:00:13. > :00:17.Tonight on Newsnight Scotland: As gas continues to leak from the
:00:17. > :00:23.Elgin plant in the North Sea, it emerges that the platform's Blair
:00:23. > :00:30.is still alight. Is there a serious danger of an explosion? -- flair.
:00:30. > :00:34.Is renewable energy seriously the future for Scotland's future?
:00:34. > :00:39.Staff have been evacuated but Gas continues to lead from the Elgin
:00:39. > :00:43.platform 150 miles off the coast of Aberdeen. Tonight, the operator
:00:43. > :00:51.Total has admitted a flair is still a light downwind of the thumb of
:00:51. > :00:58.all gas. Coastguards have set up an exclusion zone. While there is a
:00:59. > :01:05.possibility that the leak will die down of its own accord, if that is
:01:05. > :01:09.not the case, Total have said that it could take six weeks.
:01:09. > :01:13.Staff were evacuated safety. The danger is of pollution of the sea
:01:13. > :01:17.and air and the potential of an explosion. The problem developed
:01:17. > :01:22.under the Elgin platform. It involved a well which was put up
:01:22. > :01:25.one year ago and workers were in the process of killing it off. The
:01:25. > :01:29.fault occurred at the reservoir. Gas should travel to the surface
:01:29. > :01:33.through this central pipe. But it leaked to the outer casings,
:01:33. > :01:39.designed to carry other substances. It then leaked under the wellhead
:01:39. > :01:43.platform, shrouding the area in gas. Coastguards have imposed an
:01:43. > :01:48.inclusion zone -- exclusion zone of two miles for shipping and three
:01:48. > :01:54.miles for aircraft. Shall have shut down operations in a nearby
:01:54. > :01:58.platform because of the drifting gas. We could be looking at a Piper
:01:58. > :02:02.Alpha scenario. On the positive side, everyone is home and save on
:02:02. > :02:08.the platform is shut down. But if there is gas, we have got to find
:02:08. > :02:16.the source. Total say they have yet to confirm the source of the leak,
:02:16. > :02:18.but have activated their pollution emergency plan. Tonight, it emerges
:02:18. > :02:21.that a flame at the platform is still burning, raising the
:02:21. > :02:29.possibility that it could ignite the gas if the wind changes
:02:29. > :02:34.direction. Gas is mainly methane. It is very flammable. The flair is
:02:34. > :02:41.still alight on the main a production platform, but the wind
:02:41. > :02:45.is blowing the gas plume in the opposite direction, away from the
:02:46. > :02:50.flame. We know the weather forecasts are such that the wind
:02:50. > :02:54.direction remains the same for the following five or six days, and we
:02:54. > :02:58.are evaluating options to extinguish this plane. Last year,
:02:58. > :03:02.Shell came in for criticism for failing to share information after
:03:03. > :03:07.the oil spill from this platform. Total have been warned they should
:03:08. > :03:12.not make the same mistake. Last week, BP got approval for well in
:03:12. > :03:15.the deep waters west of Shetland. The difficulties in dealing with
:03:15. > :03:23.this leak will raise further questions about the wisdom of
:03:23. > :03:30.exploration in even deeper seas. Our correspondent is in Aberdeen.
:03:30. > :03:36.What do we know about this plane? The first I knew was this evening.
:03:36. > :03:41.I have interviewed David, who use or twice. I asked him at one.
