Well done Bio for locating this load of old cobblers. It’s so depressing to see that Swinney et al actually take it seriously. I’ve only skimmed the section on Energy and Climate Change and it’s obviously based on establishment climate change lies as put out by the likes of the Met Office.
Scotland has shot itself in the foot with its obsessive push towards unsustainable intermittent inertia-less renewables which are fundamentally incompatible with how the grid was designed to operate. If Scotland became detached from the UK and its (relatively) secure baseload and balancing electricity network via the imposition of zonal electricity pricing, or much worse, by independence, it could find itself up the proverbial energy supply creek without a paddle, as Dieter Helm notes here: https://x.com/KathrynPorter26/status/1937789656667443567.
Always appreciate your input Douglas as a concerned fellow Scot. Oh MSPs are deadly serious about all this. Literally. There were alot of eye openers in the document for me and i couldn't cover everything but stand outs were:
“The transition to net zero could boost productivity and living standards but it is likely not to be as productive as oil and gas was.’’
''There are ideas that A.I can help mitigate climate change,although at the moment A.I is contributing to the crisis.''
Once again, similarities with what’s going on here in Public Health Wales with their collaboration with the WHO and their regular ‘horizon scanning’ documents.
What did make me laugh (though it shouldn’t) was the reference to ‘high quality drinking water’.
"Anything can happen in the next half hour". ( oft heard in Stingray)...It is like all the Future Trends are going to come to pass, except there are always 'coulds.' And, 'events' can happen to derail the most well constructed future scenario. We hope.
"Being ‘sustainable’ will mean paying more for less."
Yes, that's obvious!
I was brought up in the 1950's, when Coal was King - smog was the weather most days, and as kids our noses ran constantly with green snot from the appalling urban air pollution. Bronchitis and lung diseases killed many working class people before their 60th birthdays. Or the cold. Our houses were cold as ice and full of mould. Because coal was expensive and time consuming.
Of course, we later experienced the gas-fired revolution - which was great - as long as the gas flowed like water. And the wonders of Nuclear power. Think Windscale, Chernobyl, and Three Mile Island.
But now the fossil fuels flows more slowly, and are harder to extract, and the price of gas and oil is through the roof - clean, cheap fossil fuels are only a stopgap - and nuclear power is looking increasingly expensive.
We are going to have to pay more whatever we do - and it all starts to get rather messy from here on in.
So this is saving the planet and only fossil fuels are bad? I'm really not seeing the same downsides with current fossil fuel/nuclear technology by comparison. The only issue i have is with vehicle exhausts which is why i could see hybrid as the standard rather than re-inventing the wheel.
''All three areas intended for deep-sea mining are therefore true biodiversity hotspots. They are very sensitive habitats that have developed over millions of years. 90 percent of the deep-sea inhabitants found there live in the top 10 centimetres of the seabed''
''Conservation groups are urging ministers to reject plans for an offshore wind farm which the developer predicts will kill tens of thousands of seabirds.''
''Approximately 90 percent of most PV modules are composed of glass. But this glass often cannot be recycled because it contains impurities such as plastic, lead, cadmium''
In the good old days, Scottish islanders used to eat Gannets and their eggs for food: so "Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose" eh?
I think gannets are important - and all wildlife, but changing from killing them from acid rain and cutting down trees for fuel to killing them because they are too dumb to avoid being hit by rather slow-moving wind turbines is all a bit 'theoretical', We live to survive, and lets not get all gooey eyed and sentimental about it ;-)
You didn't really address my points Rob and you sound so much like my MSP over this issue. I genuinely cannot see ANY significant if any human or environmental benefits to this 'green' tech you are so fond of. Fossil fuels are more environmentally/human friendly overall.
You might think so: but I disagree: I would far rather fill up my car's battery from my solar panels than from expensive imported fuel that funds wars.
a) Carbon extraction causes massive environmental and social damage in extraction areas like the Nigerian Delta (or even our huge residual paraffin red dirt mountains of slag near Linlithgow) - or when tankers sink (Torrey Canyon etc)
b) oil and gas extractions causes wars and bolsters oppressive regimes like Iran, Russia and Saudi Arabia
c) fossil fuels cause huge corruption scandals as the wealthy never trickles down
d) the easy stuff - that used to gush from the ground - is long gone. We are reaching a point where to cost of extraction is rapidly making the oil worth less than the costs of North Sea etc deep fields
e) the costs of renewables are coming down really fast due to efficiencies in manufacturing - Lithium being replaced by cheap sodium for example.
Sorry Rob not buying it. I just see alot of sales talk vs 'green' and 'renewable' and no actual benefits to the people. The environmental damage to manufacture ''green industries'' is enormous! You must rest well at night thinking about if everyone had an electric car and solar panels on their roofs there would be no more wars? lol Yeah. That's about as realistic as the sun not rising in the morning.
https://grid.iamkate.com shows current UK grid status is 56% renewables - and that means lubberly home grown energy from wind, water and sunshine - whats not to like?!!
