The ScotWind licensing round was a hugely material vote of confidence in the future of the offshore energy sector in the UK. To secure the licences and the associated ten-year option to develop the various windfarms, the consortia committed close to £700 million in upfront fees.
This raises an interesting debate around how this unexpected and material windfall is used. The easy option is of course to use the money to fund existing priorities across Scotland. There will be plenty of deserving recipients, given the current strains across the nation. Another option is to use the money for enabling and accelerating the energy transition and to deliver the net zero agenda by 2045 or earlier.
While these alternatives are appealing, it is worthwhile considering if the proceeds from the current and future licensing rounds, as well as future licence rentals and other income, could establish a new sovereign wealth fund for Scotland to benefit both current and future generations.
READ MORE: Gathering wind: How much power is offshore wind set to deliver?
Many countries have already done so and have established highly successful models to use the returns from the various funds aimed at improving people’s lives and wellbeing. One of the most successful examples is the Norwegian sovereign wealth fund, which was established in 1990 to ensure the revenues from Norway’s oil and gas resources are managed in a responsible way and to benefit both current and future generations.
The c. £1 trillion (or £1,000 billion) Norwegian sovereign wealth fund now is the envy of governments across the world and is designed to shield the Norwegian economy from external shocks. Scotland now has a unique opportunity to learn from the Norwegian experience and follow a similar path. Although £700 million is relatively modest in comparison to the amount Norway has accumulated, Scotland has to start somewhere and should use this moment to create a legacy for the nation we can all be proud of.
Professor Paul de Leeuw is the director of the RGU Energy Transition Institute.
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel