Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the Scottish Climate Change Bill: Consultation Proposals: Environmental Report

5. Assessment of SCCB Proposals

5.1. Assessment Stages

5.1.1 As noted in Section 2 of this report, a four stage assessment process was developed to allow effective appraisals of the varied issues surrounding, and implications of, the Scottish Climate Change Bill proposals.

5.1.2 This section expands on the methodologies adopted and provides a summary of the E-test assessments.

5.2. Stage 1 Modified E-tests

5.2.1 In their Scoping Report response, Historic Scotland suggested using an E-test methodology to address the likely implications of the SCCB across government sectors. The standard use of this method should involve the relevant Government department, responsible for a new policy, distributing a draft of the policy and an e-test questionnaire to all other Government departments, as a means of identifying and recording potential synergies, conflicts and implications of the policy across other departmental policies and initiatives.

5.2.2 Due to the tight timeframe of this project, and likely delays in responses from other departments, this was not seen as an effective means of progressing with the SEA. However, it was acknowledged as a valuable method for considering sectoral overviews of the likely implications of the Bill target. Standard e-test questions would include:

What are the consequences of the draft legislation:

1. for energy consumption and mobility?
2. for the consumption and stocks of raw materials?
3. for waste streams and atmospheric, soil and surface water emissions?
4. for use of available physical space, eg. land take/ land use change?

5.2.3 For the purposes of the SEA, sectoral experts were identified within AEA Technology, who considered the high-level implications and measures likely to be required to meet the 80% GHG reduction target. The sectoral breakdown, chosen to limit analysis, generally followed that within the Scottish Climate Change Programme 2006, and the assessment was employed as an information gathering tool to identify both likely emissions reduction measures and associated sectoral environmental impacts. The resultant analysis assumes those features or impacts repeatedly identified to be the most significant.

5.2.4 On the advice of SEPA and RSPB, the assessments were refined to include biodiversity effects and emissions to the water environment in general. The assessments included an overview of a 'Business as Usual' scenario and likely emissions reduction measures required under the headings of: Policy, Behavioural, Technical and Financial. It is conceded that many other measures/ distinctions could feasibly have been used, however in order to limit the scope of the assessment the four noted were considered sufficient.

5.2.5 An outline of the assessment worksheets is provided in Table 5.1 below, the populated tables are available in Appendix D and Section 5.3 provides an overview of the key environmental issues identified by sector.

Table 5.1 Example Modified E-test Worksheet

What are the likely consequences of the Scottish Climate Change Bill on…?
		Energy Consumption & Mobility	Consumption & Stocks Of Raw Materials	Waste Streams: Atmospheric, Soil & Water Emissions	Use Of Available Physical Space, Land Use Change, Biodiversity Effects
Sector: Energy Supply
Business as usual
Emission Reduction Measures	Policy/ Behavioural
	Technical/ Financial
Anticipated Environmental Effects (of reduction measures) on SEA Topics
SEA Comment

5.3. E-test Summary Results

5.3.1 The modified e-test methodology was employed to identify the likely implications of an 80% reduction target across key sectors in Scotland. The choice of sectors was informed by the Scottish Climate Change Programme (2006). The assessments are limited by the fact that identified measures may be applicable at the UK level and not specifically within the control of devolved policies open to the Scottish Government.

5.3.2 The e-tests did not separate out specific emissions sources that come within the attention of the EUETS, and therefore present a high level overview of a range of measures that may or may not be directly applicable in Scotland. Combining the analysis with the PPS review suggests that there are already many initiatives and guidelines driving action on emissions reductions, however on realisation of the SCCB, these may have to be reviewed, streamlined and strengthened to determine specific sectoral targets, taking into account those exceptions covered by the EUETS.

5.3.3 A summary of the analysis of environmental implications for each sector is provided below and should be read in conjunction with the e-test tables in Appendix D. It is important to note that future emissions reduction measures must be accompanied by appropriate regulatory, monitoring and reporting mechanisms to ensure continual improvement and progress and to identify potential environmental implications as early as possible. It is also important to note that the recommendations made fall within the opinions of the consultancy team and may not necessarily reflect current thinking within the Scottish Government.

