Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Power to the people in wind farm co-op project

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 17 January 2009
A SCOTLAND-wide co-operative could be established next year to allow people to take a stake in, and earn money from, green energy developments.

Four local energy co-ops have been set up in Scotland and three in England and a national organisation is now being proposed.

It is felt that money from the Caledonia co-op will help some community-based renewable schemes get off the ground and
the credit crunch will not deter potential investors.

Many developers provide benefits to people living near wind farms by paying into community funds to assist local projects.

Other areas fund and own their own small-scale wind farms through trusts, with profits ploughed back into local schemes. In 2004, the Isle of Gigha Heritage Trust established Gigha Renewable Energy, which runs the first community owned wind farm to be connected to the UK national grid.

The co-op model is being promoted by Energy4All, which helped develop the first wind farm co-operative in Scotland, at Boyndie in Banffshire in 2006, and has helped set up others at Ben Aketil on Skye, Kilbraur, in Sutherland, and Fort Augustus in the Great Glen.

More than 700 people invested £750,000 in the Boyndie co-op, with stakes as small as £250. More than £800,000 was raised at Ben Aketil, while the Kilbraur Wind Energy Co-operative, which originally aimed to raise £250,000 from shares costing as little as £1, eventually pulled in more than £1 million. The Great Glen co-op raised £1.3 million.

A feasibility study into a national co-op will be completed in March and it is hoped it can be set up by the end of next year.

Mark Jennison, development director Scotland for Energy4All, said so far co-ops had been connected to specific wind farm sites. However, it is hoped Caledonia would offer a broad portfolio of renewable energy projects.

"We found that people heard about the co-ops but they don't have a particular project in their locality. A lot of people in the Central Belt are keen to help projects and invest in them but they don't have a renewable project on their doorstep.

"We also have projects in remote areas where there is such a small population that you could not have a successful co-op.

"What we want to do is bring these two things together and create a Scotland-wide co-op where anyone can own a stake in a portfolio of renewable energy projects without having to buy shares in a big commercial company."

He said the credit crunch may even encourage people to consider investing in these projects: "We thought the credit crunch might affect people but it's not proved to be that way.

"The Kilbraur share offer was opened at the start of the credit crunch and it raised over £1 million. People may feel their money is safer in this kind of share offer. They are linked to the performance of the wind farm, so as long as the wind blows it should be a pretty good investment."

He said returns are not fixed but on the existing Scottish co-ops, a minimum of 6.5 per cent is guaranteed, with an expected average of 10 per cent if the project performs as expected.

"What we find a typical investor wants is something not too risky but that gives a better return than you might get in a savings account, while supporting ethical projects."

So far only one energy company, Falck Renewables, has signed up to the community co-op idea. Mr Jennison said: "Falck feels that having an element of community ownership is a good move.

"Not all developers see it that way. We have talked to every wind farm developer in Scotland. There has been a lot of interest but commitment has been slow, although I think that will change."

Charles Williams, Falck's business development director, said: "We got involved (in co-ops] because it's helpful to get wider understanding and acceptance of wind farms. We recognise there is an impact on the landscape when we install a wind farm and we want to give back something to the community and share some of the benefits. As people have become more comfortable with the concept we have seen more investment."

But Eric Dodd, national projects manager for Community Energy Scotland, which has helped set up more than 20 community renewables projects, is cautious.

"If it is a source of funding that can be used but ensures that projects are still owned and controlled by the local community, it can be a good idea. However, the devil is in the detail.

"Our concern, as with all funding, is that the control rests with the community, because they are doing it for a wider social purpose, to benefit everyone, rather than to benefit individual investors."

BACKGROUND

The four local co-ops set up so far are:


BOYNDIE AIRFIELD, ABERDEENSHIRE: The seven-turbine, 2MW project was approved in January 2004 and work started on the £10 million-£15 million scheme in June 2005 and is said to supply enough energy for 8,500 homes.

BEN AKETIL, SKYE: The majority of the development is on the MacLeod Estate and this land is crofted by the Feorlig Crofting Community. There are ten turbines, each producing 2.3MW of power, enough to supply around 14,000 homes.

GREAT GLEN: The Millennium wind farm is located in the hills north of Invergarry and southwest of Fort Augustus and Invermoriston. Sixteen 2.5MW turbines produce electricity to supply around 22,400 homes.

It is estimated that the wind farm could displace up to 84,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide each year which would otherwise have been produced by a power station burning fossil fuel.

KILBRAUR, BRORA: The wind farm is located in the Kilbraur area of Strath Brora, Sutherland. Nineteen 2.5MW turbines supply electricity to around 27,000 homes, saving up to 107,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide each year.





Page 1 of 1

 
1

,

17/01/2009 01:00:56
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
2

nabodican,

Rural Scotland 17/01/2009 09:14:19
This is pure greed and spin. These people are deliberately driving up the cost of electricity at a time when fuel poverty is a major issue and old people are freezing to death because they cant afford to heat their homes.
As for the claims about how many homes these monstrosities power - absolute nonsense.
"enough to supply around 14,000 homes."
Considering there are not 14,000 people on Skye never mind 14,000 homes, just how do they work this out.
The examples given claim to power nearly 72,000 homes,
where exactly are they supposed to be.
When you add up these claims for the hundreds of windfarms built and in planning, they claim to power more homes than there are in Scotland, yet they cant exist without our coal and nukes.
Stop this windfarm madness now by removing the subsidies.
3

Toast,

17/01/2009 10:35:27
What a joke,nevermind green power lets build another runway at heathrow.
4

Greenheatman,

http://www.greenheating.com 17/01/2009 11:30:12
What fools! These idiots that are investing in not fit for purpose wind turbines are assuming that there will be no technology in the future that will supersede these ineffectual machines that need fossil or nuclear grid electricity supplied to them to make them work in the first place!