:03:41. > :03:45.Whether there was any risk of an explosion and he told me that all
:03:45. > :03:48.the power was isolated, so there were no sources of isolation. He
:03:48. > :03:52.went on to say he could not promise that it would not ignite but they
:03:52. > :03:57.had done everything possible to minimise that risk. Maybe I should
:03:58. > :04:04.have asked him if the fleck was still going. There was no mention
:04:04. > :04:09.from Total of that until this evening. They have said that the
:04:09. > :04:14.gas cloud is much lower than the flame and that the wind is blowing
:04:14. > :04:20.the cloud away from the platform, and eventually, Total says, the
:04:21. > :04:26.flame that will extinguish itself. Do we have any more clarity on what
:04:26. > :04:29.Total might try to do to stop this leak? There seem to be three
:04:29. > :04:34.options they are working on. They say they have experts from all over
:04:34. > :04:39.the world, including their Paris headquarters, are working on it. It
:04:39. > :04:43.is unprecedented in the North Sea. The first option, they hope, is
:04:44. > :04:52.that the gas will stop digging itself. That seems to be a real
:04:52. > :04:56.hope at the moment. -- stop leaking. They thought they had closed the
:04:56. > :05:01.well by packing it down to stop the gas from producing. The third
:05:01. > :05:05.option, which will take at least six months, is to drill a relief
:05:05. > :05:12.well. That would be similar to the one that eventually stemmed the
:05:12. > :05:20.flow of oil and gas from the grid in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010.
:05:21. > :05:26.is not really safe to put anyone on this platform, is it? No. The gas
:05:26. > :05:31.is a mixture of five hydrochloride so, Hydro sulphide, methane and
:05:31. > :05:35.carbon dioxide. It is very flammable. The thing that surprises
:05:35. > :05:41.me is why they have put an air exclusion zone to try to avoid the
:05:41. > :05:49.risk of a commission from the air. There is also the see exclusion
:05:49. > :05:55.zone. -- risk of ignition. There has been a lot of criticism of oil
:05:55. > :06:01.companies in the past for not being open enough. You alluded to this
:06:01. > :06:05.already. I think the unions are annoyed about this, as well. How
:06:05. > :06:09.have you found dealing with Total on this? You asked the question so
:06:09. > :06:15.I will answer it. We should never show the roads of our dealings
:06:15. > :06:19.within -- with companies and ourselves. Companies like to
:06:19. > :06:24.control information. You may remember last year when there was a
:06:24. > :06:28.leak at a platform owned by Shell, Shell were eventually accused of
:06:28. > :06:32.downplaying the incident. They had to say that they should perhaps
:06:32. > :06:37.have been more transparent at the start. They do not like bad
:06:37. > :06:42.publicity. They have tried to work it over the years but Total's way
:06:42. > :06:47.of dealing with it in recent days would seem to be putting out a few
:06:47. > :06:54.press your leases -- press releases, very repetitive, and we have had to
:06:54. > :06:58.rely on information from other sources. The RMT say that they are
:06:58. > :07:04.at a loss as to why it is still flaring. They hope the wind does
:07:04. > :07:09.not change. Thanks very much. I am joined by Dr Simon Boxall from
:07:09. > :07:15.the Department of Oceanography at Southampton University. Some pretty
:07:15. > :07:20.obvious questions, if I could, about the conditions there. This
:07:20. > :07:24.gas cloud that is supposedly surrounding this rig - we have been
:07:24. > :07:30.told it is flammable. What happens if something ignites that? Does it
:07:30. > :07:36.explode, go on fire or what? Both of the gases are infallible. They
:07:36. > :07:44.are both very toxic, as well. -- inflammable. The first I heard that
:07:44. > :07:48.Beith Laird was still going was an hour ago and it was news to me. --
:07:48. > :07:58.the earth Laird was still going. Having shut down the electoral
:07:58. > :07:59.
:07:59. > :08:03.systems, having this great flame going. -- electrical systems. It
:08:03. > :08:08.means that the source is always there to ignite the gas, should the
:08:08. > :08:14.wind change. Should it plain that connect with gas, what happens?
