windfarms in which to make their application, and given that it already has Government approval, what is going to stop the Lewis Wind Power scheme happening on a slightly smaller scale and in a slightly different area?

Remember the promises you had that the SNP would stop all wind farms in Lewis?  Which then became all large windfarms?  Which then became all large non-community owned wind farms?  All  lies and nonsense.

MWT, you are being hung out to dry the other side of the next election when you votes will be used to justify a large scale development.

With today's news that we are definitely in the running to be on the long leet for the short leet for the possible potential schemes for wave power, if anyone can develop an working model and want to site it in Lewis where there is no way of feeding the power that might be generated if the model actually works back into the grid, we are truly on the cusp of something.  But probably not what you might think.  But it will be the attractive cover for the bad news.


With the Ofgem review of pricing being flagged up as reversing the existing pricing structure - as demanded by the SNP - it looks most likely that we in the islands will start to become a focus for renewables. And that means that the past years have been wasted denying us an economic opportunity that is now going to be forced upon us in accordance with a long standing Government policy.

I will understand exactly why MWT will go through the roof - and so they should - but it is what I saw coming a long time back and in my own way hoped we could control and manage over a longer period of time.

My problem - and this is a BIG problem - is that there is going to be a gold rush for renewables that we as a community cannot adequately manage and that we are going to lose control over the policy and direction as a consequence.

The culprits for this sit in Bayhead, because of their opportunistic approach (and let's be honest, that's what most politicians do) but those we need to be wary of sit only slightly further away, masked by shell companies and the money motive.  And thanks to another, I think I have a big tale to tell, if I can just join the dots and get it past the lawyers.

Just remember the basics. Multi-nationals aren't doing it for any reason together than the profit.  Community benefit is the 'bribe' they need to pay.  And those who speak for them sometimes do so for wrong reasons for the community.  We can/could take control of the decisions and make it work for us if we can decide on a future based around renewables and then work out how to achieve it.

Blind refusal is not going to be a winning strategy.

Legal action in Uist

I am told that Angus MacMillan, the Chair of Storas, has commenced the first stage of a libel action against Calum MacMillan.

The grounds appear to be that Calum has claimed that Angus has profited personally from his position as Chair of Storas, and with particular reference to the ongoing wind power disagreement/dispute.

No doubt this will be a very entertaining process - at least for those not directly affected - and it will undoubtedly touch on the issues of fish farm leases; unsigned agreements; conflicts of interest; the role of a shadow director; that directors of Storas have been acting with probity in every situation; and acting for the benefit of the community as a whole.

In the interim, given the obvious conflict of interest, Angus will have to be kept away from anything to do with Calum dealings with Storas, and the other directors and staff will have to do their utmost to maintain the Chinese walls.

As soon as copies of the documentation are available, I'll post them here.

"War is a continuation of diplomacy using other means." Carl von Clausewitz

South Uist - what can be done?

The business relationship between Heb Energy and Storas has totally collapsed, with the deliberate release of confidential, leading to adverse - and very personalised - media comment.

As with many things, there are often other underlying issues about all these matters, but why are many Uisteach thinking fondly of the old estate owners, compared to what they see today? Why are so many telling me that they cannot raise their heads above the parapet for fear of real or perceived retribution?


------

Huw Francis
Chief Executive
Storas Uibhist
Bornish
Isle of South Uist
HS8 5SA

9th August 2010

Dear Huw

Thank you for your letter dated 6th August 2010. There are issues regarding the letter which concern me greatly. These are namely;

