Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


MSPs back nuclear-free goal but seek more years from existing plants

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 01 July 2009
A HOLYROOD committee has backed SNP ministers' plans to turn Scotland into a nuclear-free state.
But MSPs said the lifespan of existing nuclear power stations should be extended to buy time to develop alternative, low-carbon sources of energy in the renewable sector.

Scotland's two nuclear plants, Hunterston B and Torness, are expected to clo
se by 2016 and 2023 respectively.

The nuclear issue has once again proven one of the most divisive in Scotland, with a minority of the economy, energy and tourism committee – made up of Labour and Conservative MSPs – supporting building new nuclear power stations.

However, the committee's report on the future of Scotland's electricity generation, warned that nuclear power could "unduly dominate" the debate. It encourages oil and gas companies to invest in marine energy and offshore wind.

Lewis Macdonald, Labour's energy spokesman, who voted in favour of nuclear energy, accepted that Scotland's opportunity lay in harnessing wind, wave and tidal power potential.

But he added: "All parties say they support green energy as a key part of Scotland's energy future, but actions speak louder than words."

And he has made it clear he has concerns about Scotland producing energy that was dependent on variable sources, such as winds or tides.

SNP MSP Rob Gibson, deputy convener of the committee and opposed to nuclear energy, said: "There is no desire across the Scottish Parliament for new nuclear energy in Scotland and a real enthusiasm for building a clean, green future."

The nine committee members also suggested the Scottish Government spend £1.7 billion over ten years to reduce energy demand and fuel poverty.

And it demanded that the process of approving large-scale projects, such as the proposed Beauly to Denny power line, must be speeded up.

The committee convener, Iain Smith, a Liberal Democrat MSP, said: "This is our vision for Scotland's energy future. The provision of secure, affordable and environmentally friendly energy supplies is fundamental to the wealth and national wellbeing of Scotland."

CBI Scotland's assistant director, David Lonsdale, raised the nuclear issue and said it would be wrong to drop a tried and tested form of energy production with low carbon emissions.

"We remain convinced that tried and tested means of providing reliable, constant, and controllable base-load generation, including low-carbon nuclear capacity, should continue to be the cornerstone of electricity supply, not least to minimise the potential supply problems for industrial and commercial consumers," he said.

The energy spokesman for Scottish Council for Development and Industry said: "There are some very real questions still to be answered about how we replace ageing power stations with secure and low-carbon energy generation, and meet future demand for electricity without new nuclear generation."

But he welcomed support for the Beauly to Denny line.

He said: "The line is the key that will unlock the huge potential of wind, wave and tidal power throughout the Highlands and Islands and is a vital part of Scotland and the UK's efforts to tackle climate change."

Green ideas

USING algae to absorb emissions, creating "edible communities" and a scheme to convert RBS into the Royal Bank of Sustainability were among ideas hailed yesterday as ways to transform the UK into a more sustainable society.

The Breakthroughs for the 21st Century project by the Sustainable Development Commission has chosen 19 ideas it thinks could make a big difference in tackling climate change, depletion of resources and inequality.

Top ideas included creating "incredible edible communities" by turning public flowerbeds into vegetable patches and a proposal to use fast-growing algae to soak up carbon emissions from power stations and use the biological material for products such as oil, food and pharmaceuticals.

The campaign group Platform suggested that the largely publicly owned Royal Bank should be transformed from being closely associated with the oil and gas industry into investing in projects to tackle climate change.





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 30 June 2009 9:26 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Nuclear energy
 
1

Iainbroch,

01/07/2009 00:26:40
Up Yours Broonie!
2

,

01/07/2009 01:56:32
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
3

,

01/07/2009 01:58:40
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
4

Fletty73,

Stirling 01/07/2009 03:29:21
First Labour supporter to say "lights will go out" gets a thousand lines and detention.
5

