Longannet to close next year,

Denfield Bud

Active member
Messages
3,252
Reaction score
0
Location
Clackmannan
There is no such thing as scottish power . It is Spanish power . Iberdrola . So what if they lose their money making power station ? I feel sorry for the folk that worked there but not for a Spanish utility company .
Iberdrola is that what's on the front gate?
A bit like Virgin East Coast,95% owned by stagecoach?

Your right Doon Rod dosen't help the employees.
 

allan angler

Active member
Messages
1,809
Reaction score
0
Location
Central Scotland
I thougut it was reported in the news/press that they gave a large discount to energy companies down south when joining into the national grid, but did not offer the same to Longanet and Scottish Power,maybe because of carbon regulations.
But they still said no!!!!!!!!
That is why Scottish Power are closing it down.
I think that was right Tom
It was never to do with carbon regulations, longannet got a "no" for one reason...


Purple line= shale gas potential
Blue line = shale oil potential


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

SALMON RUSHDIE

Active member
Messages
1,738
Reaction score
6
Location
BY THE UGIE
The amount of folk in peterhead that has asthma since that place was built has rocketed not so much now but it wasn't always white steam that came out the lum. All the cars in the town were sometimes covered with a dusty soot some mornings .
 

porteouz

Active member
Messages
1,044
Reaction score
7
It was never to do with carbon regulations, longannet got a "no" for one reason...


Purple line= shale gas potential
Blue line = shale oil potential


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It had absolutely nothing to do with that. The increases in carbon emission tax coupled with the unfair transmission charges stations north of the border face is ultimately what done it. The tail end of last year also saw the profit margin in coal start to shrink, it has now got so small that with the charges for carbon and emissions there is no money left.

It was a commercial decision
 
Last edited:

keirstream

Well-known member
Messages
6,889
Reaction score
189
Location
Stirling
Correct

It had absolutely nothing to do with that. The increases in carbon emission tax coupled with the unfair transmission charges stations north of the border face is ultimately what done it. The tail end of last year also saw the profit margin in coal start to shrink, it has now got so small that with the charges for carbon and emissions there is no money left.

It was a commercial decision
And please don't blame any party or government for that ultimate decision to close. Longannet was on borrowed time based on commercial decisions which ultimately made it's continued existence unviable. The failure to develop carbon capture technology , the general move away from fossil fuels (I don't see what cheaper coal has to do with a decision to close, surely it would help the overall G.M. situation?) and the green agenda influencing a shift towards renewables, a move which in this small country alone costs way more in Scotgov subsidies , taxation from all our pockets , than the £40m National Grid connection fee ever would. The £40m fee B.T.W. is, in my opinion, a number plucked out of the air to justify the closure and is not based on any factual cost. In other words, a false flag designed to ease people into acceptance of the inevitable decision. What makes me think that? Have a look at who actually owns the National Grid;

The National Grid is the high-voltage electric power transmission network in Great Britain, connecting power stations and major substations and ensuring that electricity generated anywhere in England, Scotland and Wales can be used to satisfy demand elsewhere. There are also undersea interconnections to northern France (HVDC Cross-Channel), Northern Ireland (HVDC Moyle), the Isle of Man (Isle of Man to England Interconnector), the Netherlands (BritNed) and the Republic of Ireland (EirGrid).

On the breakup of the Central Electricity Generating Board in 1990, the ownership and operation of the National Grid in England and Wales passed to National Grid Company plc, later to become National Grid Transco, and now National Grid plc. In Scotland the grid split into two separate entities, one for southern and central Scotland and the other for northern Scotland, connected by interconnectors to each other. The first is owned and maintained by SP Energy Networks, a subsidiary of Scottish Power, and the other by SSE. However, National Grid plc remains the System Operator for the whole UK Grid.

On the question of which rivers will benefit, I have a simple view on that.
Everything above the intake.
Taking into account the parlous state of the Forth, Teith and Allan over the last 3 seasons though, its going to take more than the closure of Longannet to boost adult returns as there ain't many adults producing smolts to make any significant difference nowadays.:(
 
Last edited:

Gamekeeper

New member
Messages
344
Reaction score
0
I always wondered if the smolts hung around in the forth estuary for a period during acclimatisation and went up and down the estuary with the tide, which if did occur would affect possibly Carron and Avon smolts, and might account for the large numbers of smolts lost in your letter to Sepa.

I suppose the answer would lie in whether smolts were ever sooked in on an incoming tide?
 

keirstream

Well-known member
Messages
6,889
Reaction score
189
Location
Stirling
I always wondered if the smolts hung around in the forth estuary for a period during acclimatisation and went up and down the estuary with the tide, which if did occur would affect possibly Carron and Avon smolts, and might account for the large numbers of smolts lost in your letter to Sepa.

