 Welcome back everyone. We are now going to proceed with the grand final debate, where, as you heard, the motion is, this house believes that funding the Scottish Government's plan to meet 100 per cent demand for electricity from renewable energy by 2020 is the best way to secure Scotland's future. Speaking for the motion, we have Portree, Callan Campbell, Moira MacAskill, and Malyn Lewis. Speaking against the motion, it is Charleston, with Morvan Carmichael, Jemima Morris and Cameron Cochran. Without a further adieu, I invite the first speaker to open the debate for the proposition from Portree. Good morning, Madam Chair, judges, ladies and gentlemen, and my fellow debaters. As the Opposition, we strongly agree that funding the Scottish Government's plan to meet 100 per cent demand for electricity from renewable energy by 2020 is the best way to secure Scotland's future. We not only believe that this is the future for Scotland's energy needs, but could have a key part to play in the future of our economy. First of all, ladies and gentlemen, let's take a look at this motion. It states that by 2020, all of our energy will be completely renewable. We can see that this statement does have its flaws, but what in the modern world doesn't. If the independence vote concludes as a yes, we will own an 80-year supply of oil. On the global market, this oil has a net worth of an astronomical £1.5 trillion pounds. What educated individual would think that burning this as fuel is going to be in any way beneficial? Even if Scotland does go ahead with its target, we will still be burning this oil to sell. We're not going to throw money down the drain just to rely on renewable energy. Sorry, do you mean if we sell it to other countries? Yeah, we will sell it to other countries even if we do go for 100 per cent demand. Okay, I understand that, but the thing is that the North Sea oil that Scotland has is actually incredibly inefficient to users burning. It's more likely to be used for use in cars or things like that. Imagine £1.5 million put into renewable research. As you know from the previous round, we already lead the way in marine power. Why not expand this lead into wind or biofuels? Maybe not solar, we all know what Scotland's sun can be like. However, let's glance at the other side of the argument. Eighty more years of oil might sound nice, but consider this. What are we going to do when it runs out? Without selling it, we won't have close to as much money to invest in renewables, so when we really need to become totally reliant, our renewable energies will not be nearly as efficient and useful as they would have been with this extra funding. Besides, 100 per cent dependence on anything isn't good, but whether we like it or not, we will run out and it's better we get used to renewables sooner rather than later. Many people are beginning to think that 2020 is too soon to reach this target, but consider we are currently around 50 per cent dependent, and the rate of current technology is increasing. 2020 really isn't that far out of our reach at all and could even, in our team's opinion, be achieved sooner. For the Scottish Government, energy and electricity is a priority. That means that, although the money put towards it is limited, it is still a considerable amount, nearly £500 million in fact. Even though only half of Scotland's budget currently goes to renewables, that is changing quickly. All the time, Government receives investments for renewables, whether it be charities. The Government is spending far too much on renewables, which we cannot afford when we have oil and gas, which is easily affordable. If you consider the cost of taking that oil especially out of the ground, you will find that renewables are a much more economic or a much more efficient form of energy. We receive investments from charities, companies and individuals, and each one of those increases the prospect of 100 per cent dependency by 2020. The final point that my team and I will be debating about today is to do with the Scottish jobs. Currently, around 14,000 people are employed in the renewable sector, but as this sector continues to grow, so do the number of jobs. While people will lose their jobs after fossil fuels stop, almost all renewable manufacturers say that the skills needed for fossil fuels sector are easily transferable to renewables, so the number of people employed will stay roughly the same. Ladies and gentlemen, I know by now you are in no doubt that renewable energy is of course the right step forward for our economy to grow. The right step away from these harmful, expensive fossil fuels and the right step towards a safer, cleaner and brighter future, our safer, cleaner and brighter future. I am now going to invite the first opposition speaker to outline their case from Charleston. Madam Chair, judges, fellow debaters, ladies and gentlemen, this House believes, though without doubt, funding the Scottish Government's plan to be 100 per cent demand for electricity from renewable energy by 2020 is not the best way to secure Scotland's future. Those often think that they can get something for nothing. Unfortunately, a large number of our politicians agree, and with that, they have decided to try and make their fantasy come true with taxpayers' money. Easy, they tell us, all that we have to do is harness the infinite power of wind, water, wave and tide, and that will provide us all with renewable energy sources that will power Scotland into a secure future where we do not have to worry about our energy supplies and can sell our surplus to the rest of the UK. Of course, most of us are well-informed, sensible, realistic citizens who live in the real world and realise that this fantasy is far removed from the reality of the situation. No developed economy can function with us a reliable and economic supply of electricity. With present UK and Scottish policies, we have been warned that, within a few years, there will be a risk of power failures while increases in any prices to consumers were raised by more than 50 per cent by 2025. The fantasy that our energy needs in the future can be supplied by renewables, mainly wind and marine, has gone on too long. That is not a question of opinion. You do not seem to realise that, at the moment, we could power Scotland seven times over from just marine energy. Right now, marine energy only powers 0.03 per cent of Scotland, so I do not really think that that is possible. The facts are backed up by the laws of physics. Renewable energy sources are very low concentrations and are intermittent. Renewables have been unseen through urinating, no thank you, extortionally expensive, and no amount of funding will change this fact. Marine and wind energy sources cannot be relied upon to provide energy when Scotland needs it. A recent analysis has shown that, for more than 30 per cent of the time, the output from wind farms drop below 10 per cent of their basic output and in really cold weather can fall to virtually zero. Furthermore, it is unfortunately not correct that marine energy will provide a vast, untaffed energy resource on our doorstep. Studies that have now been accepted by