Seòmar agus comataidhean

I will go to my final question. I will bring in Tim Dumenil, because he might also want to reflect on the previous answer. I know that there are time constraints.

What are your views on the potential transportation of hydrogen by ship, either as ammonia or compressed hydrogen? Our notes say that, as the years go by, that will become more viable and potentially more important. I am interested to know your views on that. Tim, do you want to come in on that? You can also reflect on the previous question if you wish.

I see nodding heads. I do not want to put words in your mouth, Tim, but are you suggesting that pivoting towards shipping in the years ahead might compromise the infrastructure that we need for long-term sustainability? Could shipping be counterproductive?

That is helpful, because it ties in quite well with what Mr Amos said about how you get that high value and a bigger boost for your economy and everything else. Thank you.

Tim, you said that, in a previous existence, you were involved with Acorn and you mentioned some of those issues. Do you want to comment on anything that you have heard so far?

Good afternoon, everyone. You probably heard me put a similar question to the previous panel—you were coming in as Mr Lumsden and I were asking questions. It is about a national network of hydrogen pipes moving hydrogen around Scotland and the UK, and project union was mentioned. I asked the first panel about the hope that that will be in place by the mid-2030s but it will not all happen at the one time—it will be phased and prioritised for the benefit of Scotland, the Scottish economy and our net zero targets. How should that work be phased and prioritised in the Scottish context? It would be helpful to know that.

I do not see any other takers, so, without putting words in your mouth, I will just nudge you slightly on the connections and locations that should be prioritised as part of that project. I expect your clear answer to be, of course, the work around the Acorn project and the wider Grangemouth cluster, for the benefit of the Scottish economy. However, is there any other prioritisation in the Scottish context that you think should happen? You do not have to give an answer to that. It is just that we heard earlier on that, although it is hoped that we will do everything that is required to be done, the uncertainty about when it will happen, and the sequencing of how it will happen, is leading to some uncertainty for business investment. Investors want that certainty and to get back their investment; they want to know whether the structure will be there. Has that been your experience in talking with investors? Are there any other parts of Scotland where that network should be prioritised?

I will turn to Professor Haszeldine. Do you want to add to that? I was going to ask you a separate question, but any reflection on that is welcome.

There are lots of reasonable points in that. You made a comment about potentially exporting hydrogen, and you mentioned a pipeline to Germany. That is interesting, because David Amos, I think, who was on the first panel, took a different view. He spoke about a different pipeline that would cost about £2 billion. I see that Scottish Government research shows that, even if our hydrogen was sold at high prices compared with global prices, there could still be a market for that because the EU would not have enough hydrogen to meet its needs. We also heard earlier that there are lots of ways of driving down the price of hydrogen.

I think that it was Mr Amos who suggested that that would be a good-quality investment for future export opportunities. I think that he compared that pipeline to Germany with cables moving energy down the east coast to serve the north-east of England, which he said would cost £24 billion to complete. He questioned whether that was for consumption and use in England or whether wider infrastructure would be built up to use hydrogen for other things, such as they are hoping to do at the Grangemouth cluster. Indeed, he queried why we would not develop that capability in Scotland.

We are trying to get our heads around where that investment should go, why it should go there and whether that might compromise future potential Scottish jobs and growth, depending on what that the infrastructure looks like. Another witness, who we thought was an expert, took the converse view from yours about having a pipeline to Germany. Rather than my putting a specific question to you, I am keen to have your reflections on all that.

I have no more questions, convener.

I will be disciplined and will not follow up on some of the interesting points that you made there, as I must move on to my next question, given the time constraints.

We have heard primarily, but not exclusively, about green and blue hydrogen. Do the different forms of hydrogen production affect how we plan for future transportation infrastructure? Does the balance between green and blue matter for investment in that infrastructure?

I am seeing no takers on that. David Amos might want to come in.