| Allan Wilson:
This has been
an informed debate. I congratulate Robin Harper on his choice of subject.
What has been said confirms that it is a matter of great importance to
Scotland. I confirm to Cathy Jamieson and all other members who have expressed
views on the renewables obligations for Scotland that the consultation
will be considered by the Executive. I would be treating that process with
contempt if I prejudged its outcome before the consultation concludes tomorrow.
Many members
have asked questions about the validity of recovering energy from waste
and about the impact of wind turbines on Scotland's environment. I am conscious
of the strong feelings that wind power whips up, if you will excuse the
pun, Presiding Officer. The Executive does not envisage vast tracts of
Scotland being populated by wind turbines. Not even the most enthusiastic
advocate of wind energy would wish that. To reiterate what John Scott said,
a balance has to be struck. If we are to meet our renewable energy targets,
wind energy clearly has a major part to play, but that consideration should
be set against our other important commitment to safeguard as far as possible
our natural heritage from the impact of excessive and inappropriate development.
The SNP amendment
reflects a position on central planning. Our new planning guidelines were
warmly welcomed and new guidance has led to a real upsurge in interest
in new renewable energy developments. Approvals of wind farm applications
in Scotland are running at 60 to 70 per cent, which is much higher than
the rate in England and Wales. We do not need an audit plan or any of the
other trappings; we need to get on with the situation in hand.
Fiona McLeod:
rose—
Allan Wilson:
If Fiona McLeod does not mind, I would like to continue.
On grants for
existing hydro generation, I say to Bruce Crawford that small hydro stations
under 10 MW will be eligible for support, and support for incremental output
from larger hydro stations is still under discussion.
Maureen Macmillan,
Nora Radcliffe and others have made much of the potential of wave power.
I unequivocally support and encourage the work that is being done in Scotland
to allow us to harness that resource. In particular, I wish to commend
the LiMPET project in Islay, which is the first commercially operating
wave-power plant anywhere in the world. Wavegen in Inverness deserves to
be congratulated on its achievement. The LiMPET project is in place with
continuing support under the Scottish renewable energy obligation because
of the unique effort and unique support offered in Scotland.
On the recovery
of energy from waste, I say to Kenneth Macintosh that our consultation
document is just that—a genuine consultation. The Executive does not see
a compelling argument for or against recovering energy from waste. We are,
however, mindful of the duties that are imposed on all of us—and particularly
on Scotland's local authorities—by our waste strategy. We accept that incineration
alone is not an ideal way to deal with waste, but it has a part to play
in waste management in the right circumstances.
We are also
conscious of the new technology benefits that Scotland could derive from
being a leader in gasification and pyrolysis. I agree with Kenny MacAskill's
point about the need to make an economic case for renewables rather than
an emotional one. Much has been said about the lack of economic benefits
from our renewables project, but gasification and pyrolysis represent one
set of possibilities and I am sure that there will be others.
George Lyon
and Jamie McGrigor were among those who advised us to consider spending
public money to upgrade the electricity network. There are clear indications
that investment must be made in those networks, which are privately owned,
if we are to realise our targets. We have commissioned a study to examine
what action will be required and that study will report in mid-March. The
fairly odd proposition made by Fiona McLeod and Bruce Crawford—that biomass
can replace energy generated by coal and nuclear power—is simply not considered
feasible. Nuclear power meets more than 50 per cent of Scotland's energy
needs, whereas biomass is both expensive and small scale.
I have tried
to answer all the points that have been raised during the debate, but I
am conscious that time is against me. I will reply in writing to all the
points that I have not covered in my speech.
To
read this debate in full, click here
|
