An unelected Tory energy minister has been criticised for making “ill advised” remarks about the north-east’s pioneering carbon capture proposals.
The UK Government rejected a funding bid for the Acorn project near Peterhead last week in favour of two schemes in the north of England.
Lord Callanan sparked a backlash by saying it was “not true” to say the Scottish project was the “most advanced” bid put forward, during an exchange in the House of Lords.
This is despite industry leaders such as Sir Ian Wood saying there are a “whole lot of reasons” why the Scottish bid should have been selected.
The Scottish Government stressed it represents the “least cost and most deliverable opportunity”.
‘It will almost certainly proceed’
In an exchange in the House of Lords, Scottish Labour peer George Foulkes claimed the “one that was most ready to go ahead is at St Fergus in Aberdeenshire“.
In response to whether the UK Government is “deliberately setting out to upset Scotland and the Scottish Executive”, Lord Callanan said a “rigorous process was gone through to determine which schemes should get the go-ahead”.
It is understood the cluster proposals were all studied in detail by a ​specialist panel using ​agreed criteria and the Scottish Cluster was ranked third, behind those which will be ​initially taken forward.
He added:Â “It is not true that the scheme to which he referred was the most advanced.
“An independent panel of experts studied all the bids.
“It is not the case that we are not going ahead with the scheme; it is on the reserve list.
“It will almost certainly proceed, but just not in the first wave.”
The Scottish Government said the north-east “has vast energy expertise and infrastructure and is ideally placed to carry this work forward”.
Speaking at a virtual summit organised by Energy Voice, energy tycoon Sir Ian said the region has “got a lot of infrastructure in place right now, and we wouldn’t have to invest in platforms and pipelines”.
‘Ill-advised remarks’
Aberdeen South MP Stephen Flynn poured scorn on the “ill-advised remarks” and questioned the UK Government’s commitment to future funding.
A previous BP-led carbon capture and storage scheme at Peterhead was abandoned in 2007, followed by the withdrawal of funding earmarked for a Shell/SSE-backed initiative at Peterhead in 2015.
The SNP politician said: “St Fergus was best placed for a track one carbon capture site and that’s a fact recognised by industry leaders and, prior to the announcement, politicians of all colours – what we saw last week was a political decision from a Tory government looking to shore up votes in the north of England.
“It’s therefore less than surprising that this unelected Lord, who appears to hail from the north-east of England, has chosen to make these ill-advised remarks.
“Despite what this unelected Lord might say, we have absolutely no reason to believe that the Tories will actually deliver further down the line given that they previously pulled the plug on £1billion of carbon capture investment in Peterhead in 2015.”
Conservative MP David Duguid, who represents Banff and Buchan, said while the decision is “disappointing”, the “SNP are wrong to suggest that this is the end of the story” for those involved in the project.
He added: “The SNP’s Green partners in government are against carbon capture entirely and would end it now if they could.”
‘Completely illogical’
A Scottish Government spokesman said: “It is completely illogical that the UK Government has passed over the Scottish Cluster bid in favour of areas outside Scotland with less expertise, depriving the north-east of many thousands of high-skilled high-wage jobs in the process.
“There is no realistic route to net zero without carbon capture, utilisation and storage as part of the energy system and the Scottish Cluster is absolutely vital for a just transition.
“We remain supportive of the Scottish Cluster, and call upon the UK Government to reverse this decision, and accelerate the Scottish Cluster to full Track-1 status without delay.”