the Government, such as the one by— Yes, please. If renewable energies aren't the way forward and our fossil fuels are going to run out sooner or later, what are we going to do for energy? This is about funding the Scottish Government's plan to meet 100 per cent demand by 2020. We're not saying that we shouldn't fund renewables, we're saying that we shouldn't try to get 100 per cent by 2020, because it's just not achievable. Industry, schools, hospitals and households need a reliable and affordable source of power to ensure that Scotland runs smoothly, grows and prospers. There is no evidence that renewables can provide this for us, so why on earth are we throwing money at these hand-over-fist? By all means, let us have some wind power, some solar power, some rain power, and some hydro and biomass power, but we must not pretend that these desirable but ineffective on large-scale renewables can provide a secure future. Scotland needs a balanced energy supply that is both efficient and affordable. We'll be fools to put over our precious heads in the renewables basket. The Scottish Government dangles the prospect of secure, affordable, clean green energy powering a prosperous Scotland before us. But the cost of building up green energy capacity is very high. Wave and tidal power cannot provide energy on a large scale. There is a limited scope for further expansion of hydro power. There have been cuts in subsidies for solar power. Recently, most of the activity has been focused on onshore wind, but this costs around three times as much as conventional generations, so again it will not provide for Scotland's energy needs in the future. The Howard newspaper recently reported that one company from Hamilton, called intelligent land investors, is planning 260 turbines, including 26 applications in a garland but alone. If I'll get the go-ahead, the company will get £30 million a year in subsidies. This sort of funding will not attract companies who want to provide Scotland with long-term solutions, just more fools within that they can get something for nothing. The Scottish Government took non-stop about renewable energy, which is expensive energy, and then claims to be concerned about fuel poverty. We have the harshest climate in the UK, and many homes are hard to heat. Around 900,000 Scots households struggle to pay their power bills. Helping them heat their homes in a way that is both economically and environmentally sustainable would be a much more sensible use of funding and should be the Government's energy policy. Renewable energy are an attractive fantasy, and we should continue to fund some projects, but funding the Scottish Government's plan to meet 100 per cent demand for electricity by 2020 is not the best way to secure Scotland's future, and I beg you to oppose the motion. Thank you very much, Charleston, and I'm now going to call on the second speaker to make the case for the proposition from poetry. Good afternoon, Madam Chairwoman, fellow dudges, fellow debaters, ladies and gentlemen. As main speaker for our team, the proposition, I would like to go on to our team's main arguments in more detail, but first I would like to refute some of the points made by the opposition. Charleston Academy has stated that we are spending too much taxpayers' money on fossil fuels, but that is not true because fossil fuels are getting the same amount of funding as renewable energies. The motion that we are debating this afternoon is as follows. This house believes that funding the Scottish Government's plan to meet 100 per cent demand for electricity from renewable sources by 2020 is the best way to secure Scotland's future. Of course, that is the way forward. We are emitting far too much carbon dioxide here in the UK. The average person in Britain causes the emission of 13,000 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent gases per year. The global average is 5,800 kilograms. We are nearly triple the global average. We should be humiliated. That's why we need to start now. We need to get our act together and start to plan goals like the Scottish Government has recently said. Fossil fuels, coal, oil and gas are only found in our earth. They have taken thousands upon thousands of years to form, and we are using them up rapidly. It is expected that by 2080 we will have no more fossil fuels left, and then what will we do? Freeze in our homes because we failed to get a backup plan up and running in time? No. We are not saying that we should just give up on renewables. We are saying that we should introduce them slowly so that it works and is reliable. What happens if we run out of fossil fuels before we introduce renewable energies? I would like to introduce our team's first argument. We argue that 100 per cent reliance on renewable energy is the best way to ensure the best way to secure Scotland's future. We have all the necessary resources, high wind speeds, miles of coastline, solar panels and, most important of all, funding. Scotland's energy budget is given £203 million per year. £200 million? No, thank you. Renewable energy is worth an estimated £2.8 billion, and the opposition team, Traffson Academy, wants us to stop using it and producing it to make way for bird torturing oil spills, wildlife killing rigs and carbon producing expensive forms of other unattractive and unappealing sources of energy. We have the opportunity to make Scotland cleaner and greener. Why should we waste it? Yes, please. We are not wanting to waste this opportunity. We are just wanting to do it in a more sensible way rather than dashing ahead when we don't need to. If our Government has already set plans for our energy, then we know that they are reliable because they would not back anything that is not going to work. Our second argument is that we believe that trying to reach this goal by 2020 is going to ensure that we have back-up energy generation in place for when our oil runs out. Our oil, whether we like it or not, is going to run out, and because of that, we need to have something ready in place which we know is reliable. By setting goals for 2020, we are ensuring that renewable energy is in our top priorities and that we are moving forward in the right direction. The year 2020 is only five and a half years away, and in reality that is perfect for our goals. The current Scottish Government is setting goals for the best. In five and a half years, Scotland is to become an extremely greener country. Right now, only 2.3 per cent of all electricity that we use is oil-based. That number is only going to lower as oil runs out, prices rise, so obviously we are clearly going to have to look for other ways to source our energy. My third point in the debate this afternoon is that if renewable energies were really as bad, then why is it getting the same amount of funding as fossil fuels? Scotland's political figures have spent many of hours debating the future of Scotland's renewable energy. It is estimated that 11,000 people are in a job because of the hundreds of renewable projects that we have across our country. Renewable energy is a demanding industry and also one that pays well. A spokesperson for the Government