By Cornelia Helmcke
Driving across Mainland Orkney with a campervan, I soon lost count of every domestic wind turbine. And who indeed would not want to take advantage of the immense power of the wind all so present on the islands? With energy prices reaching record hights in 2022 and a growing urgency to decarbonise energy systems (see also Sean Field’s latest blog post), the solution here seems straight forward. But what a closer look also reveals is that Orcadians have been severely restricted in their endeavour to make the most of their natural resources.
Each turbine, whether domestic, community-owned or commercial, is connected to the central UK electricity grid. The grid, reaching the islands through subsea transmission cables installed in 1982 and 1998 (each 33kV), started to exceed its capacity in 2009. Before the effective ban of any new grid connection in 2012 (photovoltaics and turbines generating below 3.86kW per phase excluded), new turbines had been connected but their generation is curtailed. Thus, when the overall charge increases (for example, when the wind gains speed), the Distribution Network Operator (DNO), SSEN, reduces production to avoid grid overload.
According to the Active Network Management in place on Orkney since 2009, the last generator added to the system is the first to be dropped (last-in, first-off principle). That means that especially community groups that developed their own energy generation most recently are dropped out of the system first without compensation. The Shapinsay Development Trust, for example, has a 900 kW-turbine since 2011, which could power the little island on its own. All the energy generated, however, must go into the central grid where it will be centrally distributed at centrally determined market prices, and 25% of the time the turbine needs to be switched off, because of exceeded grid capacity. As the Shapinsay Trust is not able to distribute or store the generated energy locally, it uses the income generated by selling the energy to the grid to fund community projects, for instance, improving the island’s housing stock or running a local museum and café. During times of curtailment this income cannot be generated.
The Isle of Lewis has similar grid constraints (one 33kV subsea cable), but curtailment has so far been avoided. My campervan and I comfortably settled on the Galson Community Trust campsite, which is nestled into the island’s boggy landscape together with the community centre. The new building, with an extensive glass front facing the coastline, hosts offices for the trust’s employees, seminar rooms and an exhibition space. The investments for the new campsite and the centre have been possible thanks to the income generated by three 900 kW-turbines since 2013. The trust’s turbines have a fixed grid connection and were built under the Feed-in-Tariff scheme that guaranteed a set wholesale price, independent of market fluctuations, for 20 years. Without this security of returns, investment would not have been possible.
Neighbouring community trusts would like to duplicate Galson’s achievement, but the Feed-in-Tariff scheme, in place since 2010, ended in 2019. The replacement – the Smart Export Guarantee – merely guarantees that the operator can sell its electricity to the grid at market price or as part of ‘Purchase Power Agreements’. This makes future returns unpredictable. Furthermore, generators in the North of Scotland face higher transmission connection charges (around -£20/kW in 2019), in contrast to the subsidies (around +£6/kW in 2019) paid to generators in the South of England.
A further risk for investors (and insurance companies) is grid failure. When the subsea cable connecting Lewis and Harris to the national network broke in October 2019, it made electricity transmission impossible for nine months. Island renewables had to be switched off while island-based diesel generators, in place since the 1950s, covered the demand for 18,000 homes. In times of net zero targets, this procedure seems, counterintuitive. Diesel generators can easily react to changes in demand, renewables less so.
Travelling south, sharing the road with a many other campervans and motorhomes, I am reminded of the additional pressure tourists place on the local infrastructure during the summer months. While campsites require charging points for campers to cook, heat and watch the telly, island residents cannot substantially increase their electricity consumption (for example by installing EV charging points or substituting heating oil with heating pumps on larger scales) as the grid connection has reach its limits also in the Outer Hebrides (mostly since 2016). This not only restricts business development but also the decarbonisation of transport and housing.
Barra, located a short ferry ride south of South Uist, is one of the Carbon Neutral Island case studies aimed at finding holistic, place-based approaches to the just transition. The isle’s development trust does not own land, but operates a wind turbine on crown estate, paying 6% of income as rent. This turbine has been operated under the Feed-in-Tariff on the already-restricted grid coming from South Uist. While the income has been essential in running community projects, the turbine has now reached its end of life, and the trust is struggling to update or replace it. Smaller turbines are increasingly difficult to source as the industry has moved toward larger options, which have been deemed more profitable. Big turbines, however, do not fit on the grid and, without the continuation of the Feed-in-Tariff, are not financially viable.
The Barra community turbine is not alone in this predicament. Most community and domestic wind turbines were installed under the Feed-in-Tarriff scheme in the early 2010s. Most of them will reach their expected end-of-life (and contract period) in the next five to ten years. Without options for replacement, what is the future for renewable energy on the islands?
