Perth and Kinross Council will consider cumulative impact of multiple battery energy storage systems
The local authority has received a number of planning applications for electricity generating stations
The Scottish Government has said councils should consider the cumulative impact of having several battery energy storage systems (BESS) in one area.
There has been a recent explosion in the number of 49.9MW BESS applications being submitted to Perth and Kinross Council; anything 50MW or larger requires Scottish Ministers' approval.
But that has led to places - such as Coupar Angus and Abernethy - having multiple planning applications for 49.9 MW battery energy storage systems next to one another.
Last week Perth and Kinross Council's Planning and Placemaking Committee unanimously approved a 49.9MW BESS - on prime agricultural land at Abernethy because it was essential infrastructure. Planning permission for two other 49.9MW plants in the same area were granted just last year - and there are more in the pipeline.
Applications for electricity generating stations with a capacity greater than 50MW are determined by Scottish Ministers and processed by the Energy Consents Unit (ECU).
But is there a danger of large areas of land becoming awash with a mass of BESS developments - of 49.9MW - with applications submitted on a piecemeal basis to a local planning authority, such as Perth and Kinross Council?
The Local Democracy Reporting Service asked both the Scottish Government and Perth and Kinross Council what measures - if any - are in place to stop this potential planning loophole being exploited.
A Scottish Government spokesperson said: "Whether determined by Scottish Ministers or planning authorities where new development proposals come forward the impacts of proposals on communities, nature and other receptors, including prime agricultural land, as well as cumulative impacts, are important considerations in the decision-making process. All applications are subject to site specific assessments."
Meanwhile PKC's Major Applications and Enforcement team leader Sean Panton said council planners would consider the cumulative impact of any such developments.
He said: "Applicants can submit as many applications as they want in a particular area and we cannot stop them from doing this. They are also entitled to submit a number of applications near each other for 49.9MW as each application would be considered on its own merits.
"However, if this was to happen, even although the combined output of all the different facilities would be over 50MW, as each application is under 50MW, it would be the council who would determine the applications rather than the ECU (unless called in). The council would consider cumulative impacts should we be in a situation where multiple applications have been submitted in the same area.
"There is no specified limit, but we can consider the cumulative impact to be excessive and recommend refusal should we be concerned at the over-provision in a certain area."
Pushed for an exact figure on what would be deemed too much, Mr Panton could not specify but added: "I can however say we would start to restrict them when the cumulative impact becomes 'excessive or unreasonable'."
Scotland is in the midst of a housing emergency. A shortage of available land is often blamed, so some might question why land can be found for so many BESS applications.
Mr Panton said: " In the Perth and Kinross Local Development Plan 2 (2019), there are allocated sites for housing. Housing is encouraged to be submitted on these areas rather than other areas of prime agricultural land. Equally, we would not encourage BESS developments on areas of land that are identified for housing."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
2 hours ago
- The National
Why Scotland joining Efta or EEA is infinitely preferable to the EU
Since then, there has been an understandable desire expressed by many to rejoin the EU after independence, though how that is delivered remains to be seen. However, the debate thus far has not fully addressed other options: notably membership of Efta/the EEA, at least in the medium term. Efta is the European Free Trade Association. It was formed in 1960 as kind of an economic waiting room prior to EU accession. The UK was a member of Efta before 1973 when it passed legislation to become a member of the EU. Switzerland, Norway, Iceland, and Lichtenstein never left the waiting room, and currently comprise Efta. READ MORE: These key economic truths show how independent Scotland and Wales can succeed The EEA is the European Economic Area. This was a treaty signed in 1992 which enabled all the EU states and the Efta members (excluding Switzerland) to be part of the single market. This requires all members of the EEA to respect the four freedoms of movement – workers, goods, services, and capital. Switzerland has a series of bilateral treaties with the EU under which it must abide by these four freedoms, but it is much more complicated than EEA membership. I have attended two biennial seminars of the Efta/EEA council in Brussels, and was struck by the positive engagement between all EEA members, Efta and the EU. There is this slogan against Efta membership that Scotland would be 'rule takers, not rule makers'. This ignores the fact that within the EEA treaty, all