recently said that the Scottish Government is completely committed to promoting the increased use of renewable energy sources. That commitment recognises renewables potential to support economic growth. The Scottish Government is telling us here that they are committed, committed to the increased use of renewable energies, committed to support renewable energies potential, to support our economic growth. Scotland now has a future and it is one that we can be sure of. We know that renewable energy is the way forward and it is the right steps to take for a better, brighter future. British Government takes money out of our budget every year to pay for their debt. Over 33 years, Scotland has subsidised the rest of the UK by paying interests for loans that we did not take out. That enormous subsidy adds up to nearly £7.2 billion and that crazy figure is growing at approximately £127 per second. By the end of my speech, our Government will be forced to pay an extra £22,860 for interests on loans that we did not want. That is sourced by official Government reports. That shows that we cannot afford not to go forward with renewable energies. We do not have the money to buy other energies if fossil fuels run out and we do not have a renewable energy backup plan. Our final point in today's debate is that if we do choose not to go down the renewable route, hundreds of thousands of jobs are going to be lost. Around 11,000 jobs are going to be lost if we decide not to go through this new scheme and that will not just affect the workers. No, it will affect 50,000 other people, families of those working in the renewable energy industries. How is that going to affect our economy? You may argue that jobs are going to be created through renewable energies, but what happens when our oil runs out? In Scotland today, there are 194,000 people without a job. If the Scottish Government does not go forward with our plan, then not so many people are going to be needed for work. As a nation who has set a goal that includes new jobs and has now backed down, that is going to drastically up our unemployment rate. Ladies and gentlemen, we know that in today's day and age, being unemployed is a very worrying and stressful time. We know that we have money from jobs and renewable energies and nobody ever crossed a river with two small jumps, only one big leap. It is time to take our projects, our jobs and take our leap towards a bigger, better Scotland. Thank you, Portree. I am now going to call on the second speaker to make the case for the Opposition from Charleston. Madam Chair, judges, fellow debaters, ladies and gentlemen, as my colleague Mr Cochran has already persuaded you, this House does not believe that funding the Scottish Government's plan to meet 100% demand for electricity from renewable energy by 2020 is the best way to secure Scotland's future. Mr Cochran convinced us that renewables are an extortionately expensive fantasy. I will now focus on the details of this impossible dream. I would like to start with wind turbines or to give them a more accurate description, wind rotors. Due to variable wind speed, their overall efficiency is only 18%. So what are the advocates of wind energy so thrilled about? Massive machines, huge costs, tiny returns, does not sound so appealing, does it? The list of failures does not stop there, because the entire structure is under so much stress. Their estimated lifespan is only 20 to 25 years. They are also so mechanically complex that they are expensive to run. Yes, please. You are picking holes in each individual renewable energy, but together we can easily run Scotland reliably and efficiently. None of those renewables are far too expensive, and if none of them are very efficient, then we clearly cannot do this in the short amount of time. Renewables first confirm that a 1.5 megawatt turbine costs £150,000 a year to maintain. Mr Cochran informed us earlier that wind farms are dependent on subsidies to survive. When those handouts of taxpayers' money are withdrawn, the turbines will be left to rot. That has already happened in America, Spain and Portugal, where thousands of turbines stand silent and useless, doing nothing to support the country's energy needs. We must not continue to fund projects just because we have been sucked into the renewables fantasy. In March last year, we were all shocked to find in the media that power companies operating wind farms in Scotland were paid more than £1 million to shut down their turbines because they were generating too much electricity. Has things improved? No. In this year, the figure rose to £8.7 million. Those so-called constraint payments are making a mockery of funding. How is this funding the Government's plan to meet 100 per cent electricity for renewables by 2020? It is ridiculous. What we are really doing is funding people not to generate electricity for renewables. That system is clearly not working and cannot provide a secure future for Scotland. So what other alternatives do the proposition want us to fall for? Hydro power, I hear them shouting in delight. Well, at first glance, this does seem like a safe bet. Hydro power is dependent on rainfall, so it should be perfect for Scotland's climate. As proven by the energy-saving trust, one 5 kilowatt system costs around £25,000, and then add annual maintenance to that. Scotland—yes, please. We have a £103 suspend of renewable energies. If all those costs this much and, as you are suggesting, we use other ones that are more expensive, how are we going to power the whole of Scotland by 2020? Scotland needs to be practical, and hydros power schemes are quite the opposite. 40 per cent of their power is lost to friction and pumps, and most pumps can only supply 440 megawatts for 12 hours a day. Are the proposition suggesting that we change our lifestyles to accommodate a Scotland that is powerless for 84 hours a week? More worrying is what could happen if weather conditions affect the production of energy by hydropower. If funding plans for 100 per cent electricity from renewables could leave us powerless, then that is not right for Scotland. And as for wave power, well, if there ever was a flight of fancy, then this is it. Despite massive funding and increasingly desperate efforts by engineers and politicians, a viable machine to harness wave power on a large scale has yet to emerge, when will the penny drop, that this is mission impossible and that no amount of money will change the facts? The laws of physics and economic factors make progress almost impossible. Scotland has 9,910 kilometres of coastline. This is probably why some people believe that funding tidal power projects is a way for Scotland to secure its future energy. They are wrong. Large water-driven propellers, such as the ones that are installed in the sound of Islay, are meant to harness the power of the tides. However, although water is powerful, yes, please. If the Opposition is saying that renewable energies are not good, what are we going to do when our fossil fuels run out? Those renewable energies have not been developed enough and we are trying to rush into them by 2020. That would just cause a huge loss