Chamber
Plenary, 06 Oct 2004
06 Oct 2004 · S2 · Plenary
Item of business
Renewable Energy
The committee has not been that precise, but we are disappointed that the strategic framework that we asked for has not yet been accepted by the Executive. For the reasons that are outlined in the report, we believe that the framework is necessary to ensure that planning applications are dealt with more appropriately.
It was clear to us throughout the inquiry that Scotland is not reaping the full benefit of wind energy technology, but that the potential exists for us to become world leaders in marine energy. The Executive's response to our report states, for example, that by 2020 20 per cent of our electricity production could come from marine sources. We have the natural resources in Scotland and we have the scientists and the engineers, so there is genuine scope for investment now to pay huge dividends in the future in terms of high-quality sustainable employment and cleaner energy from renewable sources.
One of the Executive's newly established intermediary technology institutes is based in Aberdeen, with good reason. It has been given responsibility for developing energy technology in the city that has been the United Kingdom's oil capital for the past 40 years. It is essential that, through making the right links with our academics, investors and businesses, the institute develops modern energy technologies to ensure the next generation of energy supply. By doing that, Scotland will move to the forefront of this technology.
We are fortunate in Scotland because we are richly endowed with the raw materials for a variety of other renewable energy sources. In addition to marine energy, we have—believe it or not—one of the best solar energy sources in Europe. We also have acres of forest that can be used to provide fuel for biomass burners. All those could, potentially, transform some rural areas with the possibility of spin-off benefits in sustainable employment—so-called green jobs—in coppicing and forestry.
In the course of our inquiry, we saw and heard of a number of examples of very high-quality, but small-scale renewable energy developments. For example, by providing half of the domestic hot water requirements of an average house in Scotland, a typical domestic solar panel system would each year prevent the release of thousands of kilograms of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
We also heard about the development of a domestic wind turbine that would cost about £750 to install in a house, but which—it is estimated—would pay for itself in about five years and would provide 15 per cent of household electricity needs. Because of the major benefits that such micro-developments can deliver for some rural communities, they need to be assisted. The committee heard that some such communities are already demonstrating their determination to become leaders in renewable energy.
Planning was a major issue. The ability or otherwise of the planning process to cope with the growing demand for renewables was a recurring theme throughout the inquiry. Many, if not all, members would attest to the fact that one of the most controversial aspects of the development of renewable energy in Scotland has been the rapid increase in the number of onshore wind farms. Current figures point to a threefold increase in such developments by the end of next year. I am sure that we have all received representations from people who are either hugely in favour of or bitterly opposed to such developments. As a result, it is hardly surprising that the committee heard a range of views about their human, environmental, social and economic pros and cons.
It was abundantly clear that no one who is affected by the issue—from those who submit plans for wind farms, to people who live nearby, to the local authorities that are responsible for assessing the suitability of plans—is in any doubt that there are major weaknesses in the current planning system and that there is a lack of clear guidance from the Executive. As a result, we recommended in our report that the Executive take an active lead and develop the national strategic framework for wind farms, to which Christine Grahame referred. It is a matter of concern that the Executive has rejected that recommendation on the ground that it will review current Scottish planning policy on renewable energy development with an announcement expected in 2006. That takes no account of the need to act as quickly as possible, given that the present system clearly cannot deal with the scale of applications and the pace at which their number is increasing.
The Executive has not responded at all to the committee's recommendation that, for larger wind farm applications in which the final decision rests with Scottish ministers, a system should be established to allow local authorities to keep planning fees. After all, although they are not given responsibility for deciding on applications, local authorities are required to carry out the work that is associated with them. Arguments in favour of that change were made forcefully to us; the committee believes that the case is just. In evidence, the Deputy Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning accepted that and stated that the Executive would be
"happy to consider that point and whether there is a way in which we can satisfactorily address that concern."—[Official Report, Enterprise and Culture Committee, 30 March 2004; c 833.]