:08:14. > :08:19.will explode. It doesn't just go on fire, it is an explosion? It is a
:08:19. > :08:23.fairly volatile explosion. The damage that would cause to the oil
:08:23. > :08:30.rig would mean that the whole issue of trying to cover of the other
:08:30. > :08:37.banks coming out... Up there all kinds of big issues. It goes from
:08:37. > :08:41.being a minor incident, relatively straightforward, to being a fairly
:08:41. > :08:45.major incident if the reader does blow. What are the implications of
:08:45. > :08:51.the fact that we are told we have this methane mix bubbling or
:08:51. > :08:58.boiling through the water? I have heard suggestions that the EC could
:08:58. > :09:03.set on fire if it was ignited, -- the ocean. And that this could
:09:03. > :09:08.affect the buoyancy of boats. in the immediate vicinity of the
:09:08. > :09:11.oil rig itself. What does that mean? If you have air bubbles
:09:11. > :09:17.underneath the boat so, the boat relies on air bubbles holding the
:09:17. > :09:22.water up. The boat would no longer be supported by the Dem -- dense
:09:22. > :09:27.water. There are incidents of boats being hit by methane bubbles from
:09:27. > :09:32.the sea bed, naturally occurring ones, which have caused boats to
:09:32. > :09:36.sink. It is not unheard of but it is only an issue in the immediate
:09:36. > :09:40.vicinity of the oil rig itself. It adds to the dangers they face when
:09:40. > :09:45.they try to tackle this but the question is, is it bubbling through
:09:45. > :09:53.the sea? One-storey we hear from Total is that the gas is being
:09:53. > :09:56.released just below the week in air. -- the oil rig. But we hear reports
:09:56. > :10:00.about the c Boiling, which implies that there is gas coming up through
:10:00. > :10:04.the seat from the sea bed. The big issue then becomes the pollution
:10:04. > :10:10.and if you have hydrogen sulphide coming into contact with water,
:10:10. > :10:14.that is going to cause quite high toxic effects to marine life. The
:10:14. > :10:19.methane itself will break down fairly quickly but the hydrogen
:10:19. > :10:24.sulphide is the thing that could potentially cause an environmental
:10:24. > :10:29.problem. I am curious as to whether you think there is a common theme
:10:29. > :10:32.here. It is less than a week since BP was given permission to do deep-
:10:32. > :10:36.water drilling to the west of Shetland. Although this was not in
:10:36. > :10:43.deep water, this was a very high- tech field. It is the highest
:10:43. > :10:53.pressure, highest temperature field in the North Sea. Are these things,
:10:53. > :10:56.
:10:56. > :11:00.do you think, happening because we A we're pushing the boundaries of
:11:00. > :11:03.what we can do. We're on the edge of technology in terms of dealing
:11:03. > :11:08.with extreme environments. That is because we are running out of oil
:11:08. > :11:13.from the normal environments, the standard sources of oil, Texas oil
:11:13. > :11:17.fields, on land or in shallow water, are fast disappearing. An hour
:11:17. > :11:27.hunger for fuel, we are being pushed to more extremes, D Lotter,
:11:27. > :11:31.
:11:31. > :11:39.the Arctic, deep gas. -- deep water. Today, Scottish Renewables have
:11:39. > :11:45.released a report saying that the renewable energy industry is going
:11:45. > :11:52.to give another 1000 jobs. Is the picture all rose? Perhaps not. It
:11:53. > :11:57.has been dubbed by its supporters the second industrial revolution,
:11:57. > :12:03.but will Scotland pursued of green energy unleashed the green-eyed
:12:03. > :12:08.monster again in years to come? Alex Salmond certainly hope so,
:12:08. > :12:12.having nailed his colours to the renewable mast. The first minister
:12:12. > :12:19.wants to generate the equivalent of 100% cut the country's electricity
:12:19. > :12:25.by renewable means by 2020. Central to that are people like Richard,
:12:25. > :12:32.who has spent the last 13 years developing and commercialising a
:12:32. > :12:36.generator capable of harnessing wage power. We get a third of the
:12:36. > :12:39.renewable -- of electricity from renewables anyway, and that speaks
:12:39. > :12:46.for itself. The industry is delivering. His is exceeding
:12:46. > :12:50.targets. That is a world-leading position. None of the measures by
:12:50. > :12:54.which the renewable sector will be judged is its ability to create
:12:54. > :13:00.employment. Today, Scottish Renewables released figures that,
:13:00. > :13:04.at present, it supports more than 11,000 jobs. The majority are in
:13:04. > :13:07.the supply chains linked to product design and development. It is a
:13:07. > :13:14.significant number, and one which Scottish Renewables say could
:13:14. > :13:20.increase quickly in the coming years. That is, if the sector
:13:20. > :13:23.continues to receive support. A Spanish company last year announced
:13:23. > :13:27.a multi-million pound investment in a wind turbine manufacturing plant
:13:27. > :13:33.to be based in Leith in Edinburgh. It was trumpeted as a sign of
:13:33. > :13:40.things to come. A we have set up a stable, growing industry, which is
:13:40. > :13:44.the bedrock of creating and sustaining jobs. We have seen some
:13:44. > :13:50.boom-bust industry in the US, which have not delivered at a sustainable
:13:50. > :13:54.employment industry. -- and plundered in the industry. In
:13:54. > :14:02.Scotland, you are saying the opposite. That is why be commenced
:14:02. > :14:08.-- big companies are coming here. For many, renewable energy provoked
:14:08. > :14:12.scepticism. Where wind farms are involved, even outright hostility.