for Scotland when we find that we can't power them because we tried to do it far too quickly. Although water is powerful, the enormous sums of money that are required to achieve a very small amount of unreliable power is obviously not sustainable and not a secure option for Scotland yet. My English teacher would confirm that this is an oxymoron. Currently, renewables cannot replace conventional power generation due to three indisputable points. Firstly, they are all intermittent and, in the case of wind power, unpredictable. Secondly, they all use expensive and complex machinery. Thirdly, there is no realistic technology to store large amounts of power at the moment, despite years of research and funding. Although the dream future, the proposition talk of is appealing, we must remember that it is just a dream. Renewable energy cannot happen unless huge quantities of subsidies are thrown at them. Money that Scotland cannot afford. Renewable energy could well leave us powerless as it has no chance of providing power on the scale that we need. The proposition needs to wake up and realise that the Government's plan is not the best way to secure Scotland's future. I ask you to oppose the motion. Thank you very much, Charleston. We are now moving on to the summations, so can I ask the third proposition speaker to sum up their case for Petrie, please. Good afternoon, Madam Chair, judges, fellow debaters, ladies and gentlemen. As the final speaker for our motion, I will first refute the arguments made by Charleston Academy and then conclude by funding the Government's plan to meet 100% demand for electricity from renewable sources by 2020 is the best way to secure Scotland's future. In small ways, this is complicated, but on the big scale, this is simple. The fact is, fossil fuels will run out and we need to be ready as soon as possible. We need energy to survive, and if you disagree, well maybe you're right, but I highly doubt you'll be Mr Pop here if you want humans to go back to living in mud huts. We need to take action now for our future. Charleston Academy say we cannot rely on only renewable energies, but facts clearly show that with a range of all of them, we could easily rely solely on renewables to run our country by 2020. Renewables are so diverse, and we'll never have to put all our eggs in one basket. The fossil fuels won't disappear either, so we will still have money if we need it. Renewable energies are the obvious and soon-to-be only option for our future. We are already approximately around 50% reliable on renewably sourced energy. This percentage has increased a significant amount in recent years. There is no reason we shouldn't meet our goal as we can only benefit from it. Continuing to rely on fossil fuels means paying higher prices for our energy, and continuing to mine in places that would otherwise be conserved means constantly releasing harmful emissions into the atmosphere. Switching to renewable means safer wildlife, longer living rain forests, and more money in the pockets of you and I. Scotland's explorable renewable energy resources attend for 10 times its peak energy demand, and we are already a net exploration at power. 100% reliance on renewable energy is the best way to secure Scotland's future. This is because Scotland is perfectly suited for almost all the types of renewable energy. Wind turbines have had such high wind speeds very consistently throughout the year. Marine energy, as there are thousands of miles on the coastline and hundreds of small coastal towns which lend themselves completely. Even though Scotland is not the sunniest place on Earth, it does not have to be, as the solar panels use light energy, which is quite obviously around every day time. Biomass, which needs lands, which Scotland doesn't exactly lack. And the same for geofirma. And finally hydropower, which is almost perfect for Scotland, as it is quite literally covered in small lochs and natural fresh water supplies. And best of all we can use whichever and as many of each of these as they are all best suited. Together there is not an occasion that we won't be reliable. The government is putting a lot of funding into renewable energies and therefore we know they wouldn't do this unless they can afford it. Charleston Academy have said that 2020 is too soon and is not necessary. By reaching this goal by 2020, we ensure that we have backup time to perfect them instead of reaching this goal the year before renewables run out and risk getting problems we simply cannot afford to have. And furthermore, it is not as if we will run out of renewable energies by 2020. So if the worst came to the worst, we still have fallback, which means we shouldn't set goals, we should still set goals. As for jobs, they will not decrease and when we expand renewable energies they can only increase. Currently 2.3% of all electricity in Scotland is oil based and this number has continuously gone down over the past few years and will continue to do so. Charleston Academy clearly have a problem with us spending money on renewables. They fail to recognise we are investing into a successful future which they fail to take into consideration. Charleston Academy also have a problem with us making too much energy. Our third argument is that if renewable energy is really as bad as the opposition claim, then why is it getting the same amount of funding as fossil fuels? This doesn't make sense. The government is paying £1.3 million into renewable energies so clearly the government has more faith than the motion you Charleston Academy agree with. Another point which we simply cannot ignore is the aspect of job. Many will be created if we meet our goal and this will greatly boost our economy and lower our unemployment. I hope that by now you can see that this is the reasonable and sensible way forward in our future to fulfil our motion. The bottom line is why shouldn't we? We are well on the course already. Thank you very much ladies and gentlemen, chair, madam chair and our judges. Thank you very much Portray and finally I'm going to call on the third opposition speaker to sum up and close the debate from Charleston. Madam chair, judges, fellow debaters, ladies and gentlemen, my colleague Mr Cochran and Ms Morris have made a clear and convincing argument against the motion that funding the government's plan to meet 100% demand for electricity from renewables is the best way to secure Scotland's future. Before I go on to sum up our futable arguments, I would like to refute some of the propositions misguided points. The propositions say that we should lead the way in wind technology like we do in wave. We all may be blonde but we know that this will get us stuck in the same situation as with wave power, not being able to move forward because we have no examples to follow. They also claim that gels will stay roughly the same as with fossil fuels but the latest statistics show for every one job made in the renewable sector 1.9 jobs are lost elsewhere. They also claim that proposing the motion is the way forward for Scotland but we all know that the hear who was too optimistic and fast was beaten by this slow, wise and careful