7 Apr 2025
Scotland’s renewable energy sector is facing an unprecedented crisis due to an overwhelmed planning system, an increasing number of proposals, and grid capacity constraints.
An analysis of the latest NESO (National Energy System Operator) projections and Scottish Government Energy Statistics reveals that there is a complete misalignment between supply and demand.
Here’s an overview:
Scotland’s current peak electricity demand is just over 4GW, with peak demand in 2030 expected to be 5GW and between 8.6GW and 11GW in 2050.
Scotland’s total current generating capacity is 17.6GW – 10.9GW from onshore wind, 4.3GW from offshore wind and 2.9GW is from other onshore generating sources, so four and half times current peak demand.
Scotland’s current maximum ability to transmit to England is 6.7GW but there are also multiple transmission constraints boundaries within Scotland.
As of December 2024, there is a pipeline of 640 energy generation projects with a total capacity of up to 37.5GW.
Looking at onshore wind projects specifically, capacity of 8.1GW is at application stage, 5.4GW is awaiting construction and 1.4GW is under construction.
Ignoring current applications and adding the rest of the onshore wind pipeline to the installed capacity gives a total of 24.4GW – close to five times the peak demand in 2030.
The planning application and Section 36 (S36) consent systems are inundated with proposals, leading to approval delays and project execution. As can be seen from the above figures the combined capacity of operational, under-construction, and consented-but-unbuilt projects drastically exceeds future domestic demand and the capacity to export to England. Internal grid transmission limits between different regions of Scotland further exacerbates the problem.
As a result, an increasing number of consented projects are failing to materialise. Prof. Gordon Hughes, former energy advisor to the World Bank and Edinburgh University’s former head of economics, recently stated during the Greystone Knowe Public Local Inquiry that only one in four consented schemes actually reaches implementation.
The National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) does not promote the approval of renewable energy projects “at all costs.” Instead, it sets out a strategic approach that balances the need for renewable energy expansion with environmental, social and planning considerations.
There are a few recent examples of seeing NPF4 in action. In the past month Scottish Borders Council has rejected three separate schemes – Lees Hill Energy Park, the anemometry mast for Mid Hill Wind Farm and Teviot Wind Farm – for reasons such as environmental and wildlife concerns, as well as visual amenity. This would suggest that councils appear to be wakening up to the fact there is a massive issue with local democracy and local voices.
Yet, in spite of this, on a governmental level the story can be quite different. There has been a trend of Scottish Ministers approving wind farm projects, even in instances where local councils have raised objections. For example, in a recent case, Ministers approved plans for wind turbines in Strath Oykel, Sutherland, despite rejection by Highland councillors and public objections. That decision is now to be the subject of a Judicial Review challenge.
It seems that both the Scottish and UK governments are determined to push through renewable energy schemes regardless. Too often there are examples of schemes being railroaded through without taking account of the fact that energy generation is way above what is required.
John Williams, chair of Heriot Community Council: “Sometimes it feels like we are in this stampede for more and more wind farms, but to what end? Scotland’s renewable energy strategy is in disarray and we are seeing so many proposals come through – many of which have no grid connection strategy. The reckless expansion of capacity beyond feasible demand and transmission capabilities has created a landscape of stalled projects, rising costs, and growing public resistance.
“There is a very high price to be paid if these projects go ahead, and that is on the environment. The beautiful open Borders landscapes will be transformed into industrial landscapes. We also need to consider the damage to bird life. Birds do not co-exist well with turbines – curlews, lapwings, grouse, blackcock and many smaller songbirds all suffer. Iconic birds such as raptors are also at threat. There has been a very successful campaign to reintroduce Golden Eagles to Southern Scotland but this could all be put at risk due to a proposal to put turbines on the highest ridges of the Moorfoots, right in the middle of their ranges.
“Decision-makers have thus far ignored the hard fact that supply far exceeds demand. They have also ignored the price we will all have to pay as the environment is degraded.”
What conclusions can we draw from all of this?
Rising costs to consumers: Constraints payments—compensation paid to operators for reducing generation due to grid limitations—are expected to rise dramatically. The costs of the massive expansion which is currently planned will also be loaded on to consumers. UK electricity costs to consumers and industry are already far higher than in other countries. The UK Government appears to be desperate to encourage economic growth – but at the same time are throttling any chance of that happening.
Governmental negligence: Despite overwhelming evidence, Scottish Ministers continue to greenlight new schemes without addressing the systemic flaws.
Public backlash intensifies: The shortsighted policy of consenting wind farms without considering grid connections is leading to a disjointed rollout of massive substation hubs and overhead transmission lines (OHL), often introduced in a piecemeal fashion, sparking public opposition.
Growing safety and environmental concerns: Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) pose emerging fire and environmental risks. The Scottish Fire and Rescue Service has now formed a specialised working group to evaluate applications and provide guidance. The potential environmental damage caused by the construction of wind farms on fragile upland areas is immense. What will the public think when the results become fully apparent?