Letters / Move the battery park to Sullom Voe Terminal

Your report that EnQuest enthusiastically support the plans for the battery park at Gremista is quite revealing.

SVT operator keen to see battery system installed amid shutdown warning

Of course, they do; this could mean that they will have the option of closing the power station at SVT and, better still, get energy consumers to ultimately pay the £100 million bill for the battery park.

However, for a secure energy supply at SVT it would probably be better to maintain the status quo. I believe that, originally, the main reason for a power station at SVT was security of supply on site.

I am sure the life of the existing power station there could be extended, as has happened with the Lerwick Power Station.

However, continuing the life of the power station is not likely to fit in with the virtue signalling that the oil and gas industry are currently indulging in with regard to renewables.

Even with a battery park, energy supply for SVT could well be less secure than with the current arrangements.

If EnQuest are so keen on the idea of a battery park, it might be an idea to site it at SVT, well away from peoples’ homes.

Frank Hay
Weisdale