Letters / What could possibly go wrong?
The SNP’s new energy policy for independence (“It’s Scotland’s Energy”) states that Scotland will have its own, breakaway electricity market, separate from the UK. Distance-to-demand “grid connection charges” will end, less gas power will be used, and our electricity prices will fall by a third”, due to “low cost renewables”?
Scottish government policies are credited with the “success of Scottish renewables”, viz.:
Installed renewable capacity in 2025 of 17.7GW (3.5 times Scotland’s winter peak demand!).
1,114 renewable energy projects (June 2025) with an estimated capacity of 76.5 GW in the planning pipeline.
Combining installed and planned projects gives a total of 94.2GW, 19 times Scotland’s winter peak demand, almost double that of the entire UK!
Wonderful! What could possibly go wrong?
The stated price for offshore wind is £44/MWh (4.4p/kWh unit), however, the UK government’s latest offshore wind contract price cap is £113/MWh (11.3p/kWh unit)?
Why is the UK government price higher?
The Department of Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) recently admitted over-estimating its offshore wind output projections by 20 per cent, and capital/operational costs are also soaring.
In 2023, the UK offshore wind auction (price cap £44/MWh) received no bids. Zippo. The BBC reported, “Industry insiders told the BBC that the £44 per megawatt hour price floor(sic) set for the latest auction failed to take account of higher costs.”
Energy analysts, McKinsey & Co., noted, “…. a relatively high …. (rate) …. of project cancellations following communicated cost increases of between 40 and 60 percent.”
And from Energy UK: “Ørsted noted that the continued increase of supply chain costs, higher interest rates, and risks to delivery of its Hornsea Four project were reasons for … (dropping) … the projects.”
Alas, it seems offshore wind is not viable at £44/MWh, or anything like it.
NB. To the contract price, add the cost of long, otherwise unnecessary, transmission lines and associated energy losses; pumped storage and batteries; gas and/or imported nuclear power to maintain grid stability and security of supply; plus other policy costs paid for by energy companies e.g. home insulation, heat pumps, community benefit, etc., all ultimately charged to ‘Indy Scottish’ consumers’ bills.
And to crown it all, grid connection charges will still be payable at the border, for exports.
Will the UK government force English and Welsh consumers to subsidise renewables contracts for 19-times our winter peak demand, when existing contracts expire? To subsidise a foreign (EU?) country’s renewables to compete with their own, while reducing Scottish prices by a third?
Aye. “Pigs might fly!”
The policy will need to be withdrawn and revised to take account of these grave errors.
John Tulloch
Aberdeen
