For the past two decades Scotland has had an excess of electrical generation capacity and has been annually exporting a great deal of electricity to England. Strangely, no-one ever asks why this is the case.
Just why did Scotland emerge with such a massive excess of generating capacity in the early 1980s? Who sanctioned this state of affairs and was it done for the benefit of Scotland?
Ironically, we are back to the issue of nuclear power stations.
When Mrs Thatcher became Prime Minister, the miners were perceived to have too much power. To dish them, it was decided, inter alia, that we should have a couple more nuclear power stations; and where better to put one than Scotland, where planning permission existed for six reactors at Torness. At that time, Scotland did not need such a station. We were not short of generating capacity and another nuclear power station with a capacity of 1200mW would give us an extraordinary excess. Indeed, the select committee report in 1981 could find no good reason why this power station was being built.
But a pliable SSEB duly obliged and Torness was completed at a cost of £2500m.
Torness was never justified in capacity or economic terms. Indeed, it caused substantial economic damage to Scotland by keeping electricity prices higher than they need have been, since, during the construction phase, the interest on the capital borrowed was charged to the ongoing price of electricity in the SSEB area.
All that is water under the bridge although the subject is surely deserving of a little further investigation to expose just who the culprits were. But at least we can rest assured that we now have an SNP government in Edinburgh, and this time round Scotland will not have an unwanted and unnecessary nuclear power station foisted upon us again just to suit a Westminster political need.
Nick Dekker, 1 Nairn Way, Cumbernauld.
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 hereComments are closed on this article