EEA states must be closely consulted on any change in EU law pertaining to the EEA agreement. On many occasions, Efta/EEA members engaged in the process early and had a positive formative influence on the law. READ MORE: Assa Samake-Roman: What if we are wrong about reasons for rise in far-right support? While Efta/EEA members do not have a vote on laws, I asked Efta members if they had ever had EU laws forced on them against their will. They couldn't think of any such occasions. Many smaller EU states feel they have no influence at all. Upon a 'democratic event' affirming majority support for independence, Scotland could apply to join Efta. While I cannot speak on their behalf, I can safely say there is great support among Efta officials for Scottish membership. The three Efta/EEA members would then lobby to get an independent Scotland into the EEA. Again, I cannot speak on their behalf, but when I last spoke with Efta officials they saw no impediment to Scotland joining Efta and the EEA within a few short months. Compare this to the EU accession process. This could easily take 10 years. EU law (the acquis) comprises 35 chapters, all of which would need to be reflected in Scots law, and Scotland would have to demonstrate that it has the institutions in place to apply EU law. It doesn't, because the 'Scottish' civil service is merely an appendage of the UK state. File photo of a Yes for EU rally at the Scottish parliamentAll 27 EU member states have veto power at any stage in the process. Think Spain and Catalonia. At the recent SSRG conference in Dunfermline, we held a panel on Efta/EEA membership. I was in touch with @YesforEU, and asked if any known prominent advocate for Scotland in the EU would be willing to speak. We got zero responses. There seems to be a contrived prevailing assumption that, because Scots voted to remain in the EU in 2016, rejoining the EU after independence would be easy and preferable to Efta membership. I was in touch with a well-known purportedly pro-indy corporate lobbyist, who after changing his mind, assured me that the EU membership 'polled' better than Efta/EEA, therefore independence should be automatically linked with EU membership. However, that assumes Scots are well-informed about the pros and cons of membership of both, and can make an informed decision. This debate has yet to be held. This ignores the many independence supporters who, despite the Scottish vote to remain in 2016, take a dim view of EU membership. As an American with UK citizenship through my Scottish father, I have been able to carve out a career as a university teacher in France. When I came to France in 1995, I felt a genuine optimism towards the economic objectives of the EU, and have benefited from it. My view of the EU has changed drastically since then. The musician Frank Zappa famously remarked that '[US] Politics is the entertainment division of the military-industrial complex'. Regrettably, the same can increasingly be said of the EU and Nato, which are becoming indistinguishable. At the same time, the EU is increasingly authoritarian. Whether you agree with them or not, look at how Viktor Orban in Hungary and Robert Fico in Slovakia have been threatened because of their opposition to the EU approach to Russia and Ukraine. It also managed to get Calin Georgescu eliminated in Romania as a presidential candidate because he dissented from Ursula Von der Leyen's orthodoxy. Kaja Kallas is the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security PolicyAnd don't get me going on the incompetence and stupidity of Kaja Kallas, the EU foreign minister. She is openly Russophobic, speaks about defeating and carving up Russia, and laments that if the EU cannot defeat Russia, how can it defeat China? Does Scotland want to join THAT EU? What happens when that bile is directed at Scotland if it dissents from EU-manufactured consent? Maybe, over time, the EU leadership will regain some sanity, get back to its original economic purpose and stop violating its members' sovereignty and cultures. Until then, Scotland should join Efta/the EEA, recoup and exercise its popular sovereignty, and let the EU sort itself out. Whether it does or not, Scotland will be much better off as an Efta/EEA member, and will be warmly welcomed. Later, there is no obstacle to joining the EU, if that is what Scots democratically decide. Dr Mark McNaught is the founder of the Scottish Sovereignty Research Group and Maître de Conférences at the University of Rennes 2, France
The National
2 hours ago
- The National
Top SNP figures in secret meeting to discuss John Swinney's leadership
