5 ms·

This is somewhat misleading - it appears to be offsetting energy exported when there's particularly good conditions for renewables against times when there's no

This is somewhat misleading - it appears to be offsetting energy exported when there's particularly good conditions for renewables against times when there's not. In reality they are still both burning some fossil fuels and importing energy from countries that are burning fossil fuels. What really should matter is the carbon intensity of both electricity production and consumption. In terms of hard numbers for Scotland, their carbon intensity is 59 gCO2/KWh (https://www.carbonintensity.org.uk/ https://www.carbonintensity.org.uk/), which is actually pretty great. You can compare against other countries here - https://www.electricitymap.org https://www.electricitymap.org. Here's the current breakdown of their electricity production: Wind: 36.5% Nuclear: 31.1% Hydro: 16.7% Gas: 13.5% Biomass: 1.4% So right now they are 52.2% renewable energy. Presuming they are running renewables to capacity, this low carbon intensity figure is actually being kept low due to the fact they are sourcing a third of their load from nuclear. Should the Scottish government phase out nuclear as they are currently planning (https://www.gov.scot/policies/nuclear-energy/ https://www.gov.scot/policies/nuclear-energy/), then we can expect this carbon intensity to rise as gas is used to pick up the base load when conditions for renewables aren't favourable.

elfexec 7y ago
Of course it's misleading. It's PR/virtue signaling by wealthy privileged european nation. It's like how Ireland was one of the great recycling nations of the world. Did you know that they recycled nearly all of their plastic? Turns out that they just ship their plastic to china. https://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-plastic-waste-3786393-Jan2018/ https://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-plastic-waste-3786393-Jan2... Sort of like how Norway is pro-environmental and anti-fossil fuel nation. Did you know that they have a trillion dollar soveriegn wealth fund and they are courageous going to divest all investments in oil companies? Of course you did because of all the PR about their divestment. But did you know that the money in the trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund all came from the oil they sold? Did you know that norway is the 4th largest oil producer per capita? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_produ... Wealthy european countries love to virtue signal and pat themselves on the back and they are especially hypocritical about it.
- samcday 7y ago
  As an Australian pulling my hair out about our domestic policies w.r.t to fossil fuel exports / consumption, let me just say I would take token gestures and virtue signalling over total ignorance, passivity and inaction, any day of the week.
- v77 7y ago
  I think this is a great achievement by Scotland but I agree with your general point. I was disappointed to see that the NY Times great series on EU farm subsidies and their massive environmental cost got no traction here but negative news about the EU doesn't seem to get much of an audience.
- chimprich 7y ago
  > But did you know that the money in the trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund all came from the oil they sold? I think it's a positive thing that one of the world's largest oil producers is moving away from fossil fuels and that they're being vocal about it. We could do with more virtue from leading countries, and signalling about it.
  - fredthomsen 7y ago
    Agreed. All countries want to be seen as leaders, and this can nudge them in the right direction.
  - Ntrails 7y ago
    > One of the world's largest oil producers is moving away from fossil fuels I mean, afaik, they're not moving away from generating oil and selling it. Arguably given the SWF is based on oil production/extraction revenues the obvious conclusion is that they were over exposed and this dis-investment is more like sensible diversification. But maybe that's just cynicism
    - lhopki01 7y ago
      They're not moving away. They've just opened up a new field. https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/19/business/norway-oil-field-climate-change-intl/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/19/business/norway-oil-field-cli...
gtk40 7y ago
I can't figure out which numbers you added to get 52.2% renewable. I would say wind, hydro, and biomass are renewable, with the possible addition of nuclear. Even just wind and hydro add up to (slightly) more.
- mcjiggerlog 7y ago
  It was a typo, it was 53.2% for wind + hydro. Biomass I refuse to count as it is absolutely awful for the environment. Nuclear is not technically renewable either. Regardless, I agree that getting fixated on the "renewable" label is not particularly productive. What matters is "zero-carbon".
  - ZeroGravitas 7y ago
    Biomass can cover a range of technologies, some of which are greener than others e.g. if you capture methane from landfills or anaerobic digestion of organic waste then the absolute best thing to do would be to turn it into chemical feedstocks, but burning it for energy is definitely better than just letting it rot and escape into the atmosphere while also burning using fossil methane gas
  - manfredo 7y ago
    Nuclear is renewable through seawater extraction: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2016/07/01/uranium-seawater-extraction-makes-nuclear-power-completely-renewable/#5ff98e48159a https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2016/07/01/uranium-s... If we want to get pedantic, there's a finite amount of fissile material. But then again solar isn't technically renewable either, since there's a finite amount of hydrogen in the sun.