:14:12. > :14:17.There's a lot of nonsense about windmills, they are horrible
:14:17. > :14:22.looking structures, they make noise, the kill birds by the thousands,
:14:22. > :14:26.there really destructive... Donald Trump believes that a proposed
:14:26. > :14:32.offshore wind farm would spoil the view from his north-east golf
:14:32. > :14:37.development. Other proponents -- other opponents have arguments
:14:37. > :14:41.which run deeper. The do not deliver, they're unreliable, they
:14:41. > :14:45.are driving up household energy builds for everybody, they are
:14:45. > :14:48.hugely subsidised. Britain has amongst the highest subsidies for
:14:48. > :14:52.wind energy anywhere in the world, and this is not government subsidy,
:14:52. > :14:58.this is not coming from the taxpayer, this is passed down the
:14:58. > :15:02.line by the energy companies directly to the consumers. Will
:15:02. > :15:09.Scotland energy future be the envy of the world? It is a debate that,
:15:09. > :15:13.in itself, will generate plenty of heat. The Royal Academy of
:15:13. > :15:20.Engineering have been debating the future of energy in Scotland. I
:15:20. > :15:28.enjoyed by Dr Simon Harrison of Mott MacDonald and Dame Sue Ion,
:15:28. > :15:35.the former director of technology at British Nuclear Fuels. Dame Sue
:15:35. > :15:38.Ion, do think we're in danger of over hyping renewables? The debate
:15:38. > :15:41.this evening has shown it is not as simple argument and that one of the
:15:41. > :15:45.issues ahead is the Engineering challenge to deliver what is
:15:45. > :15:54.required in the renewable sector, whether it be offshore wind
:15:54. > :15:56.particularly, or the wave energy and its ability to be truly
:15:56. > :16:04.commercialised and a truly commercial marine environment, that
:16:04. > :16:07.has still to be proven. Dr Simon Harrison, there is an issue that,
:16:07. > :16:12.with renewables, everyone talks about the technology and very few
:16:12. > :16:20.talk about the cost? The yes, there are cost issues with renewable
:16:20. > :16:28.energy. If we are to diversify, there are significant cost with the
:16:28. > :16:35.competing options as well, so we would be talking about gas fired
:16:35. > :16:39.power stations fitted with carbon capture storage, or nuclear plants
:16:39. > :16:47.south of the border supplying power into Scotland. The accost problems
:16:47. > :16:53.with all the options. -- there are cost problems. Do you agree with
:16:53. > :16:58.that, Dame Sue Ion? I do, the cost of electricity is going to rise.
