Traditionally, the subsidies have been spread across the entire U.K., which means that a victory for the pro-independence movement could have stuck Scotland with a significant portion of a market to finance.
“He noted that independence would have added further concerns to a market already facing significant challenges, saying: “The renewables sector still has to face the difficult choices that the new contract for difference (CfD) feed-in tariff regime, the threat of budgetary constraints and further solar subsidy revisions bring… UK’s energy sector was not looking forward to having to digest the impact of an independent Scotland. We know how prolonged policy uncertainty can impact the attractiveness and viability of renewables investment and cause project delays” (renewableenergyworld.com).
Scotland has, for years, been a leader in tackling the issue of climate change through their vast renewable involvement and can now continue along the same path. No change in government allows for business and research to continue as usual, instead of fretting the potential change in policy that would have likely followed the budgetary restrictions Scotland would have faced.
“The leadership Scotland shows is exactly what we need from regional governments in tackling climate change, and now that it will remain part of the union we hope that Scotland will continue to set a clear example on the benefit low carbon technologies can provide, both in terms of sustainable resources and economic growth” (renewableenergyworld.com).
Undoubtedly there was very strong sentiment behind Scotland’s attempted acquisition of independence, however some good has come from the down-vote. There remains a bright future for the progress of renewable assets in Scotland, which has potential to spread to surrounding nations. Scotland remains a role model.