I suppose the answer would lie in whether smolts were ever sooked in on an incoming tide?
Actually Tony, that is quite possible.
Smolts do require around 48hours in brackish water to acclimatise to life in the salt , so a very feasible viewpoint indeed.
The 48 hour period on the West Coast estuaries of Scotland renders smolts totally vulnerable to being hijacked by a huge onslaught of fish farm generated sea lice that take the opportunity to eat the smolts to death with great relish.
At Longannet it just makes them more vulnerable to being sooked in. The hijack by lice comes as they swim in proximity to the Shetland farms.
 

porteouz

Active member
Messages
1,044
Reaction score
7
Tom the actual infrastructure of the grid, ie the lines and substations etc are owned by SSE and SP energy networks but they have nothing to do with what we are talking about. It is NGT who control the Grid and set the charges which generating stations must pay to connect.

The sum of money that has been plucked out of the air has been spoken about for years. Just not in the press.

As for living on borrowed time I am not entirely sure what makes you think that. Longannet has been investing in low emissions technology over the last few years, countless millions spent on fitting a Flue Gas Desulphurisation plant to remove S02, 5 million spent on a combustion improvement project, another few million repairing the boilers to again improve combustion, another couple of million spent on another combustion improvement project all to reduce NOX emissions. There were a couple of projects under way also looking at a technology where ammonia is injected into the furnace to further reduce Nox.

There will be more I've forgot but my point is none of these projects were ran for the fun of it, this money was all spent to satisfy the unrealistic emissions limits imposed on Coal fired power stations. Emission limits that ultimately have closed the station.

The part that really gets me is this isn't the end of it, there are more stations south of the border that will close for similar reasons. Meanwhile new build nukes are getting guaranteed £90 per MW hour as opposed to £30-35 that Longannet charges (base rate), Wind farms are guaranteed generation every time the wind blows at 3 times the cost of a coal fired power station, yet the energy companies are the ones to blame for rising energy costs, boils my blood.
 
Last edited:

Gamekeeper

New member
Messages
344
Reaction score
0
Actually Tony, that is quite possible.
Smolts do require around 48hours in brackish water to acclimatise to life in the salt , so a very feasible viewpoint indeed.
The 48 hour period on the West Coast estuaries of Scotland renders smolts totally vulnerable to being hijacked by a huge onslaught of fish farm generated sea lice that take the opportunity to eat the smolts to death with great relish.
At Longannet it just makes them more vulnerable to being sooked in. The hijack by lice comes as they swim in proximity to the Shetland farms.
It would be interesting to know how far down the Forth Estuary the salmon smolts go on an outgoing tide and likewise how far they would come in on an incoming tide, for example - for the Carron smolts or any of the other rivers further up the system.

I often wondered if the smolts from the Old Forth, Teith, Allan, Devon, etc hugged the coastline on their way out, and if the prevailing wind (which is normally a westerly off the atlantic contributed to more smolts travelling down the north side of the estuary i.e. past Longannet?
 

the dipper

New member
Messages
211
Reaction score
0
Location
east kilbride
Again I will ask the question .Has anybody actually seen with their own eyes, bucket loads ,cart loads or skip loads of smolts or any other fish being removed from longannet .The reason I ask. I put this question to some of my work college's today and none are aware of this at longannet ,nor the intake at loch awe .
 
Last edited:

porteouz

Active member
Messages
1,044
Reaction score
7
Again I will ask the question .Has anybody actually seen with their own eyes, bucket loads ,cart loads or skip loads of smolts or any other fish being removed from longannet .The reason I ask. I put this question to some of my work college's today and none are aware of this at longannet ,nor the intake at loch awe .
Yes, not smolts but plenty of others.
 

Gamekeeper

New member
Messages
344
Reaction score
0
Again I will ask the question .Has anybody actually seen with their own eyes, bucket loads ,cart loads or skip loads of smolts or any other fish being removed from longannet .The reason I ask. I put this question to some of my work college's today and none are aware of this at longannet ,nor the intake at loch awe .
I haven't personally, but know guys who have, who once worked there.

This might be if interest...

Where have all the fish gone? - Conservation Issues - PBSBAC
 

Gamekeeper

New member
Messages
344
Reaction score
0
In what sort of numbers? 10, 100, 1000, Important to realize if significant or not.
I heard the fish kill was a continuous matter at all times of year as abstraction was continuous (every day). They had skips for the fish. I imagine that would equate to a lot of fish.

The fish screen mesh size at longannet (assuming there was a screen and it was actually in place and not removed to avoid cleaning of it), would dictate the size of fish, however as with all fish screens, the cross sectional area of the intake and the abstracted water flow rate dictates the water velocity on the face of the screens (if installed) and therefore determines if fish (of any size get stuck to the screens) and killed anyway.

Sepa have guidelines for maximum intake velocities for fish screens and all new plants need to be designed to meet the regs. Unfortunately longannet was built before those laws began. A loop hole you might say.
 