Energy Sector

Anticipated Environmental Effects (of emissions reduction measures) on SEA Topics
Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna Indirect impacts on biodiversity depending on the source of renewable energy (e.g. wind farms, biomass). Impacts are generally localised and negative, may be permanent, though limited in severity. Planning system, Biomass Action Plan and appropriate EIA should work to limit impacts. Air Biomass combustion can result in negative local air quality impacts and adversely affect human health. Other renewables technologies should have neutral impacts on air quality Waste streams could be diverted to energy production; thereby reducing material use, although can have direct impacts on air quality resulting from biomass transport and combustion. Air quality improvements likely through energy efficiency, demand reduction, switching from fossil fuels to renewables and more efficient energy production. Localised impacts should be minimised through local pollution control, Biomass Action Plan and Air Quality Strategy. Water Generally, as waste streams and emissions are reduced, emissions to water should also decline. Water resource use in energy production will improve with transfer to renewables. SEPA Consultation Comment: Potential for some detrimental impacts on waterbody status/ aquatic biodiversity from water based renewables, eg. hydro, off-shore wind and marine renewables, including wave and tidal devices. Soil Land use change to biomass and managed woodland has the potential for significant short term loss of carbon stores, but may improve stores in the long term. Renewables installations on high carbon soils have the potential for significant losses of soil carbon, increases in GHG emissions, risks of erosion and potentially peat landslides. Biomass Action Plan, planning system and appropriate EIA should work to limit impacts. Human Health/ Population Potential impacts from local or community generation projects that involve biomass combustion. Local pollution control and appropriate EIA should limit impacts. Widespread benefits on ambient air quality with reduction in emissions. Long term benefits associated with reduced demand and integrated/ distributed supply. Material Assets/ Landscape/ Cultural Heritage & Historic Environment Secondary, indirect and cumulative impacts as renewables (all scales) involve raw materials use and physical infrastructure with associated effects on biodiversity, soils, and landscapes, townscapes. Applies equally to development of energy crops (monocultures, fertiliser use, etc). Landscape affected by new energy generation developments, changes to existing generation and transmission infrastructure. Long term reductions in fossil fuel consumption, although short-term intensive resource use will be necessary for adequate renewables and infrastructure development.
Conclusions / Recommendations & Mitigation
Identify opportunities to maximise energy efficiency and demand reduction across all sectors, as these provide benefits in reducing all impacts associated with energy production. Energy efficiency offers low cost, high impact gains in the short term, therefore significant on-going investment in education, at all levels is required. Technological change (ie. renewables) to reduce emissions from energy production should be considered a medium term gain. Enabling provisions could allow for setting future GHG reduction targets at sector level. National planning policy guidance should steer renewables development towards non-sensitive land and sea. EIA should be carried out for all energy developments; SEA could be carried out for sector wide initiatives. Combustion technologies have the potential for local air quality impacts; these should be assessed on a case-by-case basis. Life cycle assessments should be carried out for new technologies to ensure carbon savings justify the technique. Significant infrastructure change required, resulting in short term increases in materials/ energy consumption and waste generation. Long term benefits in phasing out fossil fuel and nuclear power generation. Short term investment focus on increasing renewables capacity to cope with phased decline of conventional power generation. Carbon capture and storage is in its infancy and should not be implemented without further research on environmental risks.