• You hand delivered a copy of the letter to me at my house in Bornish on the evening of Friday 6th August.
• On Saturday 7th August, I was informed that a copy of the letter had been issued to all the members of SnBM.
• A copy of the letter was sent by recorded delivery on Saturday 7th August.
• My permission was not sought before this commercially sensitive letter was made public, although you had the opportunity to do so, when hand delivering it. You also have my mobile number, telephone number & email address. Who authorised this to be done?
• The Directors of the estate were not consulted before the letter was made public.
• The Directors of the estate were not given a copy of the letter before it was made public.
• To date, no other matter of a commercially sensitivity nature has been made available to all members simultaneously. Who authorised this change in procedure?
• At our meeting on Thursday 5th August, you (Huw) were quite clear on the following;
  • Community Members are members of SnBM.
  • The Directors are accountable to the members on SnBM matters
  • The members are not members of South Uist Estates.
  • SnBM and South Uist Estates are two separate organisations.
  • SnBM holds all the shares in South Uist Estates.
  • The Directors are not accountable to members regarding South Uist Estate matters.

The above meant that when I asked you about what leases have been granted by the Directors of South Uist Estates and what standard securities over assets have been granted by Directors. (This was in order to compare commercial terms with my own proposals). You replied that the Directors of South Uist Estate are not answerable to the membership for their actions, because they are members of SnBM and you are a member of SnBM.

9. All estate dealings of a commercially sensitive nature must now be dealt with in the same manner, past & present. I look forward to viewing all the information on all leases, bank loans obtained by the estate, all standard securities granted by the estate and all commercial contracts entered into by the estate, being sent to all the members, in the same manner as you dealt with my commercially sensitive proposal.
10. You seem to have forgotten that I am effectively an ‘inward investor’ to the economy in Uist. Simply because I live locally should not mean that you are free to treat me in this shabby and unprofessional manner.

The way in which this matter is being handled by the estate serves to underline the unprofessional approach, which we have come to expect. If you fail to understand the most basic concept of ‘commercial sensitivity’ then all your dealings must be in constant jeopardy.

It is clear that you personally failed to apply for the grid connection on behalf of your employer and are trying every method to cover up this failure. My development will not be put at risk simply because you were incompetent.

I insist that this letter should be posted onto the Storas’ website by Tuesday 10th August 2010.

I made you an offer on 17th February 2010 and I have yet to receive a reply. It is noticeable that the Chairman has chosen not to attend any meetings with me to date.

I urge Angus to attend the forthcoming meeting on Wednesday 11th August 2010 at 11.00am, which we agreed on last Thursday.

Considering that the estate is being offered £150million, in return for very little, you have an unusual approach to dealing with the whole issue. Your actions to date do not appear to have been in the best interests of your employer or the estate, to secure the deal which will ensure the estate’s future.

I await your reply by 9.00pm tomorrow.

Yours sincerely


Calum MacMillan

NIMBY's have your say.....

It only took a few minutes before some of those who opposed all the Lewis wind turbines removed their heads from their derrierres and looked out to sea, to look at the possible site of the offshore wind power they supported*.  Until this week.

Complete the following sentence

I really support renewable energy and think it is a good thing, but we don't need onshore wind power, when the real resource is at sea......

The site lies on the ley lines between my house and the grant giving departments in the Scottish Government.  My plans for mass producing Gaelic surfing gnomes will bring jobs, prosperity, tourists, a Gaelic language plan for surfing gnomes and the value of my house will all be affected if the turbines are erected and I don't get my grant.

Further submissions welcome.....

* Those who genuinely and sincerely opposed the plans have my respect.  They are and were, however, the minority.

A new big windfarm for Lewis?

Yes, probably, maybe.

When I get a few moments later this week when I have much more time to pontificate whilst spending quality hours with the family, I'll give my take on how this proposal and the study on peat bogs should actually have knitted together for the benefit of the islands.

As I said at the time and was shot down by those who didn't listen.

I'll say it again, hopefully more clearly and with fewer vested interests putting the boot in, and I hope it provokes a proper debate, rather than just knee jerks.

Offshore wind

Good news or dull news that the Government have announced the possible locations for offshore wind farms off the Hebrides?

A bit of both, as far as I am concerned.

It is good that certain areas have been ring fenced as 'possibles', as it clearly delimits the 'not acceptable' areas, which was a policy decision that was sorely lacking in previous rounds of decision influencing by Ministers.

