25 July 2006

Sakchai was the lucky one

SADLY there are many with perhaps even better reasons to be given the right to stay in the UK than Sakchai. However, they are not so lucky to have the Shetland islanders' support.

Early morning grabs of "failed" asylum seekers - often those with real fears of persecution, for example those who have fled Congo DRC, are right now being deported to an uncertain future.

Government decision-making on asylum claims according to the UNCHR is woefully biased and inadequate and valid warrrants of arrest and other documents submitted to the Home Office to prove persecution are quite often dismissed out of hand.

I invite your readers to visit www.ncadc.org.uk - the National Coalition Against Deportation Campaign - to learn more about how our government fails those who come to our shores seeking safety.

Marion Walter
Canterbury
Kent
Marionwalter1@aol.com




15 July 2006

Let's be open about Smyril

I AM concerned at your report that the SIC are thinking of investing more in the Smyril Line. So far as we know this company is loss-making and with the huge Norröna to maintain it is difficult to see how it can become profit-earning in the near future.

This does not look an attractive proposition and an equity or even a loan investment will be decidedly risky. I know that it is claimed that there is a contribution to the Shetland economy but putting money into a weak company cannot be a way to secure this benefit which in any case has not been quantified in recent times.

Besides an investment in Smyril is a permanent move as it is not saleable. I am not aware that there is a market for its shares. If there is a case for supporting Smyril in the interestsof the community then some form of subsidy would be a more appropriate choice as it would balance the cost with the benefit. If Smyril were to cease operations, become bankrupt and cease calling then the subsidy would cease, whereas an investment in shares is lost completely.

Mr Cluness, whom I have met once, and was impressed by his approach to Shetland affairs, has claimed that this is a community investment and therefore the SIC councillors must decide. If this is so then a completely open discussion should precede any investment rather than a decision be made behind closed doors. Such sensitive discussions have not previously been available for scrutiny on the SIC minutes web site.

In any such investment proposal in industry the shareholders would have to be fully informed with all relevant information given to them including full accounts of the target company and its projections for the future. If Mr Cluness is really serious when he states ".it is the community that has an investment in Smyril Line." then he should follow the principals of a publicly quoted company and disclose information sufficient for thecommunity to judge the decision made.

An important aspect that needs to be looked at is to carry out a critical evaluation of the Smyril plan for the new route pattern. The Scrabster call is not going to transform Smyril's profitability, although adding in a call at Lerwick on the way might slightly improve the revenue. By itself there must be some doubt. Where will the passengers come from? Scrabster is about 270 miles from Glasgow and Edinburgh and a seven to eight hour drive. Rosyth to Lerwick would be better offering an alternative route toShetland, Faroe and Iceland with a large catchment area to work on.

I hope there will be an openness in the council's debate on this issue.

John Jamieson Blanche
Daldrishaig
Aberfoyle
Stirling
john.blanche@zetnet.co.uk




13 July 2006

Smokehouse smokescreen

WHAT a ridiculous smokescreen the parent company has thrown up as an excuse to shut down the Shetland Smokehouse operation.

Are they being forced to trim their cloth, and if so, are they applying the scissors in the right area?

In short, no. The Shetland Smokehouse has many an award winning product range and for the parent company not to see the potential for development is laughable. At a time when they have to use business sense and imagination to see their company grow they have just shut the door on the only area that can save them.

Shetland Smokehouse, through the parent company, had access to reasonably priced herring and mackerel as well as bycatch haddock etc, so to blame the price of salmon for the company's demise is silly and lacking in imagination.

Brash sponsorship and unnecessary extravagance should have been the first areas to cut back, not the loss of 17 jobs in Skeld.

Colin Pearson
Colinpearson1@aol.com  




11 July 2006

Who needs an interconnector?

I CAME across Pete Bevington's article on the proposed wind turbines for Shetland and feel that I need to correct a few points.

He states: "the project cannot go ahead without a sub-sea connector to allow the power to be exported to the British market." It is also worth pointing out that the project cannot go ahead without the sub-sea connector because power needs to be imported from the National Grid to make the wind turbines work in the first place. The incoming power is rectified and used to energise the electromagnetic fields within the synchronous generator sets.

The capacity factor of 30 per cent on the British mainland is another myth that needs careful scrutiny. Most people do not realise that a modern wind turbine has two generators.