Transport Sector

Anticipated Environmental Effects (of emissions reduction measures) on SEA Topics
Biodiversity/ Soil/ Water/ Landscape Use of biofuels can produce direct, negative, long term impacts associated with intensive crop production. Potential indirect, long term impact on the water environment depending on energy crop production methods. Increased land use change for biomass fuel development with possible detrimental impacts on associated habitats and species as more is used for monocultures. Transport infrastructure development will impact negatively on all topics and increase emissions. SEPA Consultation Comment: SEPA would expect an increase in use of biomass for fuel to have impacts on Scotland's land that should be recorded. This may also lead to effects on population (eg through diverting land away from food crops) which should be recorded. The potential for increased use of biofuel in both energy and transport sectors, driven by the 80% target, is an issue that deserves some focus in this assessment as the implications of this are quite significant for many issues. SEA Response: It is agreed that the biofuel issue is complex and worth more detailed consideration, however this level of detail is outwith the scope of this SEA. More detailed work on this issue has been developed by the Forum for Renewable Energy Development in Scotland ( FREDS) in work supporting the Scottish Government's Biomass Action Plan. www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Business-Industry/infrastructure/19185/17883 Air Aviation, maritime and road transport all present growing sources of emissions. Increasing transport emissions reduces air quality. Low carbon transport has the potential to greatly reduce local air quality problems. Air quality negatively impacted by biofuel use as emissions still contain Air Quality Strategy priority substances. Modal shift may also negatively impact air quality at certain locations. Potential emissions from manufacturing/ refinement processes, though it is likely these will be regulated by PPC. Human Health/ Population Improvement to public transport systems is implied, which can have a positive impact on mobility. Impacts on human health will depend on the suite of measures adopted, although there may be little difference if biofuels are widely used. Road pricing may increase risks by moving traffic to lower grade/ rural roads. Material Assets Reduced use of fossil fuels and associated materials. Increase in use of materials associated with manufacture of new technologies. Improved energy security though decreased reliance on fossil fuels, increasing diversity of energy/ fuel mix and improved efficiencies. Reduced use of raw materials from improved lifetime and recycling standards. Reduced waste streams if these can be utilised for biofuel production. New waste streams could be produced from biofuel production.
Conclusions / Recommendations & Mitigation
The use of biofuels, supported by the RTFO, has the potential for environmental damage from inappropriate management or import of biomass energy crops. However, the integration of biofuels will aid reductions in fossil fuel use. Individual technologies should be subject to Life Cycle Assessment to assess whether they provide GHG savings. Bio-diesel from waste, properly supported, has the potential to offer significant GHG savings. The Scottish Government should encourage satisfactory mechanisms to address emissions from the air transport (and maritime) sector whilst allowing for acceptable development of capacity. In light of SCCB targets, financial measures must be identified (subsidies and incentives) to drive modal shift. The SCCB target is likely to influence proposals relating to strategic transport choices and the may help refocus the debate from voluntary modal shift to simply reducing transport emissions. The National Transport Strategy (2006) advocates introduction of a carbon 'balance sheet' for all future transport development decisions, which should be supported and considered across other sectors, if successful.

Agriculture and Land Use Sector

Anticipated Environmental Effects (of emissions reduction measures) on SEA Topics
Climatic Factors Emissions reduction from land management processes will have beneficial effects, however these may be difficult to realise without limiting the productivity of the sector. Intensive livestock processes can also lead to significant emissions, however without long-term change in consumption habits, reducing these levels will be difficult to realise without limiting the productivity of the sector. Transport within the sector (food miles) presents an area where savings could be realised, however this requires long-term commitment to distributed and more local processing and sales channels. Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna Generally positive impacts through measures such as improved fertiliser application techniques, responsible afforestation, wetland creation. Moves to woody biomass production or woodland pasture could present biodiversity benefits, however intensive agricultural processes and extensive monocultures can have negative impacts. Air Potentially positive impact on air quality from reduced emissions from livestock, soils, and farming vehicles representing a positive permanent impact. Water Responsible, reduced and improved or targeted use of fertiliser should reduce diffuse pollution to waters representing a positive permanent impact. Soil Soil management measures are a central focus of the contribution agriculture can make to mitigating climate change. These measures generally involve some form of soil improvement (or development of a better understanding of soil processes) and can therefore be ascribed a permanent positive impact on this topic. Human Health/ Population Introduction or extensive expansion of biofuel crops could have negative impacts on human health through increasing incidence of allergies (hay fever) or respiratory illness (asthma). Better control of agricultural pollution should have an indirect positive permanent impact on human health and population. Material Assets/ Landscape/ Cultural Heritage & Historic Environment No significant effects have been identified for material assets or the historic environment. Potential mixed impacts on landscape depending on land take in, for example, forestry.
Conclusions / Recommendations & