The Coalition Government was accused of fuelling uncertainty over investment in renewable energy yesterday after announcing another review of taxpayer subsidies.
It came as the UK's Department for Environment and Climate Change resisted calls for significant cuts to onshore wind subsidies for the time being, instead announcing a reduction of 10% in payments for new farms.
There had been speculation the Chancellor was demanding a reduction of 25% in the subsidy for onshore wind generation, which would have made Scotland's 10% cut more attractive to developers.
However, ministers announced a further review of onshore wind industry costs to be launched in the autumn.
Energy Minister Fergus Ewing said the onshore wind sector needed certainty to invest. "I am concerned the UK Government's explicit statement about another and immediate review of onshore wind costs will not dispel the uncertainty for the industry and investors that recent speculation has been allowed to create.
"These projects represent long-term investments, which could be unnecessarily delayed by the short term aspects of today's announcement by DECC. This short-termism can only damage investor confidence and I call on DECC to remove the uncertainties."
Niall Stuart, chief executive of industry body Scottish Renewables, agreed: "The announcement that the Government is launching a further review of support for onshore wind later this year only creates further uncertainty and makes it difficult for the industry to plan ahead, though we are pleased the decision on any changes in 2014 will be based on evi-dence rather than political views."
However, wild land charity the John Muir Trust had a different perspective. It is concerned about the incursion of wind-farm development into the wild parts of Scotland and yesterday responded to the 10% cut with a call for legal protection for wilderness areas.
Stuart Brooks, chief executive of the trust, said "Most of the UK's top 10% of wild land has no statutory protection. The cut in wind subsidy is not enough to reduce the goldrush despoiling our landscapes."
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