The ‘No’ vote will avert a near-term investment hiatus in the sector by removing doubt over the future of the UK government’s low carbon subsidy regime.
By some estimates it may also save Scottish consumers from shouldering the inflated cost of supporting renewable energy, while helping the UK as a whole to meet decarbonisation targets.
But the result will come as a blow to Scottish energy minister Fergus Ewing who told Utility Week ahead of the vote that “successive Westminster governments have, sadly, failed to take a coherent approach to energy” and that independence was needed “to harness Scotland’s full energy potential”.
Concerns were raised ahead of the vote over the destabilising influence that independence would have on the sector, with uncertainty over the structure of the market putting the brakes on investment.
SSE would have shouldered the greatest potential risk, with some analysts estimating that 60 per cent of its earnings are derived from Scotland.
RBC Capital said that Scottish Power parent company Iberdrola and Centrica both hold a 15-20 per cent earnings exposure to Scotland while Eon holds just 10 per cent and EDF Energy has just 5 per cent of its earning originate north of the border.
The ‘No’ vote means that Scottish energy consumers will avoid a potential bill increase predicted by Westminster to be £189 for households and £608,000 per year for medium sized businesses in the event of independence.
UK energy secretary Ed Davey said that spreading the subsidy costs for Scottish renewable generation across the “broad shoulders” of the UK’s 30 million energy consumers will prevent bills increasing north of the border.
He added that by remaining part of the union, there will not be a “doubling up” in regulation and that the integrated GB-wide energy market can be maintained.
The union between Scotland, England, Northern Ireland and Wales will be maintained, although the main Westminster parties have promised that more power will be devolved to the Holyrood administration.