New Scots coast wind farm to be biggest in the world
Up to 300 turbines will be erected off Caithness in �4.5 billion development. Picture: Getty Images
THE world’s biggest offshore wind farm is set to be built in Scotland with a multi-billion-pound investment, securing hundreds of jobs and further cementing the country’s position as a global leader in renewable energy.
The £4.5 billion project envisages up to 300 turbines in water 200ft deep more than 13 miles off Caithness, generating enough power for more than a million homes by 2020.
The wind farm would be a major boost to the Scottish Government’s target of generating 100 per cent of the country’s electricity demand from renewables by the end of the decade.
The international companies behind the scheme said the investment was a sign of confidence in Scotland as a place to invest in the offshore renewables market.
Moray Offshore Renewables Ltd (MORL) is a joint venture between a Spanish/Portuguese company, EDP Renewables, and Spanish oil and gas firm Repsol Nuevas Energias UK, which was awarded a “zone development agreement” by the Crown Estate for offshore wind energy.
The wind farm would cover about 114sq miles and could produce up to 1,500MW of wind power, about the same as a conventional power station.
Each of the 200 to 300 turbines would be capable of delivering up to 7MW and would be supported on either concrete base structures or by tubular steel jackets, using technology developed by the North Sea oil and gas industry.
The power would be collected by up to eight offshore electrical platforms, before being sent ashore via a grid connection point at Peterhead power station.
MORL said companies operating in the Moray Firth area could take advantage of the new market – which could be worth hundreds of millions of pounds and support up to 1,400 jobs during construction, and 130 to 280 posts during operation and maintenance.
Launching a report on the project in Inverness yesterday, Dan Finch, managing director of EDPR UK, said: “Over the past year, we have worked hard to move offshore wind in deeper water from a proposal to a viable project.
“We are keen to work with the government and business agencies, which will be able to develop the supply chain and turn this new market into jobs and economic growth.”
Mr Finch said the joint venture, which has an office in Edinburgh, was prepared to spend £40-£50 million on planning and developing the project before an application was expected to be submitted to Marine Scotland in June or July next year.
Work is then hoped to start in 2015 for completion by 2020.
Last week, Chancellor George Osborne said major firms were reluctant to invest in Scotland because of the uncertainty of an independence referendum.
However, Mr Finch said: “We are developing an opportunity and investing significant sums of money because we see Scotland as the place to develop offshore wind.
“Our partners Repsol, a multinational Spanish oil company, have joined us in Edinburgh because they think this is the place to be as well.
“We made this decision consciously. We could have gone somewhere else.”
He said the project offered prospects of major fabrication and supply work for firms such as Global Energy, which announced recently it had taken over the former oil yard at Nigg in Easter Ross to develop as an oil and renewables base.
A Scottish Government spokesman said: “This is a welcome statement of the reality that company after company has announced jobs and investment in Scotland in recent months – including other major international energy firms such as Gamesa, Doosan Power Systems and Mitsubishi – and the Altium Securities investor report, which makes it clear that investment will continue whatever Scotland’s constitutional status, including independence.
“These developments demolish nonsensical claims made recently – the fact is there will be a continuing need for Scottish renewable electricity to be exported to help keep the lights on south of the Border.
“International corporations and domestic firms are investing for the future in Scotland’s world-leading renewables industry. There is a pipeline of 17 Gigawatts of renewable electricity projects – nearly three times peak Scottish demand – with estimated capital investment of £46bn, ready to create thousands of jobs in Scotland.
“For as long as the wind blows and the tides turn, that investment will continue.”
MORL also has plans to develop the Inch Cape offshore wind farm site in the outer Firth of Tay region, between nine and 14 miles to the east of Angus.
It is expected to consist of about 180 wind turbines covering an area of about 58sq miles with an estimated installed capacity of 1,000MW and a potential yield of 3,000 GWh per year.
Scotland has around a quarter of Europe’s potential offshore wind resources, with ideal conditions for technology which can harness the strong winds.
The east coast seabed has been identified as a particularly suitable location for offshore wind power. The largest offshore wind farm in the world, off the Kent coast, has 100 turbines with 300MW capacity at present.
Last year, Marine Scotland published a strategic environmental assessment for offshore wind energy. A short-term plan (up until 2020) proposed the development of ten sites, for which the Crown Estate has granted exclusivity agreements to developers. A medium-term plan, for 2020 to 2030, proposes a further 25 options for development.
Johanna Yates, Scottish Renewables offshore policy manager, said: “The substantial economic benefits anticipated by this project are a reflection of the scale of benefits this growing industry can bring.
“We anticipate as many as 28,000 new jobs created directly from offshore wind within the decade, with a further 20,000 employed in businesses supplying such projects amounting to £7 billion pounds of value added to our economy.”
