Mark Macaskill
Energy analysts claim that an independent Scotland would be saddled with a
£600m bill to keep thousands of wind turbines turning because Westminster
would not be prepared to send “international aid” to subsidise wind farms
north of the border.
Nicola Sturgeon, the first minister, has said a second referendum is
“highly likely” in a bid to retain Scotland’s membership of the EU after
Brexit. A consequence of separation, however, could be that an independent
Scotland has to fully support its renewables industry, which at present is
propped up with huge subsidies paid for via the bills of British energy
consumers.
In 2015, the latest year for which figures are available, about £600m worth
of subsidies were paid to Scottish wind farms. John Constable, director of
the Renewable Energy Foundation, a charity set up by Noel Edmonds, the
television presenter, to promote sustainable energy technologies, said such
cross-border subsidies from English and Welsh consumers to the owners of
wind farms in Scotland “would not be politically acceptable in Westminster
or Cardiff’ if Scotland becomes independent.
It would in effect, he said, “be international aid to a developed country
and extremely controversial”.
Constable, added: “It is quite conceivable that this subsidy burden,
currently shared by all UK consumers, would fall entirely on Scottish
consumers in the event of independence.” Similar warnings were issued by Ed
Davey, the former UK energy minister, in 2014 when the last independence
referendum was held. He claimed average annual energy bills could increase
by up to £189 in Scotland. Davey’s claims were rubbished by the SNP who
insisted that both countries would wish to operate a shared all-Britain
energy market.
Since then, hundreds more turbines have been built in Scotland, meaning the
subsidy burden if it were to fall entirely on Scotland will be even
greater. There are currently more than 3,000 operational turbines in
Scotland with almost 2,000 more under construction or consented by planning
officials.
Sturgeon signalled the need for another Scottish independence referendum
last week after Britain’s Supreme Court ruled that the devolved assembly in
Edinburgh did not need to be consulted on triggering Brexit.
While the court ruled against Theresa May’s Brexit plans and decreed that
MPs were entitled to vote on whether to trigger Article 50, the justices
unanimously ruled that the government did not need to consult with the
devolved powers in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
The ruling prompted Sturgeon to ask: “Is Scotland content for our future to
be dictated by an increasingly right-wing Westminster government with just
one MP here, or is it better that we take our future into our own hands?”
Alex Salmond the former SNP first minister, recently speculated that a
second referendum on independence could happen within two years.
However, as with the first vote in 2014, Scottish ministers will be
expected to produce a detailed economic impact of separation. Energy
analysts claim renewable energy subsidies are one of the costs of
independence that Scottish ministers have appeared reluctant to address.
Leo Smith, who runs Gridwatch, a website that tracks British energy
production, said: “Scotland has relied on the British taxpayer to finance
its expansion of onshore wind but that is unlikely to continue if it
achieves independence.”
A Scottish government spokesman said the UK government had acknowledged the
value of maintaining efficient cross-border trading, which increased
security of supply, reduced costs for consumers and increased the
efficiency of low carbon generation.
He added: “The UK government’s view, which relates to energy trading
between the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland, also applies to Scotland
and is, in reality, even stronger in our case.”
0 Comments