The Scottish Government is going to be asked to vote for 'clean coal' thermal power stations so that the 85%:15% ratio can be maintained. This means that we we need to build coal fired power stations to get at least 85% of the electricity on the grid at any moment in time - to ensure a nice stable synchronous supply of electricity that has to be induced on the windings of the alternators in the nacelles of these monsters.

Wind turbines are, in effect, electricity amplifiers. Rubbish signal in, rubbish (amplified) signal out maxim applies. Failure to supply a clean synchronous signal onto their windings means the the amplified rubbish spiky signal is amplified and loaded onto the grid resulting in a chain reaction leading to a total grid collapse.

These miserable scenario occurs when the fossil or nuclear thermal output ratio drops below 85%.

Clearly, renewable energy is not working if more and more fossil fuel stations need to be built to maintain the 85:15% ratio which is why I sent my Gentec WATS proposal to all of our MSPs - and has been, in the main, ignored because, like most people, the trust the word of these self-proclaimed experts who are really just renewable energy salesmen with a dodgy line in patter.

5

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 17/01/2009 11:30:27
No doubt all the supporters of nuclear energy would rather forget about wind power, and eagerly look forward to the day when every home will have its own micro-nuclear power source, or is it a case of NIMBY?
6

Libertarian!,

17/01/2009 14:46:05
This nonsense about so-called 'climate change' is all about ways of making new millionaires. The one country on planet earth who needs no nuclear energy or, of the monstrisity of ugly wind farms blighting its beautiful
landsscape, IS my native country of Scotland.
We have the greatest natural resource of fresh water on the planet to provide more than enough hydro energy for all our needs. In future years to come, like oil today,it's almost certain, many wars will be fought over.
7

Upbeat,

17/01/2009 16:18:50
Greenheatman.

As has been pointed out many times in these boards ....

If your Gentec idea was both a sound and a profitable engineering option then you would never have found it so difficult to convince people to invest in it.

It appears that it's not just Scottish politicians,that disappoint you, but that no one else in the power generation field who might possess the required level of engineering expertise is sufficiently impressed by Gentec either. No one, anywhere, over these many years has offered to stump up sufficient funds for full scale trial. This should tell you something important, about the engineering prospectus of your concept. In the face of this hard truth your continued indignation about this remains a bit hard to take.
8

Greenheatman,

TAIN 17/01/2009 17:28:37
Upbeat said "It appears that it's not just Scottish politicians,that disappoint you, but that no one else in the power generation field who might possess the required level of engineering expertise is sufficiently impressed by Gentec either. No one, anywhere, over these many years has offered to stump up sufficient funds for full scale trial."

What this tells me is that 'engineering expertise' is sadly lacking in the ability to see the futility of generating electricity in real time subject to the vagaries of the weather and tides.

These self same 'engineering experts' who, incidently, are not my peers, are actually advocating building supercritical clean coal plants to provide 'part of the energy mix'.

What this really means is that they have failed to come up with any method of generating secure base-load, load following and peak shaving electricity so the resort to burning another finite fossil fuel because they do not have the necessary intellect to see that we are going nowhere with their puny wind, wave and tidal machines. I have, on the other hand, invented a way of generating all of Scotland's electricity using my brand new invention Gentec WATS which incorporates Gentec venturi and Gentec GWED. It requires no sub-sea cables - perhaps you should be congratulating me instead of your mean minded slurs on my inventiveness.

Yes, I agree they do work intermittently and rely 100% on the national grid to (a)provide sychronous electrcity to make their induction generators work in the first place and (b) to provide 100% back up for when the 'mix' of renewables hit a coincident null.

In any event only about 15% of this spiky worthless electricity can be uploaded onto the grid anyway because to exceed this will result in total grid collapse.
9

Geomac 1,

Scotland 17/01/2009 19:09:57
This is even more garbage and drivel - surely Scotsman writers should engage their brain before writing such nonsense.
At present where we have relatively few "community" wind farm beneficiaries, the concept of electricity consumers subsidising those communities is hidden. However, if every resident of Scotland is to be awarded a "benefit" for wind turbines, then what you inevitably end up with is ALL electricity consumers (who are charged the subsidy - that is ALL of us) contributing to some fund for our mutual benefit??????? This is economics of the madhouse.
In summary what John Ross is saying that we pay more on one front (via wind/renewable subsidy on our electricity bills) in order to benefit from "community" payouts - out of one pocket into the other - BUT with a rake off to the power generating companies.
CRAZY!!!!!!!!!
10

nabodican,

Rural Scotland 17/01/2009 19:58:12
#5 Lachie Todd seems to be under the impression that wind is an alternative to nuclear.
This is a fairly common attitude of the anti nuke brigade, he also suggests that the anti wind power station lobby are NIMBY's.
NIMBY means that you believe in something but you don't want it in your backyard, I would have thought it was fairly obvious from most of the posts here that few believe in the merit of wind as a power source.
Also just because someone is anti wind does not mean they are pro nuke, this is one of the myths that the turbine huggers like to perpetuate.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.