Research papers published by the David Hume Institute at the University of Edinburgh have raised questions over the security of an independent Scotland’s electricity supply. They state that a separate Scotland would have a tougher time keeping the lights on than if we remained in the UK.
They highlight that by having a smaller economy a separate Scotland would be less able to trade electricity, have a smaller storage capacity and a more restrictive transmission system. They also raise doubts over whether the development of renewable energy could continue without electricity prices rising ‘significantly’, due to the loss of subsidies.
Murdo Fraser MSP, Convener of the Scottish Parliament’s energy committee, said:
“These research papers once again highlight the uncertainty surrounding what would happen in a separate Scotland.
“A key priority for any government is maintaining a secure energy supply and making sure that the lights are kept on – but these findings show that this is far from certain if Scotland chooses to separate from the rest of the UK.
“Not only would it limit our energy storage capacity and our ability to trade electricity, it would place a huge reliance on renewable energy.
“With the Scottish Government’s energy policy almost entirely focused on wind energy it would leave us with an unreliable and intermittent energy supply without any large-scale conventional back-up.
“In addition to the large subsidies these wind turbines receive, it will leave voters wondering not only if their lights will stay on in a separate Scotland, but whether they can afford to keep them on at all.
“Once again the flaws in the SNP’s energy plans post-independence are looking shaky at best. The gamble they are asking Scots voters to take next year is becoming an increasingly tough sell.”