The bad news is two fold.

The areas defined are so large as to be nothing more than splodges on the map of areas not ruled out for any other reasons.

Secondly, the technology doesn't yet exist to exploit these areas, and having spoken to the operators of wind farms in the very shallow waters of the North sea off Denmark, I know just how vast the challenges they face are. Move into the teeth of Atlantic Gales and it is a infinitely more difficult challenge, and one that is likely to be unachievable for the foreseeable future. Although I will be delighted to eat my words.

Next month, the Government plan to announce that North Uist will probably be be able to produce enough energy to power Western Europe from the innovative Pixie Dust harvesting competition they are launching.

Hot air

The situation with SSE and Storas over the provision of a cable connection to a community wind power project in Uist is despicable, and SSE require to be taken to task over the whole episode.

Except, there is more to this than meets the eye. Much more, and potentially a scandalous amount more.

Just why were Storas so up in arms about the offer to another small energy generator, that they threw around accusation of lack of planning permission, unfairness and general malfeasance on the part of everyone else?

Senior levels of SSE management have been lobbied by senior (now ex-)Government Ministers including Jim Murphy, apparently through contacts arranged by former Energy Minister and now advisor to Storas, Brian Wilson.

I am led to believe that a director of Storas has been in active negotiations with a merchant bank about the possibility of funding his own private windfarm, and that the award of capacity to the third party meant that the director's scheme was not going to progress (at least not until the technical constraints in Skye were resolved).

No doubt these negotiations were fully disclosed, as a potential conflict of interest, to the other directors of Storas so that there was no suggestion that the position of director was being (mis)used to obtain information that could give him benefit.

But the interesting, intriguing, elements don't end there.

One of the principal partners in Warburgs, who is involved (on the periphery or perhaps closer?) of the director's planned deal was none other than one of the former shareholders in South Uist Estates who did so well from the buy-out deal. I might have the name wrong, but it may be Mr Racine (sp?) appears to be Mr David Ruck Kenne Esq.*, but I have no doubt that others can clarify this.

Anyone who acts as a director or any company knows there is a huge responsibility to ensure probity in all one's dealings. everyone who deals with public money knows there is an equal, if not greater, onus.

A director of a company funded by public money has a double responsibility and must deal with public scrutiny to ensure that their actions are above any hint of impropriety. The ball is firmly in their court to substantively refute any suggestions to the contrary.

* Thanks to anon for the correction and update.

The Pairc Trust

With the community representatives on the Trust at loggerheads with the Landlord, Barry Lomas, and with recent accusations and counter-accusations flying around, I was grateful for some documents that reached me recently, and to which I will be giving detailed consideration shortly.

I looked carefully at the Pairc Trust website and was interested to note that the footer reads:

Copyright (c) 2009 Pairc.co.uk. All rights reserved.

So who owns pairc.co.uk?

A quick look at whois.co.uk produced an astonishing answer:

Domain name:
pairc.co.uk

Registrant:
BJY Lomas

Registrant type:
UK Sole Trader

Registrant's address:
Lomas
14 Offchurch Lane Radford Semele
Leamington Spa
CV31 1TN
Unknown
United Kingdom

Registrar:
Easily Limited t/a easily.co.uk [Tag = WEBCONSULTANCY]

URL: http://www.easily.co.uk

Relevant dates:
Registered on: 20-Jan-2000
Renewal date: 20-Jan-2012
Last updated: 04-Mar-2010

WTF is going on???

Why do the parties seems to be playing at being opponents at each others throats when there appears to collusion between the parties, not just in the simple matter of the website, but in apparently secret deals behind closed doors which apparently seek to benefit some of the Trustees interests and the sellers interest in a mutually beneficial way? (More on this to follow)

As a charitable trust, the Trustees have to show an even higher standard of probity than company directors, but the public in the Pairc area need to be make any decisions in the full knowledge of the full facts. And the politicians need an even higher level of knowledge before public funds and public approval are bestowed on the deal.

