Draft Energy Strategy and Just Transition Plan consultation

There is no section to comment on the ministerial foreword or Executive Summary, so I’ve added my comments here.
1. Ministerial foreword - you mention a just transition for the oil and gas sector, but say nothing about the Nuclear Sector. Do these people, a lot of whom have dedicated their lives to providing Safe and Secure low cost electricity for Scotland not deserve Pa Just Transition. Page 92 states ‘around a quarter of respondents in the Nuclear industry’ responded to a survey of energy workers, half from oil and gas. Yet there is little or no detail on a just transition for Nuclear workers.
2. Page 10, note 3 compares HPC cost to an offshore wind cost, but makes no note of where the offshore wind cost is derived from. Is it not fairer to compare the cost of Nuclear to the projected average cost of electricity over the next 60 to 70 years from all sources, not just offshore wind?
3. Page 12 ‘Scotland is home to a multi-skilled energy workforce’ is a true statement but the omission of a just transition for Nuclear Power workers, and Conventional Power workers, is leading to a brain drain from Scotland as this workforce seeks employment elsewhere in the UK and beyond.

My comments below relate to Section 3 in general rather than this specific question.

4. General - The key to Energy Security will be a balanced Energy Policy, where Scotland has diversity and redundancy of Electricity production sources. From what I can see there is a heavy reliance on renewable generation (Figure 6 shows a heavy reliance on Renewable Generation 160TWhs out of 162 Twhs generated). The situation in 2010 shows a high degree of diversity of energy production. This should be an aim of any future energy strategy along with sufficient redundancy to allow for failures of any single source of energy production. It appears that wind technology onshore 20GW section 3.1.2, offshore 44GW section 3.1.1) is the only current viable growing option from the information set out, with hydrogen (25GW vision, nothing operational in section 3.1.7 and a high dependence on UK government as noted in section 4.1), hydro (1.69 GW section 3.1.5) wave and tidal (0.37GW section 3.1.3) solar (1.18 GW section 3.1.4) and bioenergy states 69GW in section 3.1.6 but this is clearly a mistake and should state around 1.04 GW) all representing small scale development.
5. Last paragraph of section 3.2 states the reality of dependence so,Ely on wind power where other sources of generation are required to be used in the absence of wind generation. This is a window into Scotlands future and should be a wake up call that this strategy addresses, but doesn’t. This strategy admits it doesn’t have an answer to this problem on a small scale and therefore doesn’t have an answer to the problem on a Scotland wide scenario.
6. Section 3.2.4. The case for no New Nuclear seems to be stem from the economic case, the case for SMRs on the environmental concerns. Is Nuclear not being progressed due to economics or environmental concerns Need to find info on cost of SMRs??
7. Section 3.2.4. Surely this strategy should look at the long term economics of nNuclear and not just the near to medium term.
8. Section 3.2.4, nice to see an olive branch provided to Fusion technology. It’s a petty more wasn’t done to secure the trial plant for Ardeer in the west Coast. I suspect Scotlands stance on Nuclear power was a significant underlying factor in this decision. This would have provided significant opportunity to the existing skill base for Nuclear in the west coast and brought more opportunities for the community of Stevenston and the wider Ayrshire coast.

I do believe we need to set a realistic ambition for Marine Energy to ensure we have a balanced energy portfolio. The current level of marine energy ambition is low in comparison to our wind ambitions and therefore only marginally helps toward a balanced energy policy.

I do believe we need to set a realistic ambition for wave and tidal to ensure we have a balanced energy portfolio. The current level of wave and tidal energy ambition is low in comparison to our wind ambitions and therefore only marginally helps toward a balanced energy policy.

I do believe we need to set a realistic ambition for Solar Energy to ensure we have a balanced energy portfolio. The current level of Solar energy ambition is low in comparison to our wind ambitions and therefore only marginally helps toward a balanced energy policy.

Hydrogen looks like the only source of energy likely to give a credible alternative to wind power as part of a balanced energy mix from the information provided. Therefore it is essential that we focus heavily on this are to ensure it becomes a viable energy source.

Your case study ‘Woodend Farming Partnership, Scottish Birders’ in section 4.3 is another example of diversity and redundancy in action where wind, solar and biomass are used to support the farm operations. We need this approach in the overall energy strategy.

Section 5.1 security of supply- here we note a high reliance on external countries for security of supply and the subsequent reliance on these countries for electricity price. We need to ensure we have long term secure contracts with these external countries to provide assurance of security if supply.

Section 5.1 Page 132, electrical system restoration. It seems to indicate renewables could be used for electrical system restoration, when it should state CAN as in future the bulk of the supply will be renewable. Page 133 provides an example using DRAX and Cruachan for restart emphasising the need for Thermal Generation to support a Black Start.