Scotindy,

Los Angeles 01/07/2009 04:58:39
Looks like I was blown off. All I had to say was that the unionist partys are now coming to the negotiation table. Hydro is the future as is with Tidal Power. No more oh Flower SCOTLAND it is now OH POWER OF SCOTLAND. Have a nice day................
6

donald,

glasgow 01/07/2009 06:18:43
When Labour is voted out they can go back to protesting against Trident and their Iraq War too - and saving the Post Office.
7

donald,

glasgow 01/07/2009 06:20:17
Brian Wilson, Lord Parkheid, is quids in thanks to his handouts from the Nuclear and windymill industries.
8

dornoch,

north america 01/07/2009 08:18:27
It woudl be nice if there were any comments that actually addressed the article. I don't like nuclear power, but having grown up under the shadow of Dounreay I know what it does and how clean it could potentially be. What we need to do, and not with financial interests up front, is find a way to have clean fision, to power us without me first, financial gain up front. By the way, don't you all just love it when you turn the light switch on and it does. Ever think about it?
9

,

01/07/2009 08:56:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
10

TWC,

exLabour 01/07/2009 09:12:13
This is what Scotland wants so it was only a mater of time till it was agreed .

Wish we had similar common sense on the Fiscal Autonomy question.

The next step is for Holyrood Unionist MSPs to serve Scotland before party.
11

Unimpressed one,

01/07/2009 09:21:14
"A HOLYROOD committee has backed SNP ministers' plans to turn Scotland into a nuclear-free state."

The elephant in the room being Faslane. Salmond has proven powerless over this issue, which ensures the west coast of Scotland is a nuclear target if the UK were to become involved in a conflict involving nuclear weapons.

How ironic that the rest of the UK will reap the peaceful benefit of nuclear power, whilst Scotland has to rely on wind but has enough nuclear weapons on its soil to ensure the destruction of millions.
12

mr broon,

Edinburgh 01/07/2009 10:01:38
No doubt a similar debate took place between early man over the use of fire.

13

The Former Mr. Angry,

Perth 01/07/2009 10:22:04
MSPs will never hit that 42% target for reduction in CO2 emissions until they realise that nuclear as to be part of the scenery. When renewables are proven technology to reliably supply normal and overload fine, but in the meantime look forward to nuclear and coal for some considerable time. Probably beyond 2020!
14

Farky,

Edinburgh 01/07/2009 10:31:40
We don't want nuclear power, quite soon we won't need it. We probably don't at present. It's NOT cheap, it's NOT clean and it's NOT welcome! And neither is Trident or its replacement!

15

Shave,

Edinburgh 01/07/2009 13:46:39
"The nine committee members also suggested the Scottish Government spend £1.7 billion over ten years to reduce energy demand and fuel poverty."

Free home insulation for all?

16

,

01/07/2009 15:28:58
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
17

Geomac 1,

Scotland 01/07/2009 15:49:21
What should come first?
1 Political dogma (that is, no nuclear at all)?
2 Reliability/security of electricity supply?
3 Reduction of CO2?
I doubt very much is we can achieve 2 and 3 without nuclear.
Much faith is being placed on carbon capture/storage (CCS) from coal fired power stations but it must be remembered that CCS will only remove around 25-30% of the CO2. So, replacing end of service nuclear stations with coal actually increases CO2 emissions!!
I just wish that policicians charged with making these decisions told us how they are going to replace the base load currently supplied by our 2 nuclear power stations rather than just mumble hopefully about windmills and wave power.
I wonder if this lot in power are hoping that if they can extend the lives of the 2 nuclear stations, they will no longer be MSPs and will be able to emigrate to countries where sanity still prevails???
18

TWC,

exLabour 01/07/2009 16:47:40
17 Geomac 1,
I think we can achieve 2 & 3 without nuclear.
19

Margaret L,

Edinburgh 01/07/2009 17:05:00
The fundamental flaw in the nat argument lies in the fact that the wind industry in Scotland is only there because of the massive subsidies it receives and, as 95% of those subsidies are paid for by English electricity users, where are the subsidies for renewables going to come from when we achieve independence?
20

TheDisplacedGlaswegian,

Edinburgh 01/07/2009 17:26:09
#17 Geomac, the debate about nuclear energy is not just about us right now - it's also about the waste management effort and cost we would burden our future generations for the nest ten thousand years.