Of course, I may be wrong, and I will happily publicise any further information that may shine light on the nature of the dealings, if I have got the wrong end of the stick.

Wave power

The plans for wave power announced today are exciting, innovative, and long overdue, and hold the prospect of potentially great direct and indirect benefits for Scotland.

It is fantastic to see the Government taking such a proactive approach towards wave power, and the machines will literally be tested to destruction in one of the most difficult areas of sea.

If even one of these devices can live up to its promise, then the possibilities for marine energy start to become real, and have the possibility of coming to fruition much earlier than expected.

Having had a very minor involvement with the Pelamis 'snake' project which was built in Arnish, I think it holds great promise as a possible winner.

However, the downside is that the plans to test the snake off the coast of Lewis must surely be being moved back (if not cancelled) while the company concentrate on the Pentland Firth.

The renewable energy debate moves on apace, with the options changing fairly rapidly. However, the technologies have yet to prove themselves, and the drop-off of conventional energy production is still looming, leaving a potential energy shortage on the horizon and looming closer.

Today's announcement is a huge and very welcome step in the right direction.

Eishken wind farm

I am really pleased to see that this has been given approval by Jim Mather, although his bathetic comment almost makes me want to cry or throw something through the computer screen:

"The study the Scottish Government published last January showed that there could be further renewable energy development in the Western Isles. This could just be the start."

Preceded only by the incredible:

"Since the first proposals for a wind farm on Lewis were put forward, I have maintained that the Western Isles must be able to play its part in harnessing and benefitting (sic) from our vast green energy potential. Today, we are making that reality."

FFS, if you are going to tell a lie, make it a big f'ing whopper!

Now the inter-connector and cabling need to be resolved, and as per Beauly-Denny undergrounding doesn't seem to be a matter for Government, which is - in my view - unacceptable.

Those who supported the application will be wearily glad; those who opposed will be livid, not just for the application itself, but for the implications for other applications.

And what does the press release from our MP and MSP say, given they will have been told about this a few days in advance?

---

I've quickly read through the Consent letter and I'm pleased to see that most (all?) of the concerns were fully addressed by the conditions that the Comhairle recommended (paras 42 onwards), which I think just shows that the hard work the Officers and the Committee put into the applications was an excellent piece of work, and one I remain very proud of having been invovled in.

However, para 54 refuses consent for 6 turbines, which seems completely contrary to the Beauly-Denny stance of "I don't have the power to...." and concurs exactly with what I blogged yesterday about Ministerial powers.

(Back to work, I'll read the rest later)

Mather unplugged

At the weekend I was speaking to another person who had been a very strong and vocal supporter of wind farms in the Western Isles, and like me he was totally disillusioned with the theory and practice of the Scottish Government energy policy.

I have been particularly bemused by the claim by Jim Mather, restated today, that the Government could not force the Beauly-Denny line to be undergrounded.

At the time that the various windfarm applications came to the Council, we were clearly told that the Council could impose any conditions they saw fit, and that the developers could either challenge them as being unreasonable, or accept them (or walk away). For that reasons a large number of mitigation measures were insisted upon, including undergrounding part of the overhead lines, especially around Barvas.

We were also clearly told that when the application went to Government for a decision, then Government could still impose, modify or remove any conditions that they saw fit. This was stated at the public meetings by the Civil Servants and made clear to us in discussions with the Government.

Obviously, they don't want to do that if they can, and it was clear that they would either be major decisions - for instance a big block of turbines not being allowed - or trivial matters - such as amending membership of one of the working groups.

It appears that there has been a fundamental change in the interpretation of the Planning Legislation leaving the Government (a their own desire) with a simple Yes/No option, and all the power to decide upon terms and conditions with the Councils.

Is this better?

No, I don't think so, as the ability of the Government to satisfy wider strategic objectives or simply ensure consistency by amending individual applications can only be to the ultimate benefit of the process.

