Lang Banks paints a bucolic image of a Scotland free from any non-renewable power stations (Agenda, The Herald, March 10).
Yet the crux of Mr Banks's argument is that Scotland can afford to dispense with all its baseload and dispatchable power sources (which account for about two-thirds of all electricity used here) and rely on imports from England whenever the wind doesn't blow.
However, the vast bulk of English baseload and dispatchable power - as in all of Europe - will remain non-renewable, for want of sufficient alternatives at the required scale and cost. Under this scenario, we will not genuinely de-carbonise Scotland's electricity supply at all. We will simply import fossil and nuclear power from England, and export the jobs currently held at Longannet, Hunterston and Torness to power stations south of the border.
Moreover, replacing the huge low carbon nuclear output of Hunterston B and Torness with a mix of intermittent wind and imported fossil fuel backup will actually increase the carbon footprint of Scottish power consumption. We will also have greatly increased the insecurity of power supply in Scotland in times of greatest need, reliant as we will be on just three cable connections: the two existing connectors are incapable of replacing the sum of Scottish baseload and dispatchable output and even when the new Irish Sea link is completed in 2017, the total capacity will be insufficient to reliably avoid blackouts in the (inevitable) event of generation outages south of the Border.
No Scottish government that presides over such a descent into chaos is likely to last in power long. But that needn't concern Mr Banks as the Scottish public get no vote on the leadership of pressure groups.
Professor Paul L Younger, Rankine Chair of Engineering and Professor Colin McInnes, James Watt Chair of Engineering,
School of Engineering,
James Watt Building (South),
University of Glasgow.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article