Attendees said that the First Minister has two weeks in which to come up with a new strategy on independence or face a 'bloodbath' at the SNP conference, The Herald reported. A source told that paper: 'It feels like Groundhog Day. The last time John was in charge he dropped independence, surrounded himself only by people who agreed with him, and pushed out the likes of Margo [McDonald] and anyone who challenged his devolutionist strategy. 'For those with short memories, that ended in a bruising defeat. If he stays, we will be heading for a repeat. What is left of the membership will not tolerate it.' READ MORE: Controversial Loch Lomond Flamingo Land plans recalled by Scottish ministers It comes after SNP insiders made a similar argument to The National, warning that it felt like the party was being headed up by a small, private leadership group and 'heading back into the same old internal splits'. The Herald reported that the Monday meeting was ostensibly about forcing the party to move forward on independence, but there was a unanimous view that the First Minister 'has no intention of putting independence anywhere near the party's narrative whatsoever". Previously, the SNP's former policy chief Toni Giugliano told The National that independence had never been so far off the party's agenda as currently under Swinney. One source told The Herald: 'If there is nothing in the next couple of weeks from the leadership, then conference will be a bloodbath.' Though they doubted that any MSP or MP would challenge Swinney directly, they said it did not matter if the only competition came from an activist, as any contest would be 'hugely damning and damaging, and make the party look utterly ridiculous". Under SNP rules, any member who can secure 100 nominations from 20 different branches ahead of party conference can trigger a leadership vote. (Image: PA) Last year, Swinney faced a leadership challenge from party activist Graeme McCormick, who claimed to have secured the necessary nominations. However, McCormick was later talked out of the challenge after a 'lengthy and fruitful conversation' with Swinney. An SNP insider predicted similar challenges, saying: 'NEC members better start looking for new hobbies unless the leadership announces a change of direction soon — because at this rate we are heading for a mass clear-out.' They went on: 'The ability to make the case for independence is not a desirable part of the job description – it is essential – and he has failed on probation. 'The Presbyterian schoolmaster might fly in Perthshire – but in the rest of Scotland it just does not land. Stabilising the party only works for a short time. There is no energy, no fire, no boldness, no long-term vision.' Last week's Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election saw the SNP lose to Labour by 602 votes. READ MORE: 'Absurdity' of UK position on Israel while still supplying arms called out by SNP MP The party had been favourites, with Swinney calling it a two-horse race between his party and Nigel Farage's Reform UK. Yesterday, the constituency's new MSP, Davy Russell, took his oath at Holyrood and, in a speech on the steps of the garden lobby, said his win could be a 'springboard' to Labour winning power next year. The seat had been held by Scottish Government minister Christina McKelvie until her death earlier this year at the age of 57. At a press conference on Friday, Swinney insisted there had been progress for his party when the result was measured against their dire performance at last year's general election. One MSP told The Herald on Sunday that that was not enough. They said it was time for Swinney to make changes to his top team. 'I think a proper ministerial reshuffle is required, and an exercise undertaken to seek new policies. For example, I would call in the former MPs who have experience but have had time to refresh their perspective. 'I can sense that many – for the first time – are now nervous, and rightfully so. 'On independence – again, it can never be enough to simply run a competent devolved government without a vision of what could be.' The First Minister is expected to conduct a limited reshuffle of his ministerial team in the coming days. Swinney's previous time in charge saw the party's vote share and number of seats fall. He resigned in 2004, paving the way for the return of Alex Salmond. Asked by the BBC on Sunday if he was still the man to lead the party, Swinney said: 'Yes. Twelve months ago, the party turned to me. 'I was not seeking high office – I had held high office for a long time in my life – and the party turned to me, at a moment of real jeopardy, and asked me to use all of my skills and experience, and the loyalty I command in the party, to bring people together and focus us on the future.' Professor Sir John Curtice said the close battle for Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse did not mean Anas Sarwar was a shoo-in for Bute House. READ MORE: These key economic truths show how independent Scotland and Wales can succeed The election expert told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: 'The recent message from opinion polls is the SNP is running at just over 30%, Labour is around 20%, so it seems a reasonable expectation that such a result would not mean Anas Sarwar is Scotland's next first minister.' An SNP spokesperson said: 'Since John Swinney became leader last year he has brought the SNP back together and the party is back to doing what it does best – standing up for the people of Scotland. 'In the run-up to next year's Scottish Parliament election, the SNP will continue to deliver for people across the country, while setting out a clear and hopeful vision for their future as an independent country. 'With the latest polling putting support for independence at 54%, the SNP will continue to focus on demonstrating how having the full powers of an independent country is key to addressing the everyday concerns of people across Scotland and creating a more prosperous society for us all.'