What we have here is a piecemeal approach of dealing with each issue as it arises, irrespective of how it fits into the bigger picture, and that doesn't benefit anyone.

It is all very cackhanded and bumbling, and does nothing to dispel the impression of a very difficult decision avoided, and the easiest decision taken without sensible justification.

An energy policy in search of logic...

Can anyone give me any logical and rational explanation of the SNP energy policy?

I tried to influence one, by attempting to bridge the different shades of the spectrum, but sanity was discarded in favour of meaningless and ill-though out platitudes. And these are coming back to bite with a vengeance.

Today saw the long awaited, long foreshadowed, and expensively prevaricated decision to approve the Beauly to Denny power line.

The decision in itself makes sense and I approve of it, but the context is so perverse that it almost defies belief.

The good news (1 cheer) is that it will be the basis for extending the power network to the Western Isles which gives the possibility of the early-stage wave power developments having some chance of coming to fruition and being commerically viable, irrespective of the OFGEM charging regime.

Where it all goes horribly wrong for the SNP is that having tried to play the anti-wind farm card in the Western Isles and elsewhere, they are also simultaneously granting permission for extensive developments in less commercially viable locations. Whilst stressing their green credentials by promoting renewable energies, they are also allowing 200ft pylons to run through the centre of Scotland.

It looks, smell and tastes like they have tried to face both ways at once, by trying to avoid taking a position until they realised that they had no option but to do so, when they then tried to avoid responsibility (cf Sunday ferries and letters from the Churches).

Actually what they have done is to piss off both sides in this debate by their attempts to be two-faced and the attempts to avoid the question:

• Pro- campaigners are appalled at the delays and refusals of large schemes with huge community benefit
• Anti- campaigners are now appalled at the permission for the towers and for the implications for large scale developments in the Highlands and Islands

Most people can guess where I stand (or more accurately stood, as the debate has moved on), and what I particularly take umbrage at is that many of the key reasons for approval of Beauly-Denny were ignored when it came to the Lewis Wind Power project. Some of these were hard fought for, and approval of the LWP scheme was only recommended with these conditions as part of the package.

They have no-one to blame but themselves, as they were warned about this on many ocassions, but the sheer lack of understanding of the issues at local and national level was startling. Lack of understanding and an unwillingness to hear other arguements.

I'd like comments on this post to avoid the detail of the LWP scheme which I used as an example, and concentrate on the wider policy implications eg a cable into Gravir is now much more likely and there will also be an incentive to develop mixed renewable schemes in the Highlands and Islands.

"Expert" team

You just can't make it up, can you....

Bosses from some of Scotland's main energy companies are to advise the Scottish government on achieving its climate change targets.

The experts include:

• Ian Marchant (Chair), Scottish and Southern Energy
• Nick Horler, ScottishPower
• Gordon Grant, Ineos (Grangemouth oil refinery)
• Nicola Shaw, FirstGroup
• Brian Souter, Stagecoach

This new group brings together a wide range of expertise to examine in detail the actions needed across Scotland to meet our ambitious climate change targets.

Yes, but, with the Chair having such heavy vested interests in certain courses of action, is the credibility of the Group (Committee? Panel?) not already compromised.

As Alex Salmond says:

There should be no doubt climate change is the greatest environmental threat we face.

Can't argue too much with that, but that surely calls for decisive and urgent action, by the Government, and not the creation of another talking shop to confirm the vested interests of various industry representatives.

There's no timescale for action; no detail of when and how reports will be made; and no details of their remit. These may come out in time, but the lack of time is the key issue.

Next week, the Corleone family are advising the Government on crime policy.

Power, politics and policies

I lay in the bath on Sunday night re-reading the Report of the Public Local Inquiry into the proposed windfarm in Eishken.

With a glass of wine in one hand and the jacuzzi bath bubbling around me, I was perfectly relaxed.

Until, that was, I read the Report and this week's Economist magazine.