I put my panels in 13 years ago and have generated 28,700 kWh of power to date - saving around 13 metric tons of coal from having to be mined. Mining is dirty and dangerous work - and causes massive health problems.
I'm all for critical thinking. Not going to dispute issues with coal in the 50's but a world with coal was better than a world without. Nuclear power is an impressive technology but like anything in life, has problems. But this is thankfully in the past.
The fuel prices are through the roof because of the net zero delusion and the war on fossil fuels by governments committed to the 'green' transition so that is simply a choice being made not an unavoidable reality.
I don't agree with ''paying more whatever we do and it all starts to get messy from here on in.'' You are clearly someone who has bought into 'green' technology utopia but you've convinced me even more with that remark i am correct to oppose the 'renewable/sustainable' madness that is before us. Sounds good but in practise for ordinary people i don't see any significant benefits. Higher bills, more tax for less services etc
I never once mentioned fracking. But to come back on your points i'd say let's solar panel an entire hillside or even farmland that could be used for food growing simultaneously whilst blanketing more hillsides with monstrous wind turbines which are an eyesore to Scotland's already beautiful natural environment and kill rare birds of prey too whilst we're at it..saving the planet?!
At least 30% of the planet is basically desert or wasted land, on which nothing much can grow or thrive. OK, a few cacti and the odd lizard.
Lets use it to generate solar and wind power - and also cover our car parks, factory roofs, hospitals and schools with solar panels - my own 16 rooftop panels are small potatoes, but with every man made south facing surface covered with panels it makes a huge difference. And they are a darned sight less ugly than reeking lums!
By the way, birds of prey have made a huge comeback, with red kites, osprey, and sea eagles thriving. Their main enemy is the grouse shootin' brigade of wax-jacket clad chums in their landrovers ....
Well done Bio for locating this load of old cobblers. It’s so depressing to see that Swinney et al actually take it seriously. I’ve only skimmed the section on Energy and Climate Change and it’s obviously based on establishment climate change lies as put out by the likes of the Met Office.
The section even starts with a Met Office graph of ominously rising UK temperatures but you can’t trust any Met Office temperature data, as I analysed in this recent comment: https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2025/06/28/what-is-the-point-of-the-uk-met-office/#comment-316525.
Scotland has shot itself in the foot with its obsessive push towards unsustainable intermittent inertia-less renewables which are fundamentally incompatible with how the grid was designed to operate. If Scotland became detached from the UK and its (relatively) secure baseload and balancing electricity network via the imposition of zonal electricity pricing, or much worse, by independence, it could find itself up the proverbial energy supply creek without a paddle, as Dieter Helm notes here: https://x.com/KathrynPorter26/status/1937789656667443567.
Always appreciate your input Douglas as a concerned fellow Scot. Oh MSPs are deadly serious about all this. Literally. There were alot of eye openers in the document for me and i couldn't cover everything but stand outs were:
“The transition to net zero could boost productivity and living standards but it is likely not to be as productive as oil and gas was.’’
''There are ideas that A.I can help mitigate climate change,although at the moment A.I is contributing to the crisis.''
Thanks for links.
Global warming/Climate change can be dismissed - Dr John Dees almanack has a good insight into the corruption of government science in the 1990s.
https://substack.com/@jdee/note/c-58425367
Once again, similarities with what’s going on here in Public Health Wales with their collaboration with the WHO and their regular ‘horizon scanning’ documents.
What did make me laugh (though it shouldn’t) was the reference to ‘high quality drinking water’.
'smart' water meters for homes and businesses incoming?
"Anything can happen in the next half hour". ( oft heard in Stingray)...It is like all the Future Trends are going to come to pass, except there are always 'coulds.' And, 'events' can happen to derail the most well constructed future scenario. We hope.
Where is the input from the public on what we want society to be like in 2050? 'Democracy'
Lets examine this critically, OK?
"Being ‘sustainable’ will mean paying more for less."
Yes, that's obvious!
I was brought up in the 1950's, when Coal was King - smog was the weather most days, and as kids our noses ran constantly with green snot from the appalling urban air pollution. Bronchitis and lung diseases killed many working class people before their 60th birthdays. Or the cold. Our houses were cold as ice and full of mould. Because coal was expensive and time consuming.
Of course, we later experienced the gas-fired revolution - which was great - as long as the gas flowed like water. And the wonders of Nuclear power. Think Windscale, Chernobyl, and Three Mile Island.
But now the fossil fuels flows more slowly, and are harder to extract, and the price of gas and oil is through the roof - clean, cheap fossil fuels are only a stopgap - and nuclear power is looking increasingly expensive.
We are going to have to pay more whatever we do - and it all starts to get rather messy from here on in.
So this is saving the planet and only fossil fuels are bad? I'm really not seeing the same downsides with current fossil fuel/nuclear technology by comparison. The only issue i have is with vehicle exhausts which is why i could see hybrid as the standard rather than re-inventing the wheel.
