Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

A double cross twice over

A double cross twice over

There was a moment last week, as David Cameron lectured MPs that “to govern is to choose”, when Whitehall farce combined with Scottish tragedy.

The farce is a Prime Minister quoting former Tory Chancellor Nigel Lawson when what Cameron was actually answering was not the big choices in a Budget, or between war and peace, but whether or not he should hold to his election manifesto and referendum commitments.

In both the referendum and the election Peterhead and therefore Scotland had been pledged the opportunity to create one of the world’s first commercial scale carbon capture power stations. It was a Prime Ministerial double cross covering both polls.

Callum McCaig, the increasingly impressive MP for Aberdeen South, made the point well. Was, Callum questioned, the decision to dump the Peterhead project, given the promises which had been made during the independence referendum, a betrayal of Peterhead and Scotland? Or was it rather a betrayal of the whole planet, given that this shabby retreat was sneaked out on the very cusp of the Paris summit on climate change.

The Prime Minister’s faltering and fundamentally silly reply indicated that the young member from Aberdeen had struck home. Cancelling Peterhead was the ultimate example of short-term thinking from a Prime Minister who wouldn’t recognise a strategic case if it bit him on the bahookie.

The long-term gain from carbon capture (CCS) is clear. Despite the world’s new-found and welcome enthusiasm for renewables post Paris, that in itself doesn’t deal with the coal and gas legacy which will pollute the planet for generations to come. However, by capturing the carbon dioxide (CO2) and then securely and safely storing it we can start to address and counter the mistakes of the past.

Cameron’s reply, which seemed to imply that the technology isn’t working, caused consternation in the industry given that the two remaining contestants in the CCS had still to submit their final bids. It will also come as a surprise to both the Norwegians and Canadians who are pursuing CCS on a commercial scale.

It has been estimated that the redundant oil fields and saline aquifers of the North Sea alone could store all of the entire CO2 output for the whole of Europe for a century and more. Demonstrating that this can be done safely and to scale, potentially provides the single most effective way of countering the damage to the climate and transforming the ability to reduce dramatically the output of the most prevalent of greenhouse gases.

No one can say exactly how many people during the referendum were taken in by the No campaign’s claim that the proposed Peterhead carbon capture proposal between Shell and Scottish and Southern Electric was one of those “benefits of the Union” which would have been jeopardised by a Yes vote. What can be said though is that the Prime Minister thought it important enough to make that boast the centrepiece of last year’s Westminster Cabinet meeting in Aberdeen.

But that was then and this is now. Cameron clearly believes that it is no longer necessary to make concessions to the Jocks. Instead he sneers that “to govern is to choose”. In other words after Westminster extracting some £300 billion out of the North Sea in revenue it is now safe to turn down the spending of £1 billion which might help save the planet.

So where is the tragedy in all of this sorry tale? It’s a tragedy that such an opportunity is to be shunned. It would be a tragedy if Peterhead, with all of its natural advantages for exactly such a project, was never to have them brought to fruition. It is a tragedy for the international efforts on climate change that the UK Government are running away instead of leading the way in this technology.

But the real tragedy would be if we ever again believed a single word that these arrogant, unscrupulous, upper-crust, short-term Westminster chancers ever have to say about what was best for Scotland.