Greatrex: Further doubts on energy security of supply and renewable investment

Responding to the findings of research from the David Hume Institute on the energy implications of Scottish separation, Labour’s Shadow Energy Minister, Rutherglen and Hamilton West MP Tom Greatrex, said:
Tom Greatrex MP

“These reports once again make clear the weakness of the SNP’s energy case for separation.

From security of supply to investment in renewables, the anti-UK campaign has failed to provide credible answers to the big energy questions.

Scotland and the rest of the UK mutually benefit from the sharing of energy resources, risks and rewards. There is no sense in changing that. “

The David Hume Institute is holding a number of conversations on topics related to constitutional change. The third topic to be discussed tonight relates to the energy sector and they have commissioned a number of papers.

Professor Mark Schaffer and colleagues at Heriot Watt cover the rapidly evolving and complex external/global energy environment and its implications for Scotland; Professors John Paterson and Greg Gordon from Aberdeen considers the oil-related issues; and Professor Kim Swales and colleagues from Strathclyde University examine the electricity issue. We also have a paper by Trisha McAuley (Director, Consumer Focus) on consumer related issues and an over-arching paper prepared by SCDI.

You can read the papers here.

Labour-Hame-masthead1Follow Tom on Twitter: @tomgreatrexmp

Related Posts

2 thoughts on “Greatrex: Further doubts on energy security of supply and renewable investment

  1. Whilst I am not a fan of a separate Scotland, I do think that energy is one of the more realistic areas that Scotland could go it alone. With oil/gas and arguably wind power Scotland has as much access to energy as other parts of the UK (solar may be debatable).

    1. The renewable market is actually quite fragile. At the moment, the UK Government is (some might say half heartedly) supporting the industry through a subsidy regime which is mostly funded through UK consumer energy bills.

      As you say, Scotland has a lot of renewable resources, especially wind and tidal. But this will only be developed by continuation of the current subsidy regime, ie rUK consumers paying Scotland to generate electricity. If the bill were to fall to Scottish consumers only, it would see increases of several hundred pounds per household.

      However, the flip side is that rUK wouldnt necessarily have to, as there are a number of alternatives. There are the beginnings of a schme in the Irish midlands to erect a large number of turbines purely for the sale of electricity to England and Wales and off shore wind is likely to increase (look at London Gateway).

Comments are closed.