:16:58. > :17:02.There is no simple answer. Some of the renewable technologies are
:17:02. > :17:06.other more expensive end of the spectrum. But Simon Harrison's
:17:06. > :17:10.point is that, if you're going to diversify energy, everything will
:17:10. > :17:15.cost more. Is there any evidence that the renewable policy that the
:17:15. > :17:18.Scottish government is pursuing and things like wave and tide and wind
:17:18. > :17:24.is any more expensive than the next generation of nuclear power
:17:24. > :17:29.stations? When you look at all the analysis, the nuclear option would
:17:29. > :17:35.be the more cost-effective. Recent studies in the European Commission
:17:35. > :17:41.have published that and demonstrated that clearly. Simon
:17:41. > :17:44.Harrison, being parochial about this, of Scotland has a problem, it
:17:44. > :17:48.is not just this idea about having lots of winter bites, the idea that
:17:48. > :17:54.Scotland could re industrialise itself as an industry, they areas
:17:54. > :18:00.where Scotland has a technical lead, things like wave and tide, not only
:18:00. > :18:06.are they and their infancy, I wonder if they will ever be on the
:18:06. > :18:11.scale that say, onshore and offshore wind is becoming?
:18:11. > :18:17.issue will be about producing something cost-effective and seeing
:18:17. > :18:20.it as part of a balanced portfolio, those technologies have different
:18:20. > :18:26.generation characteristics, different predictability levels to
:18:26. > :18:30.some of the other renewables. The future is likely to be about Amex.
:18:30. > :18:32.Scotland is well-placed to take advantage of the intellectual
:18:32. > :18:37.capital developed for those technologies, as well as some
:18:37. > :18:42.others, such as carbon Capture and storage. Is there an elephant in
:18:42. > :18:46.the room here? If we forget about nuclear and the cost compared to
:18:46. > :18:51.renewables, could we be on the verge of a whole new world of
:18:51. > :18:58.hydrocarbons? There have been huge new discoveries of oil in places
:18:58. > :19:02.like Brazil and the attack -- and the Arctic, there is Canadian shiel
:19:02. > :19:06.oil, there is an argument that the world's on the brink of seeing a
:19:06. > :19:13.huge new supply of oil and will we really choose, when it comes down
:19:13. > :19:17.to it, to pay extra for renewables rather than get more cheap oil?
:19:17. > :19:22.There are a number of elements to the argument, some of which are
:19:22. > :19:30.associated with climate change, and security of supply is, as well as
:19:30. > :19:34.the cost element. Although gas may become more available due to shield
:19:34. > :19:37.gas, we still have to look at the environmental implications of
:19:37. > :19:41.pursuing that road and if we're going to do her job for the Earth,
:19:41. > :19:45.and a climate change cents, we have to look at carbon sequestration,
:19:45. > :19:49.which is not yet proven and industrialise, and all that will
:19:49. > :19:52.have a cost element which will meet the fossil fuels not quite as
:19:52. > :19:55.attractive as you otherwise would have thought. So badly, we will
:19:55. > :20:05.have to leave it there. Thank you both very much indeed for joining
:20:05. > :20:23.
:20:23. > :20:33.us. -- sadly. Tomorrow's front I am going to have to readers of
:20:33. > :20:37.
:20:37. > :20:47.the screen. This is the thing that you saw on Newsnight, probably.
:20:47. > :20:57.
:20:57. > :21:01.That is all we have time for More warm sunshine to come on
:21:01. > :21:11.Wednesday. First thing, it will be chilly. Temperatures falling away
:21:11. > :21:14.quite sharply. Across northern Scotland, there will be more cloud.
:21:14. > :21:18.The sunshine will lift the temperatures in rural England. It
:21:18. > :21:22.may start below freezing in rural areas, but by the middle of the
:21:23. > :21:32.afternoon, we will be up at 20 degrees Celsius. A little bit
:21:32. > :21:39.cooler on the coast. Essentially, a beautiful, spring day. A similar
:21:39. > :21:44.picture in Northern Ireland. Parts of the South may exceed the March
:21:44. > :21:53.record for Northern Ireland, which burn the stands at 21.7 degrees
:21:53. > :22:03.Celsius. -- which currently stands there. An increasing amount of
:22:03. > :22:04.
:22:04. > :22:09.cloud for the rest of the week. There will be plenty of sunshine in