stewartb

There is a growing list of examples of Westminster’s influences and actions on energy and ‘net zero’ issues that are not in Scotland’s best interests and certainly not within Scotland’s democratic control!

This first example is of course more than a little ironic! On 20 October 2021, there were press reports of Sir Ian Wood commenting on Carbon Capture Utilisation and Storage (CCUS): ‘Acorn Project: Sir Ian Wood urges UK to rethink carbon capture snub’.

This is the context of the Acorn Project to be based at the St Fergus gas terminal in Aberdeenshire. However, sites on the Humber and Liverpool were chosen in the first round of funding for the UK Government’s £1 billion CCUS scheme, with the Scottish site considered a “reserve”. Back then Wood stated: ‘“AT THE VERY LEAST I urge the UK Government to reconsider their decision and add a third cluster to the Track 1 programme which should undoubtedly be the excellent Scottish bid.” (my emphasis)

A Unionist of influence? Well it seems not. On 19 March 2023, Wood is again commenting on the Acorn CCUS project. This from the Aberdeen & Grampian Chamber of Commerce:

‘Sir Ian welcomed the commitment to support carbon capture, but he URGED THE UK GOVERNMENT TO CONFIRM, AS A PRIORITY, that the Acorn project will benefit from this funding.’

‘He said the announcement of the CCUS funding in the (latest) Budget was welcome – even though there was NO SPECIFIC MENTION OF THE ST FERGUS SCHEME FROM the chancellor last Wednesday. Acorn – the backbone of a wider Scottish “cluster” of carbon-capture initiatives – is currently only a reserve project after it missed out on track-one status.’

‘The leading enterpreneur told the Press & Journal: “Removing its reserve status and allowing it to move forward will unlock billions of pounds of private-sector investment, support significant new job creation across the north-east of Scotland and help ensure the UK accelerates toward meeting net-zero targets.”

However, Sir Iain did not end his negative criticisms of Scotland’s energy and related prospects due to UK government policies: ‘.. Sir Ian said the chancellor’s failure to apply a price floor for the windfall tax on North Sea oil and gas producers was “disappointing”.

‘He added: “This policy is CREATING AN ADVERSE ENVIRONMENT FOR INVESTMENT AND JOBS precisely at the time we need to be maximising domestic energy security. We must have a more-stable fiscal regime to incentivise this which will, in turn, allow us to accelerate our energy-transition ambition.”

So it’s Westminster policy – from a government we didn’t vote for (again) that is critically influencing the development of Scotland’s energy resources. It’s a long list:
– on pump storage investment (as in the main blog post)
– on CCUS investments
– on where and when investments in establishing the new hydrogen economy will take place
– on energy pricing for domestic and business users
– on network transmission charges
– on taxation on energy producers, including windfall tax
– on where Scotland’s renewable energy from offshore wind is being taken – notably to the north of England
– and now moves to push nuclear power generation rather than marine renewable sources more appropriate for Scotland’s needs.

There may be other examples. However, the nature, scale and importance of all this cannot be underestimated. The development of Scotland’s indigenous energy assets are on a cusp: decisions being taken now will have ramifications for decades to come.

Big strategic development decisions are being taken in Westminster on Scotland’s behalf: we have little agency. And they are being taken not only by a government – but also within a political ‘system’ – which AS A MATTER OF (UNIONIST) PRINCIPLE does not want Scotland to have agency on matters of such importance to the future of our children and grandchildren and beyond!