Scotsman
3 hours ago
- Scotsman
Can you afford not to have a cyber insurance policy?
Scott McLuskey helps clients find the cyber insurance policy that's right for them Cyber attacks cost Scottish businesses £386m annually – but most firms still aren't insured, warns Scott McLuskey Sign up to our Scotsman Money newsletter, covering all you need to know to help manage your money. Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Recent high-profile cyber incidents involving major UK institutions including Marks & Spencer, Harrods, and the Co-op are a stark reminder: no business is immune to attack. I first spoke about the importance of cyber insurance at the inaugural Cyber Scotland Week six years ago, an initiative supported by the Government to promote cyber resilience. Since then, the threat has only accelerated – today, a cyber-attack occurs every 44 seconds in the UK. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Yet despite the scale of risk, many business leaders remain confident that their organisations are protected. Antivirus software, cloud backups, an in-house or outsourced IT Manager and a general belief that they're 'covered' often mask the reality: these measures alone are not enough. It wasn't just a cyber attack, it was an M&S cyber attack that cost millions (Picture: Adobe) Reports surrounding the recent attack on British retail heavyweight M&S suggest that the attack will cost an estimated £300 million and was not the result of poor systems, but of human error – a tale as old as time and the weakest link in any cyber defence strategy. Smaller businesses are also firmly in the firing line. Vodafone estimates Scottish SMEs are losing a combined £386m a year to Cyber Attacks, with 40% of SMEs falling victim last year alone. Costs following an attack can be significant: from forensic investigations, legal advice, regulatory notifications, and PR management, to lost revenue, extortion demands, credit monitoring, and potential lawsuits. The good news is that a cyber insurance policy offers a risk transfer solution to address these costs and assist recovery. Today's leading cyber policies also go beyond simple risk transfer – they include value-added services like vulnerability scans, penetration testing, and employee training. While not a substitute for a dedicated cybersecurity provider, these tools provide vital early protection and peace of mind. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad However, buying cyber insurance isn't always straightforward. With over 30 readily available cyber insurers – plus Lloyd's of London – and each provider offering a different proposition with their own minimum cyber security based acceptance criteria, the market can feel impenetrable. Unlike traditional insurance policies, cyber cover is still relatively new, with the first policy written in the late 1990s - the market and crucially insurer's loss data is continually developing. Compare that with buildings insurance, first developed in the wake of the Great Fire of London in the 17th century. As a result, there's wide variation in policy coverage, pricing, and – most importantly – what policyholders need to do to ensure claims are valid. Too often, businesses only realise this after a breach, when it's too late. There are promising signs. Leading providers like CFC Underwriting report a claims payout rate of over 99% and industry-wide improvements are being made in clarity, claims handling, and support services. But challenges remain – particularly for small and medium-sized businesses. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad A UK Government report found that 50% of businesses suffered some form of breach in the past year, rising to 70% among medium-sized firms. Yet just over half of all companies have cyber cover. Scotland's economy, built on a vibrant mix of SMEs, family-run firms, and fast-growing tech businesses, is particularly exposed. As the majority of organisations have digitised operations, even modest breaches can have a disproportionate impact – not only on individual companies, but on supply chains, customer trust, and investor confidence across the sector. Cyber resilience is no longer just a technical issue; it's an economic imperative. The Association of British Insurers has also identified a communication gap: cyber insurance is too often presented as a standalone 'product,' when in reality it's an ongoing service that begins before a breach and supports the business throughout. At Monteith, we're working to bridge this gap. We help clients understand their cyber exposure, decode policy language, and choose the right level of cover. Most importantly, we walk our clients through the fine print – ensuring they know exactly what's required to stay compliant, so their insurance delivers when it matters most. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The threat isn't going away. Business leaders must go beyond firewalls and backups. They need to take proactive steps – including securing expert cyber insurance advice – to protect against what is now one of the most persistent and costly risks in modern business.
