Poll shows Scots unwilling to pay bill hike for renewables
Around two-thirds of householders would not pay more for energy if it came from renewable sources, a poll suggests.
The poll commissioned by the Institution of Mechanical Engineers also found that around two-thirds (63%) believe the Government should not close nuclear power plants if it meant having to import energy to replace it.
The survey accompanied a report which said the Scottish Government’s “over-ambitious” plan to generate 100% of its electricity from renewable sources by 2020 “may increase fuel poverty and turn Scotland from a net exporter to a net importer of energy”.
The report also said that abandoning nuclear power would force Scotland to import power from non-renewable sources in England and Northern Ireland, reducing emissions savings.
It also suggests a reliance on wind power or other intermittent sources will require a large amount of back-up power when the wind doesn’t blow.
Colin Brown, director of engineering at the institution, said: “The Scottish Government is absolutely right to exploit the country’s huge potential for renewable energy. But we have serious concerns that the over-ambitious 2020 target will push up prices and, combined with the Government’s distaste for nuclear power, turn Scotland from a net exporter to a net importer of energy.
“Without any clear, workable and engineering-based plan of action, it is doubtful whether these targets are achievable at all. Holyrood needs to draw up a detailed, achievable and public strategy on how they plan to deliver these targets.”
The report also argues that the 100% renewables target will “exacerbate” rising oil and gas prices and “push more people into fuel poverty”, and that the Government’s policy “doesn’t appear to be based on any published strategy or engineering analysis of what is physically required to meet the 2020 target”.
A spokesman said: “There are currently no reliable official figures of Scottish, as opposed to UK, absolute energy consumption, combining heat, transport and electricity, and therefore nothing on which to base the percentage targets.
“The 100% target would require renewable energy capacity to be built at five times the rate of the last decade over the next nine years, despite the fact that all the best sites for onshore wind have already been taken. There are still many unknowns for offshore wind and Scotland currently lacks the skills base and manufacturing base to make this happen.”
He added: “If Holyrood wants to maintain its 100% electricity target by 2020 it should clearly state a strategy for achieving it, based on engineering rigour.
“The Scottish Government should prioritise the sourcing of secure, reliable energy supplies for the nation’s electricity, heat and transport needs, while effectively tackling the growing issue of fuel poverty.”
Email to a friend
Print this page- Family mourn death of Glasgow ‘fight’ schoolboy
- Rangers takeover: Duff & Phelps threaten legal action against BBC
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
- Rangers administration: Fans fear Duff & Phelps claims could scare off Green
- Rangers takeover: triple penalty punishment enough, says Johnston
- Alistair Darling leads ‘No to independence’ fight over tea and biscuits
- Scottish independence: SNP flip-flops over Nato
- Scottish Independence: SNP ‘won’t be Yes campaign’s only voice’
- Scottish independence: Alex Salmond’s pledge to sign up 1m voters
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Edinburgh
Sunday 27 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 11 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 9 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Comments
There are 53 comments to this article
Page 1 of 4
Tom Buidhe
Saturday, November 5, 2011 at 07:02 AMGradually it is dawning on everyone except the SNP leadership that carbon surcharges and taxes have been steadily eroding the competitiveness of European and particularly UK industry. As Europe flounders in debt and with escalating unemployment it is no surprise that China, India, Canada and Australia power ahead. We have Europe with it's carbon credit stifled industry grovelling for loans from the world's biggest and fastest expanding carbon emissions country, it is no coincidence that the top destinations for Greeks leaving their sinking ship are Canada and Australia. Perhaps the saddest part is the knowledge that energy efficient producers in Europe and the USA are being replaced by energy squandering producers in China.
Richard Lionheart
Friday, November 4, 2011 at 05:02 PMIf this is the case then Scots need to start making it clear to their elected politicians that they want them to stop this futile bid to stop the climate changing. Unless they do then, they will pay through the nose for energy in times to come and Third World countries will be denied electric power. End Green Anarchist Policies Now = Save the Human Race and the Planet
A Chemist Writes
Friday, November 4, 2011 at 11:15 AM#43 Old Jim again. Perhaps you should check your facts before trying to discredit the IMechE. Orville Wright was in fact made an Honorary Fellow of the IMechE in 1942 in honour of his work developing flight.