Email to a friend
Print this page- Alan Pattullo: Dignity, not sanctimony, is required at Parkhead
- 300 jobs at risk as Ryanair axes five Edinburgh routes
- Suzanne Pilley trial: I kissed her goodbye then never saw her again, says would-be lover
- Rangers administration: Craig Whyte’s promise to step aside and hand Rangers over to fans ‘ludicrous’
- David Cameron is playing into the SNP’s hands, says Michael Forsyth
- Scottish independence: Spectre of border controls raised by top Tory
- David Cameron is playing into the SNP’s hands, says Michael Forsyth
- Scottish independence: Alex Salmond hits back at Tory ‘Bourbons’ in battle over devo-max
- Scottish independence: Anti-Scottish jibes boost separation, Michael Gove warns Right
- Scottish independence: Let Scotland vote on independence in 19 months, says Michael Moore
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Edinburgh
Thursday 23 February 2012
Today
Light rain
Temperature: 7 C to 14 C
Wind Speed: 26 mph
Wind direction: South west
Tomorrow
Sunny spells
Temperature: 5 C to 10 C
Wind Speed: 29 mph
Wind direction: West
Comments
There are 286 comments to this article
Page 1 of 20
Kinghob
Monday, December 5, 2011 at 01:43 PMAye-England has no choice but to build nuclear power plants.....Scotland has no need (or desire) to do so!
Kinghob
Monday, December 5, 2011 at 01:40 PMi see bader is going off his rocker about boasting how great it is that England has a tiny wee wind farm-it is a deluded britadooner who would believe the is encouraging Scots to support the union by boasting about England-England is welcome to any achievements it can gain in any way of course-I just don't see how it will save the union for unionist twits to bang on about it on the scotsman!
Eddison548
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 05:15 PMWho are these idiots making decisions about Scotland's energy needs,they haven't a bloody clue but I bet it's a nice wee earner for them and their buddies ,whilst the rest of us pick up the tab.bloody wake up the lot of you and see this for what it is another scam.Scotland is rich with coal,oil,water we have all the ingredients for cheap energy don't allow these windmill scammers to get away with it.
THX1138
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 11:29 AM#229 No. You're not grasping the difference between a cause and an effect.
THX1138
Friday, November 25, 2011 at 10:32 AM#239 Not a duck at all - you asked about Newtonian gravity. The description of its observation have been superseded by another theory; therefore it is wrong, even if the equations work. " "these are established scientific facts..."-#221, THX1138 How robustly established are they compared with, say, Newton's (superseded) theory of gravity?" The ENSO is a description or explanation that fully fits the observations of sea water temperatures, surface and deep water currents, atmospheric pressure measurements, etc. in the Pacific. In that respect, therefore, it is better than Newtonian gravity, because Newtonian gravity doesn't explain all known observations. But, the description is far less mathematically precise than those given in Newtonian gravity, so in that way, it is inferior. Because of that, I regard it as a meaningful question, any more than asking "which is more true, Plate Tectonics or the Big Bang theory?" In terms of general acceptance, ENSO is in every undergraduate climate textbook and is universally accepted by climate scientists - including AGW skeptics. I know of no other explanation that claims to account for the observations in the Pacific.
Jimmy Neutron
Thursday, November 24, 2011 at 07:08 AMThats utter rubbish quite frankly. All sites are existing sites so the land would never be able to be used for anything else also its the only feasible way to use up the stockpile of plutonium that the uk has amassed. Plutonium cannot be easily long term stored and in fact to convert it for long term storage requires a much more dangerous and expensive plant to do so. So why not get the power from it? It cannot be left as is.
Taibhsearachd
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 09:21 PM#279 Jimmy Neutron: How my heart rejoices for England! 8 nuclear power stations built on what were formerly beautiful rocky headlands, which will deliver power for 60 years & then be uselessly "hot" for another 90-100 years before the sites can be cleared, requiring a 2nd generation of reactors to be built next to them, which will in turn be finished after 60 years & also uselessly "hot" for another 90-100 years, demanding a 3rd generation of reactors be built alongside THEM! And the poor wretches then living must care for all 3 generations of reactors. The land could have been used for other purposes, but nuclear accountancy excludes the opportunity costs of the useless 90-100 year "sits" as well as the devaluation of surrounding land. RE turbines are virtually 100% recyclable, & easy to dissemble & remove. How much of a nuclear power station can you safely recycle? It takes a few days to dissemble a wind turbine. How long does it take to decom a nuclear station? If a single wind or sea turbine fails there is no massive blackout, costing food processors & retailers £10s to 100s of millions - but nuclear accountancy excludes the costs of its emergency shutdowns for consumers. Last year there was a record low no. of SCRAMs in the USA: "only" 50! These unexpected nuclear outages caused vast & very expensive blackouts. Scotland has another 2 GW of identified pumped storage capacity left to develop & can develop another (roughly) 1 GW of conventional hydro. When the wind is blowing you can stop hydro turbines, allowing the water to back up for later use, & also pump water uphill at storage schemes. Add tidal, current, & wave generation, plus some solar PV,, solar water heating, geothermal energy, biomass, & carbon capture, & you'll see that beyond 20245 Scotland's need for nuclear is definitely questionable. I would NOT oppose a new nuclear power station, but I would require proof that it is essential, because when proper, all-inclusive accounting is done nuclear power is inordinately expensive, & right now nuclear stations are taking 9 years to build. Every day in Scotland more RE turbines start generating - you don't wait years & then get a sudden massive jump in power. With nuclear you still need pumped storage, because you can't cycle the power from a nuclear power station to match daily demand. And nuclear stations DO shutdown unexpectedly for long periods: weeks, months, & even permanently! My own detailed research tracking nuclear shutdowns indicates the true availability of nuclear stations - including unforeseen extensions of planned maintenance & refuelling shutdowns, plus stations that have had to be stopped permanently (& unexpectedly), is actually about 80%: much lower than the 90-91% availability upon which the industry bases its costs.
