We will now revert to the original order. PE2109, which has been lodged by Brian Shaw on behalf of the Ness District Salmon Fishery Board, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to impose a moratorium on any further development of pumped storage hydro operations on Scottish lochs that hold wild Atlantic salmon until the impact of such developments on wild Atlantic salmon migrations is understood.
I apologise for the rather long introductory note that I must read out.
We last considered the petition on 27 November 2024, when we agreed to write to the Scottish Government, major developers of pumped storage schemes, including Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks, and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization centre for water law, policy and science.
In its response, the Scottish Government states that the environmental impact assessment regulations envisage that, for large infrastructure projects, significant environmental effects are more likely to occur, but that the regulations require that ministers must determine the application in the knowledge of what significant effects are likely to occur, taking into consideration any mitigation measures that might form part of the development or be secured by the conditions of any consent. At the conclusion of the EIA process, consideration of any likely significant effects forms part of the planning balance.
In its response, the UNESCO centre for water law, policy and science states:
“While there are some very good reasons to support”
pumped storage hydro,
“there are also grounds to pause and consider alternatives.”
It describes the benefits of PSH, which include grid balancing, reducing the need for carbon emissions, energy security and job creation, but states that
“the proposals ... represent huge interventions in our landscapes and”
rivers, and it considers that
“If any or all of these threaten the dwindling populations of ... Atlantic salmon, the impacts will be cumulative year by year, and could ultimately lead to species losses.”
The centre also states:
“Protected species and habitats will inevitably be adversely impacted by the various PSH proposals under consideration.”
The submission from SSE Renewables provides information about its experience with pumped storage hydro technology through the Foyers power station at Loch Ness. It also highlights research and monitoring that found “no observed impact” on the flow of smolts at Foyers.
In its response, Glen Earrach Energy—I am getting an admonishing look from Mr Ewing in relation to my pronunciation of “Earrach”—shares that it is undertaking relevant work with the petitioners group, the Ness District Salmon Fishery Board; NatureScot; the Scottish Environment Protection Agency; and the Highland Council. That work has included a smolt tracking study to understand smolt behaviour in Loch Ness.
Similarly, in its response, Statkraft highlights work that it is undertaking with the Ness District Salmon Fishery Board on smolt tracking.
I do apologise—this is quite a long introduction. The petitioner has provided a written submission that highlights the findings of the computational fluid dynamics study on Loch Ness, which was set up to examine the cumulative impact of pumped storage on the hydrology and temperature regime. The submission states:
“The effect on Loch Ness is profound with cold water currents crossing the loch, changes to the temperature profile, including at depth, and the formation of a vortex in Dores Bay.”
Edward Mountain MSP has provided a written submission noting his entry in the register of members’ interests, which shows that he owns part of a wild salmon fishery. Well, I have to say that we have never seen the benefit of that here. Laughter. I shall have to pursue that separately. He also wishes to put on record the fact that he managed fisheries on the Ness and Loch Ness until 2006.
In his submission, Mr Mountain states that
“Wild Atlantic salmon in Scotland are in serious decline”,
and he believes that
“pump storage at Loch Ness has proven that there are real threats to the environment that have not yet been fully evaluated.”
He suggests that,
“as a precaution”
pumped storage hydro schemes
“should not be allowed unless it can be proved that the overall temperature of the loch and indeed the surface temperature does not increase, or affect migratory fish.”
With apologies for that very long preamble, I wonder whether colleagues have any comments or suggestions as to what we do next.
