IN your report on its Employment Trends and Business Confidence Study,
Scottish Renewables was joined by WWF and yet again expounded their
demonstrably erroneous assertion that “onshore wind and solar are the two
cheapest forms of electricity” (“Warning over jobs in renewables”, The
Herald, March 4).
May I direct these groups to the recent House of Lords Price of Power…
report issued following probably the widest related consultation to date in
the UK which concluded that “electricity generated from fossil fuels has
always been, and remains, cheaper than electricity generated by renewable
sources. Renewables generation requires some sort of subsidy in order to be
competitive”.
May I further direct them to the Aris/Gibson modelling of comparative
energy costs which originated in 2011 and was updated in 2016. This
estimates that the overall range of costs for renewables is £165-£463/MWh
whereas that for nuclear and Closed Cycle Gas Turbines is £41-£106/MWh.
This from two of the most experienced power systems engineers in the
country reflecting long practice in such financial modelling.
These estimates address all of the related costs including wind and solar
back-up generation, system transmission and grid integration costs, nuclear
on-site waste storage, decommissioning, waste removal and long term
storage. They also recognised the low output of wind farms, their 25-year
operating life and the therefore high annual capital costs repayments,
compared with the 85% output and 50 year plus lifetime of nuclear.
The relevant papers and spreadsheets can be accessed from the Institution
of Engineers and Shipbuilders website.
Scottish Renewables and WWF must be aware of these reports but presumably
have chosen to ignore them. Surprising- as Scottish Renewables contributed
to the Lords review.
DBWatson,
Saviskaill, Langdales Avenue, Cumbernauld.
THE claim by Iain Macwhirter that sovereignty will be the key question of
the second independence referedum (“Sovereignty likely to be the currency
of the next debate”, The Herald, March 9) overlooks the impact of energy
costs in an independent Scotland. Whilst a large number of Scots are
familiar with the fact that reducing the deficit by £10 billion a year to
meet the three per cent of GDP criteria is equivalent to a basic rate of
tax of 40p in the pound, very few address the problem should 92 per cent of
Scottish renewable levies not be subsidised by English and Welsh consumers.
Once there is no longer a UK grid, Scots will face paying 100 per cent of
the Feed-in Tariffs levy, the Renewable Heat Incentive levy, the Renewables
Obligation Cerificate levy, the Constraint Payment levy and the costs of
importing electricity if high pressure results in minimum output from
renewables. This results in a worst case scenario cost of around £15
billion a year or an annual £6,000 increase in energy bills for Scottish
consumers.
However, these are not the only costs in the event of the demise of the UK
grid system. ScottishPower customers pay just over £40 per MW-hour for the
generation cost of their electricity. The Holyrood energy policy means that
12,000 MW of wind turbines will supply 100 per cent of Scottish demand by
2020. resulting in consumers facing wind turbine output cost of around £130
pounds per MW hour. This would double electricity bills in Scotland and put
high use energy consumers at an economic disadvantage compared to their rUK
competitors.
Perhaps a detailed assessment of energy costs arising from demise of the UK
grid should be carried out by Parliament instead of appointing a team to
redefine fuel poverty, thus papering over the failure of MSPs to eliminate
such poverty.
Ian Moir,
79 Queen Street, Castle Douglas.
0 Comments