On 18 September, the people of Scotland will vote on whether their country should become independent of the UK. This article is part of our " Four futures for an independent Scotland " special report, looking at the choices a newly independent Scotland could make.

Scotland’s current and future wind farms

Scotland is arguably one of the greenest countries in Europe. It produces 40 per cent of Scottish electricity demand from renewable sources, and models suggest this could rise to 67 per cent by 2018. That’s closing in on the government’s goal of producing enough green power to supply the equivalent of all of Scottish demand by 2020.

Some fear that independence means this goal will be too expensive for Scotland because offshore wind is expensive. “It’s silly to say it’s going to be expensive,” says David Toke of the University of Aberdeen, “when in fact it can be done pretty cheaply onshore.” (see diagram, above right)

Toke and his colleagues published estimates last year suggesting that independence would ruin Scotland’s chances of hitting its green goal. But later that year the team made a U-turn: they now say that it will be cheaper for Scotland to pursue its 2020 target as an independent nation.

What changed? Newly announced nuclear power stations will need funding in the UK and new financial policies heavily favour nuclear over wind power.


So it now makes more sense for a green Scottish consumer to vote for independence, says Toke. Electricity bills will still go up – by about 7 per cent, he claims – and this will pay for onshore wind power. In the UK, bills would rise by 8 to 10 per cent to pay for new nuclear, Toke says.

An independent Scotland will need a close electrical alliance with England and Wales. A power-sharing market that allows all those involved to navigate the peaks and troughs of supply and demand is a tricky business. This balancing act is particularly tough when fickle renewables are involved, but there is a precedent in Scandinavia. Nord Pool is a power-sharing market on a grid that runs largely on renewables.

Denmark, for instance, has a huge amount of wind power. When it produces more than it can use, it simply sends it out to its Nord Pool partners and makes money on the transaction. But wind does not offer constant energy so the Danes need back up. In part that comes from Norway, which can sell its abundant hydropower to the Danes in their times of need. Accordingly, Scotland’s incumbent Scottish National Party (SNP) has proposed an “energy partnership” with the UK.

Independence will allow the party to take control of national regulation, and implement measures like better loans for companies wishing to build new renewable power stations or premium rates for renewable energy companies.

A further measure that Toke and his colleagues advocate is to allow small companies and even individuals to profit from feed-in tariffs. Existing feed-in tariffs from the UK government mean only very large power companies can sell renewable power to the grid. The result would be a more distributed power grid, which has the benefit of being less vulnerable to extreme weather events that can knock out centralised grids if they hit key power stations.

With all these measures on the table, Toke estimates that Scotland can meet its 100 per cent target by 2023 for less money than it would if it remained part of the UK.

Don’t be fooled by all this green ambition – Scotland won’t be kicking the oil habit. Its target is to produce the equivalent of 100 per cent of Scottish demand with renewables, but the country will remain a big energy exporter. The excess will come largely from its traditional fossil fuel and nuclear power resources.

But the SNP says emphasis will be placed on developing carbon dioxide capture and storage for its fossil fuel power stations. It’s not easy being green, but independence might make it a little easier.