That has not happened. The Executive cannot have its cake and eat it. I hope that the new minister might have reconsidered the matter and that he will have something positive to say about it.
Overall, the Executive's response to the report is disappointing. I have mentioned some aspects, but I have to say that it was silent on a significant number of recommendations. Although we recommended the development of hydrogen technology as a means of countering intermittency problems, it was not mentioned in the Executive's response. I have commented on our recommendation that the Executive should establish a system to allow local authorities to be reimbursed for planning fees.
We also recommended that the Executive examine the potential for disseminating good practice and for linking the warm deal and new deal programmes; again, those were not mentioned in its response. Although we recommended that the Executive continue to raise the visibility of promoting the concept of community ownership of renewable projects, the Executive's response did not mention community ownership.
We recommended that, in developing the renewable energy sector as a priority, the Executive take the lead where the private sector is risk averse, that it undertake research as soon as possible to estimate the generating capacity that the market will be able to deliver by 2020 and that it develop a clear policy to ensure that communities in Scotland gain the maximum benefit from the renewables sector. None of those recommendations was mentioned in the Executive's response. We hope that the new minister will revisit the committee report and come back to us on the issues that the Executive has not addressed.
I thank everyone in Parliament who participated in the inquiry—not just the clerks and the Scottish Parliament information centre but those outwith the Parliament. It has been a good example of the way in which Scotland's public can engage in our work and contribute to the outcome.
Members of the Enterprise and Culture Committee spent a lot of time reading a lot of submissions and hearing a lot of evidence. At the end of that process, we produced a unanimous report and one that I commend to the Parliament.
I move,
That the Parliament commends the 6th Report 2004 (Session 2) of the Enterprise and Culture Committee, Renewable Energy in Scotland, including its support for the Scottish Executive's ambitious renewable energy targets; recognises that, if the targets are to be met, further development of all sources of renewable energy will be necessary, and urges the Executive to take active steps to ensure that the targets are met from a range of renewable sources including wind, wave, tidal, solar and bio-mass, that energy efficiency measures continue to increase and that the current planning regime is kept under review to facilitate this.
It was clear to us throughout the inquiry that Scotland is not reaping the full benefit of wind energy technology, but that the potential exists for us to become world leaders in marine energy. The Executive's response to our report states, for example, that by 2020 20 per cent of our electricity production could come from marine sources. We have the natural resources in Scotland and we have the scientists and the engineers, so there is genuine scope for investment now to pay huge dividends in the future in terms of high-quality sustainable employment and cleaner energy from renewable sources.
One of the Executive's newly established intermediary technology institutes is based in Aberdeen, with good reason. It has been given responsibility for developing energy technology in the city that has been the United Kingdom's oil capital for the past 40 years. It is essential that, through making the right links with our academics, investors and businesses, the institute develops modern energy technologies to ensure the next generation of energy supply. By doing that, Scotland will move to the forefront of this technology.
We are fortunate in Scotland because we are richly endowed with the raw materials for a variety of other renewable energy sources. In addition to marine energy, we have—believe it or not—one of the best solar energy sources in Europe. We also have acres of forest that can be used to provide fuel for biomass burners. All those could, potentially, transform some rural areas with the possibility of spin-off benefits in sustainable employment—so-called green jobs—in coppicing and forestry.
In the course of our inquiry, we saw and heard of a number of examples of very high-quality, but small-scale renewable energy developments. For example, by providing half of the domestic hot water requirements of an average house in Scotland, a typical domestic solar panel system would each year prevent the release of thousands of kilograms of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
We also heard about the development of a domestic wind turbine that would cost about £750 to install in a house, but which—it is estimated—would pay for itself in about five years and would provide 15 per cent of household electricity needs. Because of the major benefits that such micro-developments can deliver for some rural communities, they need to be assisted. The committee heard that some such communities are already demonstrating their determination to become leaders in renewable energy.
