Scots face soaring bills as they power the rest of the UK free

herald

A clearly partisan case for nuclear energy is presented uncritically by the Herald – corporate backscratching rather than informing the public. You cannot trust this former newspaper.

Why would Scotland, once independent, never need to import any energy at all.

Apologies, regulars, but here it is again:

Scotland produces far more electricity and gas than it consumes.

With 8% of the population, Scotland produces 28% of the UK’s gas consumption.

https://www.gov.scot/news/oil-and-gas-production-statistics-for-2019-1/

And on electricity, Scotland produces 97% of its electricity from renewables, compared to only 35% in the UK or that 25% of the UK consumption is transferred from Scotland.

https://www.thescottishfarmer.co.uk/news/19504045.scotland-reaches-renewables-top-three/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_Scotland

herald

8 thoughts on “Scots face soaring bills as they power the rest of the UK free

  1. All part of the unionist establishment’s narrative here in Scotland that we need nuclear power stations.
    Not because we need them to supply us with energy but because England does and we can’t be seen as being different.
    The soaring energy bills are more about what is happening in England rather than in our country.
    Another union dividend.

    Liked by 4 people

  2. Scotland exports electricity and gas south. We could:–
    A. Keep the electricity and convert it into hydrogen.
    B. Keep the gas and use it for base load back-up in the short term.
    C. Put a “transition tax” on electricity and gas going to England/Ireland (same as Ukraine does with Russian gas).
    (Scotland should also pay a similar tax to electricity coming north).
    Use this “transition tax” to kick start a tidal stream industry in Scotland.

    The last thing Scotland needs is to be handcuffed to a nuclear industry whose life-cycle is 100 years (20 years to build. 40 years to operate. 40 years to decommission) to 200,000 years–with a waste repository.
    Which would be situated in Scotland, not in the deep clay beds of southern England, the best site for such a repository.

    Liked by 5 people

  3. The BBC Webpage article on Hunterston takes the “increased reliance in the short-term on fossil fuel or imported energy sources” angle, without attempting to define what the imported energy sources are or where they are required.
    Since we are essentially self-sufficient in renewables suggests the “problem” lies elsewhere.
    The BBC article also quotes the GMB’s Louise Gilmour promoting a nuclear replacement, so indeed the nuclear lobby are in full influence mode.

    The Scotsman article implies linkage between Hunterston and soaring power bills, which, a la Musson, is absolute garbage. The reason for soaring electricity bills is Tory policy and England’s total dependency on imported power.

    Once unshackled from London, an independent SG could not only resolve the punative grid connection charges which have long disfavoured Scotland, but double energy production from wind and address baseload from tidal etc in but a few short years.
    None of this is rocket science, except of course to the likes of David Bol clearly writing from the nuclear lobby’s viewpoint, but to address whose problem, England or Scotland ?
    There is a discussion to be had on where nuclear energy is considered in SG’s energy mix at some point, but it is not now.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. The Hinkley Point 2 nuclear plant is to get a pay in subsidy, which is a quiet wee subsidy for the SE on England.
      HP2 is also the site of Rolls Royce development of the nuclear reactors for new Trident II submarines. It will also supply the Plutonium for the missile warheads.
      It will be run after commissioning by EDF (French Gov controlled) who will get a guaranteed price per kilowatt whilst having no responsibility for decommissioning the reactor.

      Scotland has no need for Hinckley Point for multiple reasons.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Recently, The Herald has been publishing pieces by former Energy Minister, Mr Brian Wilson, who is a strong advocate of the continued use of nuclear energy. More ominously, he is chair of the Labour Party’s energy policy committee. Should Labour ever form a government, nuclear energy will be ‘part of the mix’. The ‘justification’ is that ‘the wind is not always blowing’. This is wilfully misleading and implies that ‘renewables’ = wind energy. There is hydroelectric energy, tidal, solar, as well as the developing ‘heat pump’ technology. Better building techniques will reduce space heating needs. In any case, anyone who has been in the hills or out at sea is aware that there is always some wind somewhere.

    Liked by 5 people

  5. Nuclear the the most expensive, damaging and dangerous, Nuclear power plants are years over time and over budget. Hickley Point is £Billions over budget. The Tory slush fund. A total waste of money.

    There are much safer and cheaper forms of energy to invest in, Renewables are much cheaper and reliable.

    Scotland has to pay over cost for fuel and energy. Despite being in surplus and nearer the source, because of Westminster policies, Scotland should pay less for parity.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. I follow all things energy and have done for some years. The way ahead for us as an independent country is to put in a few west coast inter connectors and put hundreds of underwater turbines around our coast. No need for wind reliance and no lag in power as we know the tides for centuries ahead. So one area goes slack due to the tides turn other areas are unaffected. We can in theory if we really went for it with undersea, land and sea surface turbines create over seven times the energy we need now. This could be our national wealth fund.
    Then for a modicum of profit, say double the production costs we can sell it to the rUK. Revenge is really good, you get to feel so much better.

    Liked by 3 people

  7. More on nuclear power. The House of Commons Library has just published (7 January) a briefing on Westminster’s new ‘Nuclear Energy (Financing) Bill’.

    The Bill aims to establish a different model – a Regulated Asset Base (RAB) – for financing new nuclear power stations in the UK. The RAB model is expected to allow private investors, such as pension funds and insurers, to finance new nuclear projects, and reduce reliance on overseas investors.

    ‘New nuclear power stations financed through the RAB would be funded by a charge on electricity suppliers, who are expected to pass the cost on to consumers.’

    The briefing notes that the RAB model may be used to help the Government take forward the Sizewell C project and change the project’s current ownership structure which involves Chinese interests.

    Notably, the model will mean that consumers start paying for the project from the construction phase i.e. before any generation starts. An obvious concern here is that construction cost overruns will need to be met by consumers. And we know that big nuclear projects are commonly associated with cost overruns.

    The HoL briefing recall that in 2017, the National Audit Office (NAO) concluded that the Government’s deal for Hinkley Point C (under construction) had “locked consumers into a risky and expensive project with uncertain strategic and economic benefits.”

    The NAO also noted: “The government’s case for the project has weakened since it agreed key commercial terms on the deal in 2013. Delays have pushed back the nuclear power plant’s construction, and the expected cost of top-up payments under the Hinkley Point C’s contract for difference has increased from £6 billion to £30 billion.”

    (https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-9356/CBP-9356.pdf )

    Energy is generally a reserved matter so most of the Bill applies to England, Wales and Scotland. Northern Ireland does not share the energy infrastructure of Great Britain and is therefore not included in provisions related to new nuclear power funding.

    Within the present devolved settlement, without agency, we consumers and voters in Scotland together with our Government in Edinburgh are left to ‘spectate’ as the energy future of our country is determined in ways designed to meet the perceived needs of England and in line with values and policies of England’s government.

    Liked by 3 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.