They are also wrong, as Ofgem’s review of the UK energy market yesterday made clear. The energy watchdog considered four possible future scenarios in a bid to estimate how much consumers might be paying by the 2020s to power their homes. What emerged was that, while investing in renewable energy infrastructure like wind and tidal power plants will be costly, not doing so will be more so. Without that investment, by the UK and other countries, global competition for gas could cause prices to spike, especially in the context of strong economic resurgence boosting demand for energy. This could result in bill hikes of 60% for consumers.
No mainstream politician of any party believes a high carbon future is feasible or desirable. What now has to be decided is what our future energy mix will look like, and whether it will contain nuclear power.
The SNP Government has signalled its opposition to new nuclear power stations at the same time as setting for Scotland the world’s most ambitious greenhouse gas reduction targets. That creates a major challenge in terms of securing continuous energy supply as many renewable technologies, including wind, wave and tidal, provide intermittent supply.
There is also the small detail that tidal and wave power are in their infancy, and the fact that it takes time to plan and install the infrastructure to harness renewable energy. Then there is the headache that current power stations are ageing, raising the spectre of an energy gap.
The upshot is that action must be taken. As Ofgem chief executive Alistair Buchanan made clear “early action can avoid hasty and expensive measures later”, expensive measures paid for by the consumer. An energy mix containing nuclear power is likely to be Scotland’s best hope for a secure, low carbon future.
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