Could SSEN please answer these questions

As SSEN continues to assail Shetland with more and more infrastructure there are some questions that they should be prepared to answer. SSEN will be visiting Burravoe on 1 July to discuss its latest proposals for Yell.

The company frequently emphasises the importance of genuine community engagement, transparency and providing communities with the information that they need to understand its plans.

Could SSEN provide clear comprehensive answers to each question within the next week and publish them?

Then everyone will know where they stand and can understand how these proposals fit into the wider picture for Yell and Shetland. We would be most grateful if SSEN could do this.

1. SSEN now describes the Shetland Strategy as a whole-system approach designed to accommodate both present and future energy needs. Could you define what the intended end state for Yell actually is? What infrastructure do you currently envisage existing on the island twenty years from now?
2. You have spoken of providing headroom for future growth. Could you specify what future developments have already been assumed when designing this substation and associated transmission infrastructure, and which of those projects have not yet entered public consultation?
3. Given that Energy Isles and Beaw Field were consented as separate generation projects, at what stage did SSEN determine that a technically, environmentally and economically viable transmission solution existed for both developments?
4. Given that SSEN is responsible for designing and delivering the transmission infrastructure associated with these developments, what assessment has SSEN itself undertaken of the cumulative environmental, landscape and community impacts arising from the transmission elements of the wider Shetland Strategy, and how has that assessment influenced the design of the current proposal?
5. Given that SSEN has publicly identified the Yell Substation, Northern Substation Hub, Hamarigrind Substation, Shetland 2 and associated cable connections as components of a wider Shetland Strategy, does SSEN possess an integrated engineering plan showing how these elements fit together? If so, will it be published?
6.  SSEN states that it provides communities with the information they need to understand its plans and that it has adopted a whole-system approach to Shetland’s transmission network. Given that the Yell Substation is now explicitly presented as one element of a wider Shetland Strategy involving multiple substations, interconnectors and cable systems, why are communities not provided with a single integrated strategic plan showing the complete network they are being asked to accommodate?
7. SSEN regularly consults communities on individual infrastructure proposals. Can you identify a mechanism through which communities are able to influence the underlying strategic vision itself, rather than merely comment on how that vision is implemented? If no such mechanism exists, in what sense are communities participating in decisions rather than simply being consulted on them?
8. SSEN’s published material presents continuing expansion of transmission infrastructure as necessary to accommodate future generation and demand projects. Is there any point at which SSEN would conclude that additional development in a particular area is no longer appropriate, regardless of technical feasibility? If so, what criteria would determine that limit?

Advertisement6 of 9

We look forward to receiving the requested answers.

Advertisement7 of 9

However, before proceeding with these future plans SSEN should be putting right the damage that they have done with their current work.

The  main roads A970 and A968 are in dreadful state following the cabling works.  The road surfaces should be repaired properly as a matter of urgency before any further work is undertaken.

Frank Hay
Chairman
Sustainable Shetland.