SCOTLAND's largest petrochemical plant could close in 15 years unless an indigenous shale gas industry can be developed, according its owner.
Chemicals giant Ineos says the recently approved practice to import cheap shale gas from the USA for use in its chemical plants will not be cost-effective in the long term.
The company, which runs the huge refinery and petrochemicals plant at Grangemouth, on the Firth of Forth, recently acquired 729 sq miles of fracking exploration licences in central Scotland.
But the firm says the Scottish Government's moratorium on granting fracking licences could prevent the shale gas industry from developing in Scotland.
The development comes days after Scottish Labour leader Jim Murphy said he would use new powers in Holyrood to ban fracking, led to allegations of political posturing.
The Grangemouth facility is Scotland's biggest industrial site, employing about 1,000 staff and hundreds more on contract.
Ineos threatened to close the plant during a bitter industrial dispute in 2013 before unions accepted changes to pay and conditions.
The Scottish Government did not respond to the Ineos claim, except to say that the question of licensing powers for onshore oil and gas is subject of a consultation.
The Ineos move for licences would make it one of the biggest shale gas players in the UK.
It has already invested in an ethane supply project at Grangemouth which will allow the firm to import, store and use cheap shale gas from the US.
That formed part of its survival plan announced by Ineos in September, 2013.
Ineos Upstream chief executive Gary Haywood said it was not a long-term solution and was only expected to cover Grangemouth's needs for the next "10 to 15 years".
Speaking at a conference in Edinburgh he said it was feasible to get a shale industry up and running in the UK "within three to five years".
He added: "If you look forward five years, it is possible we could be producing gas from that point onwards.
"That would mean that we have some time to develop the resource and replace what we get from the US. Can we do that efficiently enough to make Grangemouth make sense in the future? That is a real challenge."
Commenting on the future of the plant without an indigenous shale gas supply, he said: "I think it is going to be very difficult because when you are shipping in material of that nature you are always at a disadvantage.
"It is a very special situation at the moment... with ethane being available in the US at very low prices, because of the rapid increase in production and the lack of demand in the US.
"That has meant we have been able to get that ethane at very, very cheap prices, relatively speaking.
"We can't see that going on. Unless we can develop an indigenous source, it is unlikely that the cracker (at Grangemouth) has a long-term future."
Scottish Conservative energy spokesman Murdo Fraser said: "This warning shows just how crucial it is for Scotland not to be left behind on fracking. It has revolutionised the US energy economy.
"It makes absolutely no sense for Grangemouth to be refining shale from across the Atlantic, while the SNP and Labour here either want to ignore fracking or ban it altogether.
"This vital plant has already been to the brink in recent years - we should take action now to ensure it doesn't return there any time soon."
Scottish Conservative energy spokesman Murdo Fraser said: "This warning shows just how crucial it is for Scotland not to be left behind on fracking.
"It makes absolutely no sense for Grangemouth to be refining shale from across the Atlantic, while the SNP and Labour here either want to ignore fracking or ban it altogether.
"This vital plant has already been to the brink in recent years - we should take action now to ensure it doesn't return there any time soon."
A Scottish Government spokesperson said: "The consultation will allow everyone with a view on this issue to feed it into government.
"Industry bodies including Ineos and the UK Onshore Operators Group welcomed the opportunity to engage in the consultation and environmental organisations including Friends of the Earth Scotland and WWF Scotland also both welcomed the announcement."
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