(http://www.windpower.org/en/tour/wtrb/stator.htm)

The main generator cuts in at a wind speed approaching gale force (16m/s), and drops out in storm conditions at around 25m/s. The inline
mini-generator's capacity is rated at one eighth of the plated capacity of the main generator because a half cubed equals one eighth. This
mini-generator starts to generate at its full capacity at 8m/s and continues to do so until the wind speed reaches 16m/s. This is when the main generator cuts in.

Sadly, for windfarm operators the latter occurs for just 5 per cent of the year so the mini-generator operates for most of the time. If we generously assume that the wind blows at 8m/s for 80 per cent of the year (10 per cent) at one eighth capacity and 5 per cent of the year at full capacity (5 per cent) we can see that the maximum capacity of any mainland based wind turbine is 15 per cent.

So where does the 30 per cent come from? That's easy, the industry simply divides the annual total output by the maximum theoretical output generated over six months. In other words it divides the true answer by a half.

Interpolating, we can assume that the true capacity factor in Shetland is just 25 per cent and not the oft quoted 50 per cent so the interconnector cable does not have to carry anywhere close to the capacity first mooted and will, of course, be redundant for half the time.

The DTI website that shows annual outputs from all forms of generation including wind turbines does not give actual outputs but calculates them on the basis that the capacity factor is 30 per cent or greater. It is rather odd that the industry is so coy about releasing these numbers if they are supposed to be close to those calculated. One can only assume that the numbers are more than a half of those calculated above.

Recent press reports suggest that Scotland is on course to realise the targets two years early but in reality, we will need to wait another 8 to 10 years.

A piece by Ruaridh Nicoll in the Guardian describes just how dirty Shetland's electricity is and how the pathetic attempts to bring wind
turbines to Shetland will probably end in tears.

(http://www.guardian.co.uk/renewable/Story/0,,1800342,00.html)

In the article, Alistair Cooper, head of development services at SIC, laments that no one is looking at wave and tidal energy, the obvious choice. He then goes and spoils it all by saying that he would be 'delighted' if any of the Scottish companies building new wave or tidal machines wanted to test them in local waters, but he is not about to go looking for them.

Although his job title suggests that that is precisely what he should be doing, he need not look further than GENTEC venturi, the only
non-intermittent renewable energy system in the world today that will generate all of Shetland's electricity from tidal stream with or without an interconnector.

Perhaps he should read this excellent letters' page more often.

Kind regards,
Andrew H Mackay
Greenheat Systems Limited
Glenaldie
TAIN
Ross-shire
IV19 1NE
www.greenheating.com

Previous letters on the same issue can be found in our achieve at:
www.shetland-news.co.uk/archives/pages/news%20stories/2006/01_2006/january_letters.htm




10 July 2006

What an amazing story

I'D JUST like to congratulate the supporters of Sakchai. What an amazing story, with a positive ending.

I had a very brief introduction to the situation from Arlene and Davie Gardner and their sons who used my internet café a couple of times while they were here on holiday.

The dedication to the cause and the concern for Sakchai was empowering. If I'm locked away unjustly I want these people on my side!

Well done to all of those involved.

I wish Sakchai a happy and prosperous future. Look after your Shetland family mate, they're all champions.

Thanks to the Gardners for giving me a small insight into something important a long, long way away. (The tip was totally unnecessary!)

Cheers

Tim Harrison
Bicheno
Tasmania
Australia
swellcafe@bigpond.com.au



10 July 2006

Help make a difference

I WOULD like to draw readers' attention to the fast-approaching National Cruelty-Free Week, and would respectfully request that you check the labels on all cosmetics, toiletries and household cleaning products to ensure the rabbit logo is there before buying.

An animal dies unnecessarily every three seconds in a lab within the EU alone.

BUAV {The British Union for Against Vivisection} carefully scrutinises all products and manufacturers before awarding the logo, to ensure that no animal suffered to bring us the product. A list of approved manufacturers and further information can be found on their website - www.buav.org

PETA also produce an approved list - www.peta.org.uk

Also, checking the labels on food products to ensure the country of origin of meat can help. "Produced within the EU" is not necessarily a guarantee that the animal was raised and slaughtered to higher standards - conditions can be dire in some of the countries joining the EU recently, where the animal welfare regulations are not yet enforced.

In this modern day and age, there is no need for any form of animal cruelty to exist, such as laboratory testing, trapping, clubbing, harpooning or factory or intensive farming, but unfortunately it continues. We as consumers can make a difference, by choosing where and upon what we spend our money, and by joining organisations such as BUAV or PETA to become numbers, demanding justice and fair treatment for animals.

Please help make a difference.
Thank You

Karen Angus
karen.angus@btinternet.com