SWLG Home Action Wild Land News About us

Wild Land News no 62, Winter 2004/2005

The SWLG position on renewable energy in Scotland

Article

Alistair Cant on a sugary tale that becomes a recipe for disaster

This article must start with the standard phrase that echoes round meeting rooms and policy papers... "We all love renewable energy projects, but..."

So why does this happen. My theory is that it is a classic British Fudge .the recipe being as follows:

Fudge recipe To achieve a policy aim you leave it up to the market and throw in generous ongoing subsidies. The commercial companies that get involved wish to have their cake and eat it - i.e. implement it to maximise private gain and achieve the subsidies. The implementation conflicts with aspects of public concern. The government leaves the companies to go hell-for-leather and the strongest / most resilient wins. The regulatory system (in this the Planning system) is unable to cope with the conflicts generated as it can only rein in the wildest excesses and can only respond to the demands generated by the commercial companies - it cannot direct those companies' activities in a planned way.

This British fudge for renewable energy projects has been singed in the oven of public objection and there are likely to be more burnt offerings to come.

What should happen would be a Tablet recipe - for Tablets of Stone i.e. direction laid down by government:

Tablet recipe Government, industry, planners and non-governmental organisations' (NGO) representatives agree a strategy for implementing a policy, with the aim of minimising conflict and encouraging broad support. Subsidies are targeted and time limited to kick-start an industry but not allow excess profits to be generated. Future technologies are given more generous long term support as a seedbed. Existing technologies to be given the minimum support. Consistent decision-making at all tiers of government to reinforce the direction agreed - the Tablets are not to be sold down the river for individual / short term gain. Implementation is achieved much more quickly as conflict is dealt with by negotiation and concessions agreed at the strategic national planning stage. Sustainable development can be built in as planning is in progress at the centre / in advance / with the medium to long term in mind.

So where does this leave us in respect of renewable energy projects in Scotland. NGOs can only respond to fudge by increasing the heat in the oven and burning a few (or more than a few) of the cookies. They can also try and lobby to alter the recipe, but there are now strong vested interests for the current flavour and method of cooking.

All this fan-fired hot air is leading up to the Wild Land Group steering team setting out its stall on renewable energy in Scotland. We are not willing to accept the existing system as one that can be worked within. Our position therefore is perhaps more principled than some, but it in essence is as follows:

1. There should be no more medium-to-large scale renewable energy projects in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland (i.e. north of the Glasgow - Aberdeen line). Wild land areas in the Borders to have a moratorium too. Very small projects of appropriate height, scale and location would be fine, based on meeting local community needs.

2. There shall be no increase in the extent or capacity of the transmission grid in the same zone.

3. There shall be a national strategy for renewable energy agreed jointly between Government, Industry, Local Authorities and NGOs. This shall direct the industry as to the technologies and the locations, as well as the size and shape of schemes. Subsidies shall be targeted to achieve a reasonable return for industry/investors with more subsidy directed to the longer term future technologies. Capacity of manufacturing plants for equipment shall be encouraged to meet the planned expansion.

4. Conservation of energy shall receive as high a profile as new energy projects.

5. The precautionary principle shall be paramount - e.g. if building wind farms on peat bogs means the significant loss of carbon-storing peat, then this shall not be allowed for the present, even if the extent of release of stored carbon is not yet been predicted fully.

6. The aim, on present information, is to base the future on these ideas below:
   1. Production to be near the areas of high demand i.e. in or near the central belt.

   2. Turbines to be built on brownfield land where possible. The height to be restricted to agreed levels, rather than an ever increasing height.

   3. Aim for off-shore projects - wind, wave, tidal - again carefully sited away from key marine / coastline / island areas.

   4. Connection to the national grid based on undersea cables direct to an existing major connection to the grid (e.g. Torness, Hunterston)

   5. Small scale localised low-height turbines for farms/small communities to be encouraged, subject to careful siting.

7. Thus the Group are against major new renewable energy developments in the Western Isles, against the proposed new or upgrading of transmission lines within the Western isles, from Ullapool to Beauly and the Beauly to Denny proposals. The 'choice' of route options or to having very small sections underground is a false choice based on the premise 'it's going in anyway so be glad for these crumbs'.

8. We are also against the current system where projects are seen in isolation e.g. one wind farm is proposed as the 'starter' and more ones are swiftly proposed close-by, once the way has been opened up and precedents set.

9. The root of the sugar pill of renewable energy projects is the financial incentives which drive the system, and which are often in the end, paid for by the consumer. These need a complete overhaul, allied to the strategic assessment of society's needs.