It seems that the future of renewables will primarily take the form of largescale wind farms, as currently planned offshore of Lewis, Orkney and Shetland, as well as onshore through a variety of projects in Skye. Each of the developments would come with its own infrastructural investments: new interconnector cables, new (onshore) substations and new pylons. The anticipated drastic alteration of the cultural landscape makes many islanders sceptical to such investments.
A photomontage of a wind turbine placed next to the 35 meters high Skye Bridge illustrates the local perception of current proposals for Skye, which include the erection of 134 turbines of up to 200 meters. The fear of the massive infrastructure spoiling the island scenery – that attracts not only locals but tourists – is matched with concerns over the environmental impact on the extensive island peatlands. Peatlands are essential to any climate change mitigation strategy, because they act as very effective long-term carbon storage and sink, if maintained in a healthy condition. Adding concrete and compacting peat (as any physical infrastructure would require) upsets the fragile ecosystem.
But the issue of biggest contention to wind power development lies in the matter of community benefits. The ‘green’ electricity to be generated will be exported directly to the central gird, while the Scottish Islanders continue to pay high energy bills due to high heating demands (old housing stock + arctic winds) and higher network charges (as ‘remote’ from central transmission) making them most prone to fuel poverty within the UK. And Scottish policy remains vague about community benefit schemes aligned to renewable development.
Guidelines suggest that onshore windfarm developers pay £5,000 per installed MW per year to community wealth funds but such payments are voluntary and lack transparency. Island communities have felt side-lined in the use and management of their local resources – resources that they would like to benefit from themselves, either directly through the local distribution of island energy (to affordable prices) or indirectly through community or shared ownership of the energy projects.
Resultant opposition to large-scale wind power developments has led the Isle of Mull to develop run-of hydropower schemes.
Green Energy Mull, formed by the Mull and Iona Community Trust, operates Garmony Hydro, a 400kW run-of-hydroelectric plant, since 2015. Having a fixed connection to the gird, the net profits of the energy sold are paid into the island’s Waterfall Fund. So far, the scheme has funded 131 community projects with a total worth of £406k. Among them is the Fuel Hardship Fund that supports islanders struggling with their energy bills. But the hydro-plant is running on only 30% of its capacity most of the time. The next step for the trust would be to instal pumped storage to regulate the output: to pump water up into a reservoir during times of increased water flow (use excess energy) and release the water during times of shortage.
Energy storage is key to any decentral and self-sufficient system: viable solutions such as hydrogen and pumped hydro are being explored but struggle with the availability of necessary on-island resources and capacity. Smart meters can offer further adaptability to the system, potentially allowing consumers to monitor live-availability (and prices, as has been possible with the soon outdated Radio Tele Switch electricity meters) of different energy sources and adjust their consumption accordingly. But the role-out of smart technology has been proven difficult in areas of poor data range and remote from installation companies, such as in the Highland and Islands.
Travelling the island, it is apparent that community run renewable projects have proven important for islanders – to uphold living standards, to promote local businesses and innovation, and to counteract depopulation. But it is also clear that the current system of energy distribution is disadvantaging such projects on several levels.
First, island transmission cables have largely exceeded their capacity, hindering further renewable electrification on community level as well as the decarbonisation of housing and transport. Second, if powerlines are added or renewed that increase the capacity of import and export (projected for 2030 and 2050), large corporate investments outcompete community projects as they have more resources to reserve and negotiate necessary grid space. This means primarily that (again) more benefits can be channelled away from the islands. Third, island generators face higher transmission charges, while island consumer pay higher distribution charges, relative to the UK market. And forth, the island generation is dependent on the functioning of a far-reaching infrastructure with multiple vulnerabilities and insecurities.
Organisations across the islands have tried to establish local distribution of local generation, to take advantage of local sources first and foremost, to decide themselves over the most appropriate form and scale of power generation, and to build long-term resilience. However, this direct connection has not been permitted. Regulations and institutions, the business-as-usual, appear too rigid to allow for localised approaches to the just transitions.
The national grid has been built to accommodate the needs of a fossil-fuel based energy system; it is not adept to the much more decentral generation of renewables. However, regulators continue to hesitate to push for a change in the management of the grid, to make the grid more adaptable and equipped for decentral generation and distribution. Holistic, local approaches to energy, housing and transport will need to be found in close collaboration with island communities. Allowing them to realise their potential could lead to groundbreaking transformation and innovation not only of value to the Scottish ‘peripheries’, but the nation.