Planning was a major issue. The ability or otherwise of the planning process to cope with the growing demand for renewables was a recurring theme throughout the inquiry. Many, if not all, members would attest to the fact that one of the most controversial aspects of the development of renewable energy in Scotland has been the rapid increase in the number of onshore wind farms. Current figures point to a threefold increase in such developments by the end of next year. I am sure that we have all received representations from people who are either hugely in favour of or bitterly opposed to such developments. As a result, it is hardly surprising that the committee heard a range of views about their human, environmental, social and economic pros and cons.
It was abundantly clear that no one who is affected by the issue—from those who submit plans for wind farms, to people who live nearby, to the local authorities that are responsible for assessing the suitability of plans—is in any doubt that there are major weaknesses in the current planning system and that there is a lack of clear guidance from the Executive. As a result, we recommended in our report that the Executive take an active lead and develop the national strategic framework for wind farms, to which Christine Grahame referred. It is a matter of concern that the Executive has rejected that recommendation on the ground that it will review current Scottish planning policy on renewable energy development with an announcement expected in 2006. That takes no account of the need to act as quickly as possible, given that the present system clearly cannot deal with the scale of applications and the pace at which their number is increasing.
The Executive has not responded at all to the committee's recommendation that, for larger wind farm applications in which the final decision rests with Scottish ministers, a system should be established to allow local authorities to keep planning fees. After all, although they are not given responsibility for deciding on applications, local authorities are required to carry out the work that is associated with them. Arguments in favour of that change were made forcefully to us; the committee believes that the case is just. In evidence, the Deputy Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning accepted that and stated that the Executive would be
"happy to consider that point and whether there is a way in which we can satisfactorily address that concern."—[Official Report, Enterprise and Culture Committee, 30 March 2004; c 833.]
That has not happened. The Executive cannot have its cake and eat it. I hope that the new minister might have reconsidered the matter and that he will have something positive to say about it.
Overall, the Executive's response to the report is disappointing. I have mentioned some aspects, but I have to say that it was silent on a significant number of recommendations. Although we recommended the development of hydrogen technology as a means of countering intermittency problems, it was not mentioned in the Executive's response. I have commented on our recommendation that the Executive should establish a system to allow local authorities to be reimbursed for planning fees.
We also recommended that the Executive examine the potential for disseminating good practice and for linking the warm deal and new deal programmes; again, those were not mentioned in its response. Although we recommended that the Executive continue to raise the visibility of promoting the concept of community ownership of renewable projects, the Executive's response did not mention community ownership.
We recommended that, in developing the renewable energy sector as a priority, the Executive take the lead where the private sector is risk averse, that it undertake research as soon as possible to estimate the generating capacity that the market will be able to deliver by 2020 and that it develop a clear policy to ensure that communities in Scotland gain the maximum benefit from the renewables sector. None of those recommendations was mentioned in the Executive's response. We hope that the new minister will revisit the committee report and come back to us on the issues that the Executive has not addressed.
I thank everyone in Parliament who participated in the inquiry—not just the clerks and the Scottish Parliament information centre but those outwith the Parliament. It has been a good example of the way in which Scotland's public can engage in our work and contribute to the outcome.
Members of the Enterprise and Culture Committee spent a lot of time reading a lot of submissions and hearing a lot of evidence. At the end of that process, we produced a unanimous report and one that I commend to the Parliament.
I move,
That the Parliament commends the 6th Report 2004 (Session 2) of the Enterprise and Culture Committee, Renewable Energy in Scotland, including its support for the Scottish Executive's ambitious renewable energy targets; recognises that, if the targets are to be met, further development of all sources of renewable energy will be necessary, and urges the Executive to take active steps to ensure that the targets are met from a range of renewable sources including wind, wave, tidal, solar and bio-mass, that energy efficiency measures continue to increase and that the current planning regime is kept under review to facilitate this.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Murray Tosh):
Con
The next item of business is a debate on motion S2M-1762, in the name of Alex Neil, on behalf of the Enterprise and Culture Committee, on renewable energy in...
