Energy ministers have clashed over the impact of Scottish independence on household bills.
The UK Government is warning that a Yes vote will add at least £38 a year, possibly as much as £189 more once the cost of supporting renewables projects is included.
But the Scottish Government says the prediction is scaremongering based on a skewed look at the industry.
UK Energy Secretary Ed Davey set out his view at a conference in Edinburgh timed to coincide with the publication of a Westminster Government analysis paper on the industry after independence.
"The UK works better together, and our single energy market shows why," he said.
"As a United Kingdom, we keep energy bills down for all consumers, regardless of where they live, and this works well, especially for people in Scotland.
"Without unrestricted access to the integrated GB market, the costs of supporting Scottish energy network investment, small-scale renewables and programmes to support remote consumers would fall on Scottish bill-payers alone. This would add at least £38 to annual household energy bills and around £110,000 to energy costs for a medium-sized manufacturer in 2020.
"In addition, if the full costs of supporting large-scale Scottish renewables fell to Scottish bill-payers, the total potential increase would rise considerably up to £189 for households and £608,000 for a medium-sized manufacturer in 2020.
"Right across the energy mix, Scotland benefits from being part of the UK's strong, stable consumer and tax base, supporting thousands of jobs, creating new supply chains and cementing the energy sector as the engine room of the economy."
The analysis paper concludes that the rest of the UK, with a range of power sources domestically and "elsewhere", would not need to purchase energy from Scotland. The UK Government is also looking at grid connections to continental Europe.
But Scottish Energy Minister Fergus Ewing said Mr Davey's administration is likely to drive up bills.
He underlined his commitment to keep the single GB market after independence and accused the British Government of mismanagement.
"Only a Westminster politician could fail to see the huge benefits of Scotland's abundant energy wealth to consumers across these islands," he said.
"Instead of accessing Scotland's reliable energy resources, he is talking of importing energy over interconnectors that don't yet exist from the European mainland where many countries face a similar energy supply concerns as the UK.
"You don't have to be an energy expert to see that that is somewhat problematic. Even more so when these interconnectors can then be used to export electricity as well as import electricity.
"Under EU rules, Mr Davey would not be able to prevent power flowing out of the UK to continental markets if prices were higher there, thus potentially worsening the UK's difficult position."
Scottish consumers help subsidise renewable power in England already, he said.
Richard Dixon, director of environmental group Friends of the Earth Scotland, said: "The UK Government's obsession with getting new nuclear at any cost is a direct threat to investment in renewables and efficiency.
"The bottom line is that Scotland is rich in clean, green energy sources, and green electricity will be in demand more and more as the rest of the UK and countries in Europe try to cut climate emissions. On the other hand, new nuclear power creates dangerous wastes and needs a fortune in public subsidies to get built at all.
"If Europe eventually clears the way, UK electricity consumers will be paying around £1 billion a year for 35 years to subsidise only two reactors in England. Just a fraction of this money would see the widespread roll-out of renewables and improvements in energy efficiency."
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