The Report is all things to all men - maybe aye and maybe no - and is aimless in its attempts for balance and an objective review of the evidence and the submissions.

Everyone was given a fair hearing, and (virtually) all the evidence was accepted. Meaning anything and nothing to everyone. Time and planning applications have moved on, and we are still no nearer or clearer about the acceptability or otherwise of large-scale wind farm developments on the islands.

Lingerbay II anyone? Which is something we all wanted to avoid.

But the bigger policy issue was in an excellent Economist article called "The looming electricity crunch" which clearly sets out the impending problems we will be facing.

Renewables will never bridge the gap - that's a given -until the technology moves on dramatically, but the underlying imbalance between demand and supply highlights the over-dependence on a free-market solution.

The Economist was advocating a rush to nuclear as a potential solution, as was Tony Blair after he prevaricated so long that every other option was ruled out, but now it certainly appears that there is no solution that is going to bridge the gap; other than reliance on supplies from Russia.

We are all going to have to face the fact that there are going to be major energy shortages in the next decade as a direct result of the failure of the Labour Government to take any decisions, instead (mis)placing their faith in the free market to meet demand.

There is an urgent need for long-term strategic decision making, both conventional and renewable, and for new structures to encourage security of supply. That can probably only come about with major changes in the way in which the energy companies operate, and with more state intervention in the infrastructure.

This country is burdened with regulation for the sake of regulation, which abrogates responsibility to quangos and believes that the free-market must solve everything. Our politicians then deny any correlation between that and the inability to get things done. We are not as bad as Ethiopia, but we get close.

One only needs to look at the farce over the Beauly-Denny power line and the need for Ofgem to encourage bidding for the electricity infrastructure to understand that politicians seem unable to take and implement necessary long-term strategic decisions. The trivial and stupid stuff is easy for them; but deciding yea or nay to what sort of power supplies we will have in ten years time is too difficult for them.

When the lights threaten to go out, I'll be throwing the nearest politician onto the fire.

WTF was the delay?

From page 1 of the document:

Report by Miss Janet M McNair, a Reporter appointed by the Scottish Ministers

· Case reference: IEC/3/134
· Application by Beinn Mhor Power Ltd for consent under section 36 of the
· Electricity Act 1989 for a wind farm and associated infrastructure
· Site Address: Muaitheabhal, Eisgein Estate, Isle of Lewis
· Date of pre-inquiry meeting 7 March 2008
· Dates of inquiry: 13-21 May 2008
· Date of this report: September 2008

Look at the document properties:

Last printed: 25 August 2008 20:24:00

Does this mean that the Government have been sitting on this for nearly a year???

During which time the scheme has been dramatically modified, amended, cut into pieces and put back together in a different order, whilst all the time someone has been sitting on this.

Great.

Restores ones faith in the ability of the public sector to move with all the speed and athleticism of an arthritic hippo in concrete wellies.

Approval for the Eishken wind scheme

According to Hebrides News, the much delayed Public Inquiry has recommended approval for a scheme that has now been superceded by events.

As someone who gave evidence to the PLI, I want to study the report carefully before making any further comment, but as the applicant dryly notes:

“The report is very interesting and very fair but it is now of only academic interest.”

Update 7/8: I've read the Report, carefully, and I need to read it again, even more carefully.

My initial reaction is that the Report can be read either way you wish, giving the Minister complete leeway to make whatever decision he wants. So neither approved nor rejected.

Fat chance, fat man

You may have seen the ridiculous attack on the Galson community wind farm proposals by the enormously enormous and self-important Murdo "Esso" Morrison, who is seeking to protect his holiday home and has enlisted the usual suspects in creating another pressure group out of three or four of his mates.

Well, it looks like some naughty boys and girls have been helping his campaign.

Not that I am encouraging anyone to despoil the petition, but there will be prizes.....

Update Wednesday: The names of 'supporters' are being removed whilst iffy double signatures are still being allowed to stay. Barely a local to be seen in the list of signatures.