Jimmy Neutron
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 07:27 PMEngland is building 8 reactors dependant on which design wins they produce either 1500MWe or 1650MWe 24x7x365 each. That's the equivelent of between 24,000 and 26,400 enercon e82 windmills!
Tibially Challenged Douglas Bader
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 06:52 PM277 - Well, it certainly shows the SNP has blatantly lied twice. Once about keeping the lights on in the south and that Scotland doesn't import electricity from England.
Incandescent
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 06:38 PM#276 Duncan ------ Stultifying, er, I mean fascinating.
Tibially Challenged Douglas Bader
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 06:30 PM"Scotland is still reliant on electricity imported from England, despite a claim by the First Minister Alex Salmond last month that “Scotland hasn’t imported electricity for donkey’s years.” Between 6 March and 12 March consultant Stuart Young analysed data from the National Grid which shows the flow of electricity through the inter-connector which links Scotland and England. He found that Scotland imported electricity for a total of 32 hours and 50 minutes over the six day period, around 22 per cent of the time. At one point Scotland was importing one third of its electricity from south of the border. Stuart Brooks, chief executive of the John Muir Trust, the UK’s leading wild land charity, said: “Scotland is a net exporter of electricity, but this data shows that for significant periods of time we are relying on electricity being available from England. Increasing the proportion of energy we get from intermittent sources like wind is likely to exacerbate this issue. “The refusal of the Scottish Government to address the concerns raised increasingly by National Grid’s data shows an unwillingness to acknowledge the serious challenges Scotland faces - if the country is to have a secure electricity supply and reduce carbon emissions. “The John Muir Trust supports targets to reduce carbon emissions. There is a wealth of evidence to demonstrate the most cost-effective way to do this is to concentrate on energy conservation and efficiency, rather the current strategy which appears to be putting up wind turbines in remote and sensitive landscapes. Since significant subsidy is being taken from electricity consumers, it is the duty of all public bodies to ensure it is spent effectively.” The First Minister made the comment on a Radio Four programme, “Power of Scotland”, broadcast on 14 February. He said: “Scotland hasn't imported electricity for donkey’s years. I saw a newspaper headline… claiming that Scotland had imported French nuclear power - absolute nonsense. Certainly England may well have imported nuclear power from France but Scotland's an interconnector and that interconnector flows north to south.” http:www.jmt.orgnews.asp?s=2&cat=Campaigning&nid=JMT-N10555.................More SNP lies.
Incandescent
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 06:22 PM#269 Yeah,Tellen,Bader. ------ I now firmly believe that you have actually been Duncan in Edinburgh all along. The Googled information presented as "polymath" knowledge and the condescending tone are unmistakeable.
tested
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 05:19 PM#272 Look at the time scale. Building isnt anticipated until after the referendum so plenty time to back out. Not that they will have to as they know that the SNP have given up on full independence favouring a devo max option. Their investment will still be subsidised by all the energy consumers in the UK.
Tibially Challenged Douglas Bader
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 02:42 PM272 - They were awarded the licence in January 2010 Biffo. Oink! Oink! SPLAT!
Shawfield Urchin
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 01:05 PM“Moray Offshore Renewables Ltd (MORL) is a joint venture between a SpanishPortuguese company, EDP Renewables, and Spanish oil and gas firm Repsol Nuevas Energias UK.”...........Obviously these companies and their £4.5 billion investment do not realise that the forthcoming referendum is supposed to have put them off from investing in Scotland.....Don’t these people read the Hootsmon or listen to the wisdom of those economic sages who have been predicting that this type of economic activity will not happen?......... Apparently not.............arf, arf etc.
Page 1 of 20
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.