How interesting to learn that Peterhead is now the only power station in the running for the Westminster money on offer for carbon capture.
We could have been at this point a few years ago, when this was a new technology devised in Aberdeen, no other country had developed it and Scotland could have been a world leader, able to sell the techniques and skills around the globe, if Westminster had backed the pilot proposed for Peterhead in cooperation with Shell, using its redundant oil facilities.
But Westminster refused to back this for the most specious of excuses. Would Scotland becoming a world leader in something with such potential not have benefitted the Scottish economy and thereby the UK as well?
But then Westminster backing waited for other UK power sources to enter the competition, while other countries, as usual, stole a march on us by taking the technology forward so that we lost our pre-eminent position in the marketplace. So now we have only Peterhead able to take this project forward. How ironic; back to square one. One has to suspect that this was a deliberate attempt to prevent too much benefit to the Scottish economy, which might have been a boost in the independence debate.
Let us also consider the anomaly, or sheer hypocrisy, of Westminster maintaining that the high cost of connecting renewables to the national grid from Scotland is intended to encourage production of renewable energy as close to the point of use as possible, while it cuts the incentives to local schemes and even to the likes of solar panels on the property that uses the power – and now intends imposing carbon taxes on such schemes that produce no carbon.
P Davidson,
22 Gartcows Road,
Falkirk.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel