With COP28 now under way, the focus is back on the environment and climate change, and in particular on the transition away from fossil fuels.
Earlier this week, the UK Government’s Nuclear Minister Andrew Bowie urged Scotland to re-engage with nuclear power, a stance that vexed two of our correspondents.
Read more: Scotland is self-sufficient in renewables, we don't need nuclear
Today a reader argues the case for both nuclear and gas.
George Rennie of Inverness writes:
"You published two letters (November 30) claiming that Scotland does not need nuclear power since, it is claimed, it is self-sufficient in renewables. A few facts illustrate the lack of depth to this argument.
"While reading the letters, 31 per cent of Scotland’s electricity was being generated at Torness Nuclear Power Station with a further 19 per cent generated by gas turbines. That is, half of Scotland’s electricity was being generated by power stations which it is intended to shut down.
"To give some idea of the importance of nuclear and gas generation, Torness can supply 1,190MW while gas-fuelled Peterhead Power Station can supply 1,180MW.
Read more: Humza Yousaf urged to harness 'global leadership' for ecocide success
"In contrast, the Whitelees wind farm, the UK’s largest onshore wind farm, has an installed capacity of 539MW but it is dependent upon wind conditions. When I most recently visited it (on October 14), it was displaying the figure of 3793MWh as the average daily output over the preceding three months.
"Dividing this figure by the 24 hours in a day gives an average output of 158MW.
Sign up for the Letter of the Day email.
"This morning, rather than being generated in Scotland, three per cent of Scotland’s electricity was imported. When Torness closes, rather than Scotland being self-sufficient in energy, we can expect to see the proportion of electricity imported across the border significantly increasing.
"Virtue-signalling and political rhetoric will not keep the lights on."
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