elfexec 7y ago

Of course it's misleading. It's PR/virtue signaling by wealthy privileged european nation. It's like how Ireland was one of the great recycling nations of the world. Did you know that they recycled nearly all of their plastic? Turns out that they just ship their plastic to china. https://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-plastic-waste-3786393-Jan2018/ https://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-plastic-waste-3786393-Jan2... Sort of like how Norway is pro-environmental and anti-fossil fuel nation. Did you know that they have a trillion dollar soveriegn wealth fund and they are courageous going to divest all investments in oil companies? Of course you did because of all the PR about their divestment. But did you know that the money in the trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund all came from the oil they sold? Did you know that norway is the 4th largest oil producer per capita? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_produ... Wealthy european countries love to virtue signal and pat themselves on the back and they are especially hypocritical about it.

samcday 7y ago
As an Australian pulling my hair out about our domestic policies w.r.t to fossil fuel exports / consumption, let me just say I would take token gestures and virtue signalling over total ignorance, passivity and inaction, any day of the week.
v77 7y ago
I think this is a great achievement by Scotland but I agree with your general point. I was disappointed to see that the NY Times great series on EU farm subsidies and their massive environmental cost got no traction here but negative news about the EU doesn't seem to get much of an audience.
chimprich 7y ago
> But did you know that the money in the trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund all came from the oil they sold? I think it's a positive thing that one of the world's largest oil producers is moving away from fossil fuels and that they're being vocal about it. We could do with more virtue from leading countries, and signalling about it.
- fredthomsen 7y ago
  Agreed. All countries want to be seen as leaders, and this can nudge them in the right direction.
- Ntrails 7y ago
  > One of the world's largest oil producers is moving away from fossil fuels I mean, afaik, they're not moving away from generating oil and selling it. Arguably given the SWF is based on oil production/extraction revenues the obvious conclusion is that they were over exposed and this dis-investment is more like sensible diversification. But maybe that's just cynicism
  - lhopki01 7y ago
    They're not moving away. They've just opened up a new field. https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/19/business/norway-oil-field-climate-change-intl/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/19/business/norway-oil-field-cli...

gtk40 7y ago

I can't figure out which numbers you added to get 52.2% renewable. I would say wind, hydro, and biomass are renewable, with the possible addition of nuclear. Even just wind and hydro add up to (slightly) more.

mcjiggerlog 7y ago
It was a typo, it was 53.2% for wind + hydro. Biomass I refuse to count as it is absolutely awful for the environment. Nuclear is not technically renewable either. Regardless, I agree that getting fixated on the "renewable" label is not particularly productive. What matters is "zero-carbon".
- ZeroGravitas 7y ago
  Biomass can cover a range of technologies, some of which are greener than others e.g. if you capture methane from landfills or anaerobic digestion of organic waste then the absolute best thing to do would be to turn it into chemical feedstocks, but burning it for energy is definitely better than just letting it rot and escape into the atmosphere while also burning using fossil methane gas
- manfredo 7y ago
  Nuclear is renewable through seawater extraction: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2016/07/01/uranium-seawater-extraction-makes-nuclear-power-completely-renewable/#5ff98e48159a https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2016/07/01/uranium-s... If we want to get pedantic, there's a finite amount of fissile material. But then again solar isn't technically renewable either, since there's a finite amount of hydrogen in the sun.