Alex Neil (Central Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
I am sorry, Presiding Officer, but the debate will be introduced by my colleague Mike Watson, who is the deputy convener of the committee.
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
In that case, I am happy to call Mike Watson.
Mike Watson (Glasgow Cathcart) (Lab):
Lab
I am pleased to open the debate on behalf of the Enterprise and Culture Committee. I do so as the deputy convener of the committee, as our convener throughou...
Christine May (Central Fife) (Lab):
Lab
Will Mike Watson confirm that, as I have, he has received representations on the trans-European networks and the potential of the European strand for interco...
Mike Watson:
Lab
Yes, like Christine May, I have received information about that and it seems to be a valuable contribution, because it is a trans-European project—as the nam...
Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con):
Con
Will the member take an intervention?
Mike Watson:
Lab
I would like to make some progress, although I might have time later.It is understandable that energy companies will want to use proven technology that makes...
Christine Grahame (South of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
As Mike Watson knows, I gave evidence to the committee on the Minchmoor petition. I note from recommendation 33 in the committee's report that the committee ...
Mike Watson:
Lab
The committee has not been that precise, but we are disappointed that the strategic framework that we asked for has not yet been accepted by the Executive. F...
The Deputy Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning (Allan Wilson):
Lab
Before I address the terms of the motion, I would like to express my admiration for the Enterprise and Culture Committee and its inquiry into renewable energ...
Phil Gallie:
Con
Will the minister give way on the issue of targets?
Allan Wilson:
Lab
Certainly.
Phil Gallie:
Con
Page 24 of the committee's report states that neither the Department of Trade and Industry nor the supply industry can identify what generation requirements ...
Allan Wilson:
Lab
We set targets for good reason—so that we can meet our renewables obligations. The environmental benefits and the benefits in economic performance are manife...
Richard Lochhead (North East Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
The minister talks about Scotland's potential to become a "renewables powerhouse", but does he accept that the current proposals of the National Grid Company...
Allan Wilson:
Lab
I understand the point that Mr Lochhead makes and I assure him that we are involved with our colleagues in the Scotland Office, the DTI and elsewhere to ensu...
Christine May:
Lab
The minister mentioned the Executive's welcome initiatives on biomass. Does he accept that there is some concern among producers about the decisions and atti...
Allan Wilson:
Lab
I am aware of those concerns. I understand that Scottish Coal and Ofgem, with the Executive as mediator, are seeking solutions to the problems in respect of ...
Murdo Fraser (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con):
Con
Will the minister give way?
Mr Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD):
LD
Will the minister give way?
Allan Wilson:
Lab
I am spoiled for choice. I give way to Murdo Fraser.
Murdo Fraser:
Con
I press the minister on his point about wave energy. Will he tell us what projects are available, perhaps funded by the enterprise companies, to encourage en...
Allan Wilson:
Lab
I am not familiar with the detail of the individual case to which the member referred, but I am happy to write to him. As I understand the position, the £50 ...
Mr Stone:
LD
Mike Watson referred to hydrogen power. Given that Arnold Schwarzenegger is having a hydrogen highway put in in California, will the minister tell us somethi...
Allan Wilson:
Lab
There is a school of thought that says that hydrogen will produce a large part of the energy that we need in the future. There is work in my constituency tha...
John Scott (Ayr) (Con):
Con
Will the minister give way?
Allan Wilson:
Lab
No. I have done reasonably well so far in taking interventions.Our forum for renewable energy development continues to produce results. FREDS envisages the E...
Mr John Swinney (North Tayside) (SNP):
SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Allan Wilson:
Lab
If the member does not mind, I would like to make progressIt is also worth noting that those large developments drew only a tiny handful of objections, which...