Last edited:

allan angler

Active member
Messages
1,809
Reaction score
0
Location
Central Scotland
Again I will ask the question .Has anybody actually seen with their own eyes, bucket loads ,cart loads or skip loads of smolts or any other fish being removed from longannet .The reason I ask. I put this question to some of my work college's today and none are aware of this at longannet ,nor the intake at loch awe .
Ill see if i can try and get hold of a picture, i have seen one of a huge salmon that had got caught in the intake that was being held up before It got skipped or something similar


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

keirstream

Well-known member
Messages
6,889
Reaction score
189
Location
Stirling
Accept The Facts

I find it incredible that after posting an official document that admits unequivocally that 5000 salmon are killed each season , and given that the actual kill is obviously greater than admitted, that skeptics continue to ask for proof.
It's pointless continuing to contribute to this thread , really.
 

Gamekeeper

New member
Messages
344
Reaction score
0
I find it incredible that after posting an official document that admits unequivocally that 5000 salmon are killed each season , and given that the actual kill is obviously greater than admitted, that skeptics continue to ask for proof.
It's pointless continuing to contribute to this thread , really.
Keep your head up Tom.

To be fair on those asking, it's not every angler who knows about the sheer massive volumes of water these power stations abstract for their cooling systems or the amount of fish taken. Some take in 1-2 tons of water per second, along with anything else swimming by the vicinity of the intake.

The forth estuary is rich with aquatic life, it's not got RAMSAR status and various SSSI's dotted around it for no reason.

I feel sorry for the bass.
 

big red

New member
Messages
522
Reaction score
0
Location
stirling
.Has anybody actually seen with their own eyes, skip loads of smolts or any other fish being removed from longannet .

yes, when I worked there as a subbie 10 yrs ago...
 

silver surfer

Member
Messages
875
Reaction score
2
Location
location location
is this a political thread ?

bring back mining ,and steel making and and ship building, car making ,lets build coal fired amphibious cars in Scotland .....:)
 

big red

New member
Messages
522
Reaction score
0
Location
stirling
I think (and this is non political) that Iberdrola have been hung out to dry here...£40mill connection fees for Longannet but a £4mill payment down south???
Longannet were first to harvest Carbon Capture but the grants then dried up??? So it went South.....
Sorry for all the Guys working there but the writing has been on the wall for a couple of years, and after the volume of votes for The Nats..(hold on, not got my tin hat on yet!!) It was always a fight that was not to be won.
Feel **** about the fact that this can happen when so many people in an area that is already blighted by a relativly high unemployment % is getting another big hit!!!
 

Gibbo

Member
Messages
317
Reaction score
0
Location
Northampton
Never mind the fishing. My family originate from there. Over the years a number of them worked there. Thank god they don't now. I hope the boys and girls there now can get worthwhile work elsewhere and if lucky enough a decent redundancy payout.
 

keirross

Active member
Messages
1,197
Reaction score
20
Location
In a cooling North Atlantic...
What some folks here need to better understand is that given this foreclosure, a best part of a quarter or more of near 40-years worth of stable Scottish grid requirement is about to be lost. It's been proven that so-called renewables (ie. wind) cannot substitute for thermal. As long-term studies have shown, at best Scottish wind parks throughout average generate best about one quarter of rated capacity.

Longannet's 'problems' stem very directly from European Union directives in adherence to UN mandates ie. CO2 is bad. Back around 2008, UK's then Energy and Climate Change Minister, Ed Miliband, made Act of Parliament that UK was committed to 60% net reductions in CO2 emissions over 1990 levels by 2030. The then and current clowns within Scottish Gov decided instead to self-impose an 80% de-carbonisation target not just across electricity needs, but across the spectrum of energetic requirement.

It is an absolute disgrace and nonsense that those who propose wind generation are allowed and are mandated double price for same on shore via thermal and three times per unit offshore.

Should it happen as seems likely, welcome Scot's folks to first time in a century of becoming reliant on imported electricity. There's currently an interconnector cable being laid between Scotland and England off Clyde-Solway-Cumbrian coasts. A total sell out by Scottish Gov to the blatantly obvious. See the next time you beseech us the with 'Scotland - not for sale' banners, Nicola, get lifted, just think Monadliath and Cairngorms and all those government local planning authority over-rulings . Farcical.
 
Last edited:

keirstream

Well-known member
Messages
6,889
Reaction score
189
Location
Stirling
Deja Vu???

It is an absolute disgrace and nonsense that those who propose wind generation are allowed and are mandated double price for same on shore via thermal and three times per unit offshore.

Should it happen as seems likely, welcome Scot's folks to first time in a century of becoming reliant on imported electricity.
Shades of Thatcher's irrational attack on the coal industry condemning our nation to imported coal dependency for the 1st time in 400 years.:(
Whilst we pay through the nose for renewables , inevitably we will depend on imported energy at blackmail prices.
In that situation, how important will it be to the assembled deluded super egos at ScotGov how it is generated??
Madness.
 
Top