tortoise. They also allege that we need a backup plan when fossil fuels run out but what they feel to realise is that here on the opposition we are all for renewables but not in such a rushed way and this will not secure our future as there is still many faults with renewables. For example, we weren't even able to visit a wind farm last year because there was too much wind. The evidence that my colleague presented against funding such rushed plans for renewables is impossible to deny. Wave energy is difficult to harness as yet, despite heavy funding, a way to transport the power from the sea to the land has not been perfected. It is awful to believe that harnessing wave power could slow down the rotation speed of the planet which would be devastating for the whole world. Wind power isn't reliable. The strength of the wind is not constant and varies to zero to storm force just like our visit to the wind farm. Scotland needs a reliable, constant supply of energy, which wind cannot provide. Solar power requires large amounts of solar panels and a large land area to place them. In Scotland we would not have the appropriate amount of sunlight to provide the power that we need. Tidal power is all well and good but there is no effective storage system despite massive funding. Of course Scotland needs a reliable and affordable energy but continuing to fund renewable projects is not the best way to secure our future. That may mean that we need to reduce the amount of energy that we use or to build more energy facilities. It also indicates that the best solution to our energy problems is to have a balance of many different power sources. Another disadvantage of renewable energy sources is the reliability of supply. Renewable energy often relies on the weather for its source of power. While those resources are unavailable, so is the capacity to make energy from them. This can be unpredictable and inconsistent. The current cost of funding renewable energy technology is far in excess of traditional fossil fuel generation. This is because it is a new technology and it has an extremely large capital cost. If we leave our future energy security to the proposition that Scotland will be full of thousands of abandoned, decaying monsters, that used to be turbines, turbines that proved to be useless in getting to the 2020 target, our coastal waters will be full of useless machines that failed to harness the power of our waves and left us powerless. We will have field after field of solar panels that desperately looked for the sun that of course never came, that will have been abandoned because the technology was not able to be developed to store the power produced. The waste that renewal projects could leave us with is shocking thought. In a few years we will need funding to deal with e-waste. There are big plans for renewable power, but costs and lack of workable technology mean that they will not work for Scotland. The difficulty with renewable energy is not whether it will be here in 500 years, it is whether it will be here next Tuesday. We cannot risk relying on renewables because they are so unreliable. This would not be beneficial to Scotland's future. A short-term reliance and a managed amount of wind, wave, hydro and solar would be risky enough, but funding plans over 100 per cent results by 2020 is incredibly dangerous. Scotland's weather is notoriously unreliable, so risking our energy requirements by funding renewables that work in relation to the weather is risking our future. So, ladies and gentlemen, judges, fellow debaters, it is clear that we should all oppose the motion. Thank you, Charleston, and the debate has now closed. Thank you to both Portrey and Charleston for, I'm sure you'll agree, an outstanding final and a very fitting finale for the big green challenge. The judges have the difficult job of deciding who is the winner of the big green challenge, and I believe that they are going to vocate this chamber to the judging room, and whilst they're making their decisions, I'm going to hand over to Claire Douglas from Tricker PR, who's going to give a short presentation about the big green challenge. So, I think our judges will be away for about 15 to 20 minutes, but I'm sure the minute we see them then we will stop and make an announcement on our winner. Bear with us until then, and I'll hand over to Claire, who's going to tell us about the big green challenge. Hello, everybody. My name is Claire Douglas, I'm one of the organisers of the big green challenge. I've worked on this project for three years now and it's always a fantastic event to be a part of. I want to talk to you just now about the importance of this project and how everybody here today is part of something that's so much bigger than just this competition. 18th century French author Joseph Schubert said, it is better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debating it. Renewable energy is one of the most hotly debated topics in the rod right now, and learning about both sides of the argument is the only way you can truly understand the depths of an issue. In the past five years, there have been 113 debates with the big green challenge that's 226 pupils debating for and 226 pupils debating against, motions on renewable energy, that's almost 500 pupils in total. It is hoped that renewable energy will bring up to 40,000 jobs to Scotland, and you can be a part of that. You are the generation that is going to fill those jobs, and the big green challenge is an excellent platform for you to start your journey into the industry. Scottish Renewables recently undertook a survey addressing the skills gap in the renewable sector. The results showed that over a third of responding companies believed that there was a gap in graduate-level engineers, technician engineers and construction engineers, but it's not just the technical side of the industry where there is an identifiable gap. Almost 20 per cent believe that there is a gap in administration and management-level positions, and 7 per cent believe that there is a gap in communications positions. There are even gaps in sales, planning and policy. There are so many routes for you guys to travel. You are obviously an exceptionally bright bunch of young people who are capable of achieving anything that you can put your mind to. If you have an interest in the renewable sector, then there are careers out there for you. The industry is still very young. New developments are constantly being made. The future of renewable energy is literally in your hands, and you will be the one shaping the way that the world looks at energy in years to come. That brings me to the importance of the Scottish Parliament as a venue for the competition. Apart from the fact that the amount of hot air being produced in this building is probably enough to power the country for years, this is where history is made, where legislation is passed and where the future of our country is decided upon. Since opening nearly 10 years ago, the Scottish Parliament has passed many legislations to protect our environment. As you all know very well, the Scottish Government's 2020 route map for renewable energy in Scotland