#19 What are you gibberring about?
21

Geomac 1,

Scotland 01/07/2009 17:39:22
#18 TWC - you "think" that 2 and 3 can be achieved without nuclear.
Please, please help me to understand HOW? This is a small word but terribly important - I hope that you are not in the same mould as politicains who are HOPING that they will be able to do this.
I am an engineer and so far I am unconvinced that there is an answer to my question - even power companies such as EoN and SSE have no idea HOW!!!
22

Geomac 1,

Scotland 01/07/2009 17:43:58
#20 TDG
I am fully aware of the need to resolve the nuclear waste issue but as an engineer, I must say that this is a far easier issue to resolve than how to maintain relaibel electricity supply using only renewables.
#19 Margaret - sorry, but I have to disagree with you - ALL electricity consumers pay the ROC subsidy.
23

TheDisplacedGlaswegian,

Edinburgh 01/07/2009 18:36:52
Geomac 1, the Pentland Firth has massive potential for tidal power - some experts suggesting enough to power the whole UK. We have massive potential for wind power. Just earlier this week, a report said that all of Scotland's domestic needs could be met by expanding our hydro capabilities. Let's not forget about extracting energy from waves. Let's also not forget about our solar potential (advances in this technology are happening day by day).
There is no doubt that nuclear is highly reliable and environmentally friendly. However, it is far from ideal - it leaves a long term waste and decommissioning problem for those that do not benefit from it. I am not suggesting we don't know how to manage the waste - we do, but you can't just vitrify, then bury it and swan off. It will need constant attention until no longer dangerous... that doesn't even bear thinking about. How can you even begin to calculate this cost?

Right now, we have a problem to solve: how to guarantee base load from renewables. As a fellow engineer, problem solving is what it is all about. You'll be only too aware that the art is arriving at the solution that meets the full requirements for the least cost (including maintenance, decommissioning and long term waste management). This is usually achieved by keeping things as simple as possible and producing the most easily maintainable deliverable. What is simpler than a range of machines that harnesses mother natures power without leaving dangerous by products? This report makes it clear that no-one is suggesting we bin nuclear outright. Just because we choose to attempt to implement a non nuclear approach now doesn't mean that it won't be proven that we'll need at least some minimal nuclear capacity. That's cool with me - but only if proven beyond any doubt.

Right now, we need to advance technology so that wind farms can still produce in high winds, we need to develop efficient technology for storing energy in times of surplus (high wind and
24

billalba,

fife 01/07/2009 18:51:32
did none of you watch the telly yesterday re the plan for two pump storage stations which would be enough to power all homes in Scotland so NO need for nuclear.
25

Shave,

Edinburgh 01/07/2009 20:13:02
#16 Spagan

If the SNP hadn't pushed ahead with the M74 extension it would have been affordable.
26

Observer,,

Glasgow 01/07/2009 21:20:04
Shave - spot on.
27

nabodican,

Newton Stewart 01/07/2009 21:20:12
Our MSP's clearly know less about electricity production than even Brian Wilson.
Their misguided and ill informed policies are totally lacking in any technical merit.
Margaret l raises a valid point regarding who pays the lions share of the subsidies for wind farms so beloved of the greenie anti nukes.
If the tartan taliban get their way and Scotland is fully turbinised and independent, does wee fat Eck think that England will continue to give massive support to Scottish windfarms.!!!
28

Jimmy Neutron,

04/07/2009 19:14:36
Personally i believe there IS NO VIABLE ALTERNATIVE at this moment in time, the footprint/output ratio of nuclear power is unsurpassed nothing known to man can produce more power.
The waste issue however will be resolved in time, after all, every other force known to man has an equal opposite force than nutralises it (alkali/acid hot/cold pressure/vaccuum etc), we just haven't discovered it yet! and when we do the stored waste will be easily nutralised.
If SNP continue objecting to all things nuclear scotland will be an economic waste ground, imagine a scotland with no dounrey, chapelcross, faslane etc and by the time thier actions have bitten there will be no oil industry either. welcome to unemployment scotland because once wind farms are built they pretty much run themselves…..
PS I am born and bread in scotland but was forced to move to england for employment along with thousands of others every year, I’d love to return but since moving five years ago there have been no jobs in central scotland to return to.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.