Electric Hermit
Friday, November 4, 2011 at 11:15 AM48 A Chemist Writes "Do you agree or disagree that pursuing the SNP renewables policy is going to place more people in fuel poverty?" - I accept that the Scottish Government's renewables development policy will be blamed for any increase in fuel poverty regardless of the facts. But this is all politically motivated and shouldn't be given too much weight. The simple truth is that fuel poverty, like other forms of poverty, will always tend to increase due to the workings of the market capitalist system. If the Scottish Government totally abandoned its current policy tomorrow, fuel poverty would still be predicted to increase.
A Chemist Writes
Friday, November 4, 2011 at 11:09 AM#43 Old Jim. You are mistaken. The IMechE report (the Mechanics Institute is a totally separate body) clearly talks about all renewables, not just wind. It is available on their website - it is worth a read. The sample size and date will be published in their monthly magazine which is available to members.
A Chemist Writes
Friday, November 4, 2011 at 10:58 AM#31 Hermit. Let's try again. Presumably by now you have read the IMechE report. It clearly says that the SG target to eradicate fuel poverty by 2016 is already at risk, and is further at risk due to the cost of renewables. You clearly support the SNP renewables policy. Do you agree or disagree that pursuing the SNP renewables policy is going to place more people in fuel poverty?
Electric Hermit
Friday, November 4, 2011 at 10:32 AM45 tested "The only problem is that Scotland's future lies in oil..." - All of Scotland's future? Forever? You have uncovered a limitless, eternal supply of oil? Where is it?
M78
Friday, November 4, 2011 at 10:26 AMIf you asked a thousand people if they would like to die tomorrow----yes-----no No prizes for guessing the answer. Seems the unionists will use any means to do Scotland down, viz. yesterday's F.M's questions in which Nicola wiped the floor with Elmer, no wonder he is running away---again.
tested
Friday, November 4, 2011 at 09:40 AM#43 and #44 Lot of talk no substance. Same stuff we have been hearing for over a decade. The SNP's renewables policy was a party political device to catch the "green" vote and convince the scottish people that there was a bright new future for Scotland and therefore independence was a realistic future. Many years on and what have we got - a load of imported windmills providing meagre amounts of unreliable electricity and no demonstrable reduction in CO2 emissions. As a lifelong supporter of independence I have always viewed the renewables farce as a barrier to independence rather than a boost. Yes there are a lot of clever people in the SNP, Alex being prime. Yes, they got themselves elected. Now they have to deliver independence while still keeping the "gullible greens" on board. The only problem is that Scotland's future lies in oil and "greens" are not necessarily in favour of independence.
Huntly Loon
Friday, November 4, 2011 at 01:49 AMNo one wants to pay higher fuel bills. They are already enormous and that is because of rising fossil fuel costs. By 2020 goodness knows how much fossil fuels will be costing and any electricity produced from them. Of course the setting up new technologies and infrastructures will not come cheap, but the actual cost of the energy that renewables use costs diddly squat and will still be diddly squat in 2020. Wind, wave and tides dont need to be purchased from Russian Gas suppliers. But we have the Unionists now wanting to turn back the tide on renewable energy because they see it as an SNP hobbyhorse. We will be confronted by all the dirty tricks that the UK's vast propaganda machine can pull. fifty years ago we were all told of the wonders of nuclear power that would be too cheap to meter. It was only ever developed for the nuclear weapons industry and we never paid the real costs in our fuel bills. Once the trurbines that harness the tides are in place we will be thankful we did so. Until then subsidies have to be put in place that regulates the cost of energy to ordinary consumers. Once the systems are developed not only will it be producing energy for us but it will be a technology that will provide jobs here as hopefully we will be the pioneers that will export the skills to the rest of the world. We must be ambitious and positive.