established a target for the equivalent of 100 per cent of Scotland's electricity demand to be supplied by renewable resources by 2020. We first succeeded the first target set, and it is clear that the industry is making progress towards the final target. By the amount of upcoming renewable projects in the pipeline, the progress can continue well into the future as we continue to unlock Scotland's full renewables potential. In 2020, you will all be about 19, 20 years old. It seems like a very long way away, but right now is the time that you need to decide what you are going to be doing in that year. Many of you will soon be choosing your subjects for fourth, fifth or sixth year. In fact, a recent study that we undertook for past participants of the Big Green Challenge showed that nearly 100 per cent of the Big Green Challenge pupils went on to study at a higher level. Popular subjects included biology, maths and physics, and huge amounts of pupils were passionate about studying chemistry and geography. A massive 86 per cent of past participants of the Big Green Challenge went on to or planned to study at university. In 2020, many of you will be close to graduating. Graduating at a time where it is hoped if the targets can be achieved, that 100 per cent of Scotland's electricity will come from renewables. You will be reading about new development. You may even be part of their creation, helping to shape what is discussed in this very building. I just want to add right now that I am really excited to have had Heather Reid with us today, and I am going to hand over to her in a minute. I have to admit that she is a bit of a childhood hero of mine. There was a long time that I wanted to be a meteorologist just like her. I remember meeting her when I was about your guy's age at Dynamic Earth. I nervously asked for autographs and some career advice. Unfortunately, it turned out that I was not as great at science as I had hoped, and my career path had to change. However, it feels like I have come full circle. I am here at an event with Heather again in a room full of young people who are passionate about science renewables and the environment, and they have all done a fantastic job today. As I mentioned before, I have been involved in this project for three years now, and organising it has never been smooth sailing. From train strikes to snowdrifts, schools pooling out with a week to go and prizes going missing in the post, it certainly always has been a big green challenge. However, it is worth it all in the end to watch everybody come together with fantastic debates and to see people flourished year on year. There was a boy three years ago who was a very reluctant reserve. He had to step in at the last minute and was very nervous, barely lifted his head from his notes. He could tell he wanted to take part, but he was not very confident. The next year, I was surprised to see him back, but he had become an excellent speaker. He was able to convey his points very fluently. I think that this proves the big green challenge has many virtues aside from learning about renewables, and I hope that you have all benefited from it and will continue to use the skills that you have learnt in your future careers and beyond. That was excellent. I learned a lot about what is a brilliant initiative and well done to everyone who has taken part in those debates over the years. Clare has asked me to say a few words about my career and the sort of work that I do now. My career involved, I suppose, quite an exciting job in the media. I am presenting the weather forecast on television with the BBC, although I also worked as a real forecaster for the Met Office. That interest in the weather started during my physics degree here at Edinburgh University when I did a course in atmospheric physics, but it really switched me on to the science of the atmosphere, which is weather. I joined the Met Office after doing an MSc in satellite image processing, remote sensing and fully intended to work in the Met Office in image processing for the rest of my life. It did not quite turn out that way because everyone who joined the Met Office did an introductory course on what the Met Office is all about. I did a little bit of forecasting and I really enjoyed it. The Met Office College thought that I was quite good at it, and they thought that I had some presentational skills that would then make the Met Office a lot of money if I moved into television, which I treated as a huge joke initially, because I did not think for a second that I would end up on television somewhere. However, BBC Scotland was looking for someone as I finished my forecast of training. I thought, well, I will give it a go and I will give it six months and see how it goes. I ended up standing in front of the map for 15 long years saying hello there and discussing the highs and lows, quite literally, of the Scottish weather. However, I had also almost become a teacher. I had an interview at teacher training college and I was very passionate about education, physics and science in particular. However, what was great about being on the television was that you got invited to lots of events like this, science festivals and science centres, and I did a lot of work with the Institute of Physics. I had a public engagement role, got to meet Claire at Dynamic Earth, and I really enjoyed combining the two jobs—media forecasting, the weather, and working in science engagement. During my 15 years on the television, which was in 1994 to 2009—I am that old—climate change developed as a hot topic and Scotland developed as a renewables nation, which we have debated very thoroughly here today. That was very interesting as well. Although I am not a climatologist and I would never claim to have real expert knowledge in a lot of the issues that we have been talking about, as in that there are lots of academics and researchers within industry who are very experienced in climatology and global warming theories. However, it did really open my eyes to the opportunities that climate change as a context brings in education. In 2009, I decided that I did not really want to be a 40-something whether girl on the television anymore, whether girl was always something that I battled against as a physicist and forecaster. Although, as you get older, the tag girl does not cause as many problems as it did when I was in my 20s and was very enthusiastic about being treated seriously as a scientist. Nonetheless, I decided that, with the onset of curriculum for excellence, there was an opportunity to work more closely with education. Also, as a mum to a primary one-year-old at the time who is now finishing primary five, my reporting Scotland role did not really work terribly well with them taking her to brownies and picking her up from schools. I started working in education and working with organisations such as Education Scotland, as they are now learning and teaching Scotland, as they were universities and local authorities. The areas that I have particularly enjoyed working in are interdisciplinary learning, which of course is a cornerstone of curriculum for excellence. Climate change and weather and