Deep sea mining- https://www.naturalscience.org/news/2024/06/deep-sea-mining/
''All three areas intended for deep-sea mining are therefore true biodiversity hotspots. They are very sensitive habitats that have developed over millions of years. 90 percent of the deep-sea inhabitants found there live in the top 10 centimetres of the seabed''
Wind Turbines- https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj68glee30eo
''Conservation groups are urging ministers to reject plans for an offshore wind farm which the developer predicts will kill tens of thousands of seabirds.''
Solar panels- https://www.hazardouswasteexperts.com/are-solar-panels-hazardous-waste-are-solar-panels-recyclable/
''Approximately 90 percent of most PV modules are composed of glass. But this glass often cannot be recycled because it contains impurities such as plastic, lead, cadmium''
Electric cars- https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/consumer-affairs/heavy-electric-cars-toxic-tyre-particles-petrol-vehicles/
''Drivers of electric cars are unwittingly releasing more toxic tyre particles into the air than those driving petrol vehicles, experts have warned.''
In the good old days, Scottish islanders used to eat Gannets and their eggs for food: so "Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose" eh?
I think gannets are important - and all wildlife, but changing from killing them from acid rain and cutting down trees for fuel to killing them because they are too dumb to avoid being hit by rather slow-moving wind turbines is all a bit 'theoretical', We live to survive, and lets not get all gooey eyed and sentimental about it ;-)
You didn't really address my points Rob and you sound so much like my MSP over this issue. I genuinely cannot see ANY significant if any human or environmental benefits to this 'green' tech you are so fond of. Fossil fuels are more environmentally/human friendly overall.
You might think so: but I disagree: I would far rather fill up my car's battery from my solar panels than from expensive imported fuel that funds wars.
a) Carbon extraction causes massive environmental and social damage in extraction areas like the Nigerian Delta (or even our huge residual paraffin red dirt mountains of slag near Linlithgow) - or when tankers sink (Torrey Canyon etc)
b) oil and gas extractions causes wars and bolsters oppressive regimes like Iran, Russia and Saudi Arabia
c) fossil fuels cause huge corruption scandals as the wealthy never trickles down
d) the easy stuff - that used to gush from the ground - is long gone. We are reaching a point where to cost of extraction is rapidly making the oil worth less than the costs of North Sea etc deep fields
e) the costs of renewables are coming down really fast due to efficiencies in manufacturing - Lithium being replaced by cheap sodium for example.
Sorry Rob not buying it. I just see alot of sales talk vs 'green' and 'renewable' and no actual benefits to the people. The environmental damage to manufacture ''green industries'' is enormous! You must rest well at night thinking about if everyone had an electric car and solar panels on their roofs there would be no more wars? lol Yeah. That's about as realistic as the sun not rising in the morning.
https://grid.iamkate.com shows current UK grid status is 56% renewables - and that means lubberly home grown energy from wind, water and sunshine - whats not to like?!!
I put my panels in 13 years ago and have generated 28,700 kWh of power to date - saving around 13 metric tons of coal from having to be mined. Mining is dirty and dangerous work - and causes massive health problems.
I'm all for critical thinking. Not going to dispute issues with coal in the 50's but a world with coal was better than a world without. Nuclear power is an impressive technology but like anything in life, has problems. But this is thankfully in the past.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2021/03/25/nuclear-power-continues-to-break-records-in-safety-and-generation/
I don't agree fossil fuels flow more slowly and are harder to extract, quite the contrary. We've got better at it.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-40580058
The fuel prices are through the roof because of the net zero delusion and the war on fossil fuels by governments committed to the 'green' transition so that is simply a choice being made not an unavoidable reality.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/01/09/net-zero-driving-up-energy-prices-admits-bank-of-england/
I don't agree with ''paying more whatever we do and it all starts to get messy from here on in.'' You are clearly someone who has bought into 'green' technology utopia but you've convinced me even more with that remark i am correct to oppose the 'renewable/sustainable' madness that is before us. Sounds good but in practise for ordinary people i don't see any significant benefits. Higher bills, more tax for less services etc
OK - lets frack your village, your community, and the whole of the central belt - but don't frack me - cos I bite!
I never once mentioned fracking. But to come back on your points i'd say let's solar panel an entire hillside or even farmland that could be used for food growing simultaneously whilst blanketing more hillsides with monstrous wind turbines which are an eyesore to Scotland's already beautiful natural environment and kill rare birds of prey too whilst we're at it..saving the planet?!
At least 30% of the planet is basically desert or wasted land, on which nothing much can grow or thrive. OK, a few cacti and the odd lizard.
Lets use it to generate solar and wind power - and also cover our car parks, factory roofs, hospitals and schools with solar panels - my own 16 rooftop panels are small potatoes, but with every man made south facing surface covered with panels it makes a huge difference. And they are a darned sight less ugly than reeking lums!
By the way, birds of prey have made a huge comeback, with red kites, osprey, and sea eagles thriving. Their main enemy is the grouse shootin' brigade of wax-jacket clad chums in their landrovers ....