Old Jim
Friday, November 4, 2011 at 01:43 AM"The poll commissioned by the Institution of Mechanical Engineers also found that around two-thirds (63%) believe the Government should not close nuclear power plants if it meant having to import energy to replace it" First of all, when was the poll conducted?, what was the sampling? was it 500?, 700?, 1000?, 2000? - all very vague stuff from an Institute that likes accuracies! The question 'Would you want to pay more (for your energy)' So are we surprised that someone says 'No I would not like to pay more' (you can apply that to ANYTHING), so it looks like a dodgy question. Then there is the assumption and this is the best part, that energy generated from renewables will be more expensive than energy generated from coalgasoilnuclear. Which is a strange assumption based on the hypothesis that renewables will always be more expensive than other forms, except the Insitute (remember the men that like accuracies) conveniently forget that Nuclear generation is genorously subsidised.. The other flaw in the Inst of Mechanics, is the only mention Wind, ignoring Tide and wave energy. Some how I'm glad these guys were not around when Orville Wright was tinkering with his powered flight machine. They would be telling people that powered flight wasnt reliable, too costly and we should stick to steam powerd trains! Everyone should realise and appreciate,we are at the very start in regards renewables. The most obvious is the one most of us see and thats wind turbines. But thats not ALL renewables. Wave and tidal generation is being developed and will eventually overtake wind, in terms of power output. Scotland is actually leading the way in wave and tidal technology. Scotland is also blessed, by having strong wave and tidal currents, especially in the Pentland Firth. All this paper is doing is continueing its attack on the SNP , by using these English based reports. But dont take my word for it, start Googling and find out yourself about whats giong on
brianwci
Friday, November 4, 2011 at 01:06 AMWould you be willing to pay more for your fuel bills if..............NO! Who isn't going to say NO to a question along those lines? Clearly the engineers think they are dealing with the Labour Party or some other Unionist party who put London's interests before country. The actual raison d'etre of the SNP is NOT Independence, that's just the vehicle, the raison d'etre is to give the people of Scotland a better life. They are not going to do that by making their fuel bills higher. The SNP is NOT full of idiots, these are the same people who pulled off the electoral 'impossibility' of winning complete power in Holyrood. People rightly trust their judgement. Salmond is in the Middle East right now arranging investments in renewables in exchange for R&D information. The level of stupidity written on these boards by unionists is laughable in the extreme, almost as bad as the Scotsman's daily diatribe of unionist propaganda articles. Independence is coming, live with it!
The Tin Man
Friday, November 4, 2011 at 12:44 AMThe most bizarre thing is that the support of current UK energy policy is very much a nat crusade. You could say that the SNP support UK energy policy even more than Westminster, which is a breath of fresh air, at least. A few days ago we have people saying that there would be investment uncertainty about renewable energy on Scotland, because the government subsidy for renewable energy was uncertain due to the referendum. Then we had his Alexness retort that such subsidies, and consequent investment, would depend on subsidies set by foreign countries, if everything went His way. The thing is, they are both correct, and they are agreeing with each other.
SimonHurrll
Friday, November 4, 2011 at 12:04 AMComment removed by moderator
tested
Thursday, November 3, 2011 at 10:41 PMI dont know the relative costsubsidy of nuclear v renewables but if nuclear is indeed subsidised then I assume it is by way of tax revenue. Taxes are are based on our ability to pay and include revenues from companies. The more affluent an individual or company the more tax they pay (please dont go into the tax evasion rant it has minor relevance). Renewable susidies are included in our energy bills and therefore are not based on our ability to pay and therefore impact much more on the poorer in society hence increasing numbers in fuel poverty. There is also the very relevant point that with nuclear you get something that delivers unlike windpower. Oh and before all the anti nukes start screeching I'm not a supporter of nuclear energy nor a unionist naysayer just pointing out what should be obvious.
Page 1 of 4
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.