renewables are brilliant examples of how interdisciplinary learning can really flourish, because it is bringing together the science, the literacy and communication skills today, it is bringing the social studies and the impact around geography, and it is bringing a lot of numeracy and technology. That reflects how you will work in the real world. As Clare said, if you go on through school and into work, or further education or higher education, you will find more and more that all those subjects that you have done at school overlap more and more, and you will be drawing on skills from all those different subjects. To see interdisciplinary learning more and more in our schools is a good thing. Curriculum for Excellence has also brought us the context of developing global citizens, which I think is fantastic. You, as a generation, are so much aware of global issues compared to when I was in school. You have this social responsibility about you as well, which is just wonderful to see for our nation. I am delighted to have been here today and to see the interdisciplinary approach and the global citizenship approach really in action. I suppose that what I am most passionate about is raising awareness about the importance of science education. You all, from S1 to S3, should have an excellent science education, because Scotland has an excellent tradition in the sciences. I was brought up knowing that Alexander Fleming was responsible for Penicillin, John Logey Baird and Alexander Graham Bell. All those famous names that we have produced have given the world so much, but we are continuing that tradition in Scotland today with some world-class research going on in our universities and in institutions and industry across the country. We lead the world in laser technology here in Scotland. We are leading the world in renewables technology as well. There is stratified medicine and a lot of healthcare research as well. Plant and animal sciences are all areas where Scotland is leading the world today in science research. As Clare pointed out, there are many, many jobs available if you continue in science. Finally, it is not all about being a scientist for me. You are having excellent science education at school. Yes, we need to inspire young people to go on and become scientists and engineers, but we also need to make sure that our future generation is a generation of informed decision makers. If you think about some of the huge issues over the last decade, such as GM crops, such as MMR vaccinations and climate change, it is society that pressures scientists and politicians to make the right decision and come to the right conclusion. If you have not had a good grounding in science and have been enthusiastic about science at school in terms of weighing up scientific data and being aware of scientific process, you might not feel as confident as you in making some of the decisions that will affect society in the future. Science and technology will continue to underpin global society more and more and will underpin global economies more and more. Your decisions in the future will become even more important. Based on the evidence that we have seen today, I feel confident that, certainly across the Highlands and Islands, here in Scotland, we will have excellent and informed decision makers, and I am sure plenty of world-class scientists coming from Scotland. Thank you very much indeed for having me here today. I believe that the judges have returned. I am again going to hand over to Isabel to announce the overall winner, and we will present some prizes. I am sure that it was a difficult decision, but here she is. Thank you very much, Heather. I am sure that you will join me in thanking Heather for her very inspiring words. It is really fantastic to hear from her, so thank you very much. Before I announce the winner of the 2014 big green challenge, we would like to announce the winner of a new additional prize this year, which is from Artemis. I am going to ask Neil Caldwell from Artemis Intelligent Power to come up and present that award. Artemis is really a fantastic success story and exactly the kind of thing that we would like to see more of right across Scotland, as we really combine engineering excellence and entrepreneurialism. He has some very stirring and galvanising things to say to you, and I look forward to hearing from him. Thank you very much for that introduction. First of all, on behalf of the judges, I just want to see how impressed we were with the standard that was on display today. I really did not expect anything like as much technical ability of debating, but also as much engagement in the issues. I started off scoring 9, 9, 9, 10, and then I had to very quickly re-evaluate all the scores because, in actual fact, the standard was so high. I think that you should all be very proud of that. On one of the points that I drew out in the debates was to do with numbers. It is actually very difficult to make a very powerful point with numbers, because everybody is dealing with different numbers on different times. Are you gigawatt hours? I am dealing with so many megawatts and millions and billions, and the content can be lost in that. That also applies in policy. One of the very important contributions to the debate in the UK is made by David Mackay, who is the chief scientist of DECC. He wrote a book called Sustainable Energy Without the Hot Air, which is available free to download, so I am not doing any product placement here. That book was very influential because it set a common baseline for a lot of those comparisons. When we are talking about comparing apples and oranges, it is very difficult, but once you put everything on to a common baseline, you can have a reasonable debate, which is numerical and which has values. When you get to the policy making, those are very much numerical evaluations that have to be made. I would urge you all to treat that as your essential reading to follow up from this debate and find out more about the issues around sustainable energy. Secondly, I want to talk about how we actually go forth with renewable energy and how we commercialise it in Scotland and get it working for us. One of the keywords here is teamwork. Artemis started back in the day as a few people in a workshop making some bits and pieces and trying to get them working. We had a dream. It was a name that came up, Stephen Salter, and he was my inspiration. He wrote a paper in 1985 on hydraulics for wind, and he said, why are these gearboxes in turbines? Why not do it hydraulically? He could see that, if the technology was developed, it could be a much more efficient and powerful way of doing it. However, we had to get from there to the final point, and we had to get there by teamwork. Artemis had to team up with other companies to get a technology from the small scale to the big scale. Finally, we teamed up with one of the biggest companies, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, who were looking for a new technology to put in their offshore wind turbine. It is called SeaAngel, which is a very poetic name. The first SeaAngel will be deployed off Hunterston in September. I have been a little bit distracted today because I am getting near time data from the prototype that has been tested in Yokohama as we speak. That is very exciting for me. Once we test SeaAngel, we will also have to team up with the companies that are going to operate it, so they are teamed up with SSC. In actual fact, there is a test site in which SSC is running, in which SeaAngel will be tested. Finally, we will have to team up with the companies that will deploy offshore turbines in the sea and operate them. That is one of the important messages that I wanted to say. