Seòmar agus comataidhean

I thank panel members for their patience. Are there any concerns around carbon offsetting, the purchase of commercial carbon credits and the implication for land use, particularly in your vast geographies?

I come first to Simon Fieldhouse. Dumfries and Galloway Council has a stringent target of being net zero by 2025, but you have said that you need to consider offsetting residual emissions. Is that appropriate? Do you have concerns about mass afforestation, for example, or other use of land in your area? What might that mean for your plans for net zero?

I will then come to Margaret Davidson. Do you have any concerns about other councils, or organisations such as private companies, using your land in the Highland region, and about the transparency of and accounting for that? Is there a specific desire to make use of the land capability of the Highlands to meet the net zero targets of other organisations?

Thank you. I will pass back to the convener now but, if the two councils want to say anything more on their relationship with the private sector and financial services in particular, maybe they could follow up in writing, as we are interested in that area.

With the 2030 target, the original plans had—[Inaudible.]—of carbon capture and storage. You might be aware that the committee took evidence on that last week. One of the messages that we got was that, if we want to get on with CCS, we must do so quickly.

Clearly, there are questions about the Acorn project being put on the reserve list. What does that mean for Scotland’s target? What needs to be done about CCS in Scotland? If CCS is delayed beyond a meaningful implementation date, is it possible that the emissions removals and reductions that can be achieved through other action on, for example, peatland, diet or aviation could compensate for the lack of progress?

I will go to Chris Stark first, and then to Professor Bell, if he wants to come in.

Thank you. I now hand back to the convener.

Thank you.

Finally, I want to ask about cement. The committee was told recently that if cement were a country it would be in third place after the United States and China when it comes to its global emissions. We heard about the potential of carbon capture, utilisation and storage in relation to cement. Should there be more focus on innovation and other aspects in that regard? We know that world capital is interested in the most obvious and exciting investments, particularly in relation to renewable energy generation, but should we be looking at the unsexy subjects, such as cement, given that the message that we are hearing is that we have to do more of everything, rather than just one thing?

I will put that question to Chris Stark, and the convener will let us know whether there is time to bring in Professor Bell, too.

It is good to see both of you. Thank you for joining us.

Given the risks to meeting the tough 75 per cent emissions reduction target by 2030, which was a cross-party, collective decision in the Scottish Parliament, in which sectors are rapid gains still feasible? What needs to change to deliver tangible reductions in those areas? I know that you set that out in detail in your recent report, but I am keen to hear from both of you about the focus and emphasis that you want to give the committee.

Do you want to add anything, Professor Bell?

I will come to Keith Ridgway. I know that the work of the NMIS has been driven a lot by the low carbon and digital agenda, initially in the aerospace sector. Can that thinking be applied to resilience elsewhere, in particular in the construction sector?

Good morning, everyone. It is good to see you all. I am particularly interested in how we can marry the sustainability and resilience of domestic supply chains with the net zero goal. Much of what is imported comes from the far east, particularly in the construction sector, as we heard last week.

Getting back to the basics about construction helping with our recovery, we know that cement presents a global challenge. We discussed last week whether there is an opportunity to investigate the replacement of cement with next-generation materials and innovation. At the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee just yesterday, we heard about the potential in Scotland for carbon capture and storage to address some of the cement issues. If we do not address cement, we will not be able to address some of the net zero challenges, globally or domestically.

I am not sure whether cement is your area, but perhaps you can comment on how we marry the need to address supply-chain interruptions in key sectors by looking at how we do things domestically with the desire to become global innovators in moving towards net zero and the world that we need. How realistic would that be if we put our minds to it?

I will come to Nick Shields first, and then to the others. If cement in particular is not your thing, you can comment on the general concept in relation to the carbon miles issue. Is there a policy intervention—through procurement, for example—that could help the domestic economic innovation agenda?

Nick Shields wants to come back in before I hand back to the convener. Colin Beattie has been very patient.