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries has its roots in Scotland. You may not know this, but a Scottish man called Thomas Glover went over to Japan at the end of the 19th century, and he helped to kick-start the Japanese industry, particularly shipbuilding. If you go to Nagasaki in Japan, you will find that Thomas Glover is a superstar. His house is one of the biggest attractions in Japan. We taught Japan a lot about how to industrialise and how to manufacture things, and perhaps we lost it after that. Now Mitsubishi have come back, and they are teaching us a thing or two. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries manufactures some very large equipment that they export all around the world, in a high-labour economy in Japan, of course. This is a sign that we can do it in Scotland here. One of the concepts that they are teaching us about is something called mono-zukuri, which is a Japanese word that means the art, science and craft of making things. This is a link to your schoolwork and the science and maths that you learn in school. Making machines and making technology is not just about the science, but there are also very important elements of craft to it. Machines can break because they were put together wrong, or because something very small inside has been made badly, and the quality has been made badly. In order to make a work-functioning machine, you need to get all those elements right—the art, science and the craft. When Artemis engineers looked back into their school life, and we were all little boys and girls at one point, we learned a lot at school about maths and science. Maybe we also learned a lot outside of school in hobbies, such as fixing things and taking things apart. One of the elements of this prize is a set of screwdrivers—I am breaking the spell now—a set of screwdrivers, which is really symbolic. I hope that it will inspire you to take things apart, learn how they work and put them back together again. Our technology that we have developed is a fusion of different elements of technology—mechanical, electrical and software. One of the other parts of the prize is a little kit to make your own robot. I am not telling you what to do with a robot—you can use it for good or evil—it is up to you. One thing that you will learn is that modern technologies, particularly renewable technologies, need a fusion of mechanical, electrical and software engineering. In this little kit, you will learn how to build a machine, how to interface it with a sensor—it could be turning towards a light or listening for a sound—and write some software to make it do what you want it to do. I hope that it is an inspiration for the lucky winner. Finally, I hope that this prize stimulates some of you to think of engineering technology not as a consumer, not just to buy your next phone—I want a flashier one—but when it breaks, try and fix it. Do not throw it away because it is broken. If you have anything around your house that is broken, try and fix it. Take it apart. Take that opportunity. If you engage with technology not as a consumer but as a creator, you will find that it is much more exciting than downloading the latest app, because you are creating the next generation—you are creating it yourself. I hope that you will all be inspired after this to think of taking part in Scotland's future as involved in the technology, engineering and building the machines that we need to gather energy of renewable energy. Without further ado, I am going to award the prize to the group that I thought could be the engineers of tomorrow. The prize goes to Nairn Academy. Thank you very much, Nair, and congratulations to Nairn Academy. I would like to announce the winner of the 2014 big green challenge, and I would like to give congratulations to Charleston academy. Well done, guys. You have won a trip to see renewable energy in action. I know that that will be a fantastic trip, but I know that you know that it will be fantastic because I know that you know that there have been fantastic trips in the past, for example, Dynamic Earth and the Eden project. That will be arranged between you and the school, so it will be wonderful. If you would like to come up and you will be presented with your trophy and your certificate. Before you all leave, can we do the photographs at the end? We will carry on just before your runaway. I would like to say well done to the runners-up for G High School. You have won a fantastic Kindle and the Amazon gift voucher, so very well done. We will do photographs in a little while, but before you all rush off, I would like to thank first and foremost the people who have just been absolutely wonderful and their teachers. You have clearly put in an incredible amount of time and effort in preparing at each stage of the competition, and we are very much appreciative of that. I think that that really showed today. There have been coaches right across the Highlands and Islands who have gone into your schools to help people prepare. There have been judges throughout every stage of the competition who have given up their time on a regional basis. Of course, the judges here today, Mike McKenzie, MSP for the Highlands and Islands, Neil Caldwell from Artemis and Greg Clack from SSE Renewables. I would like to thank them very much for giving up their time. They were very good to work with and it was a very difficult job. I would also like to pay a special tribute to our sponsors, SSE Renewables and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Europe, who have been providing mentoring and judges, as well as invaluable resources for this year's competition. I would also like to give a very, very big thank you to Heather, who I am sure she will agree has been an absolutely wonderful host. Thank you very much. I would like to thank Tricker PR, who has organised the competition on behalf of HIE from the initial communications to the schools, through to the regional heats, through to getting us here today. Mike McKenzie is a very special thank you for enabling us to hold the event in this very, very fitting venue. I hope that you have found it inspiring. It is a great building and it is wonderful to hear all of your voices in here. Last but not least is you, the audience, for taking the time out a few days to come and support the event. Thank you very much. It has been a great event and I hope that you are all very proud because you should be. It has just been really wonderful and inspiring, as I said from the beginning. Thank you all very much. If we can get the photographs done, if we can do Charleston,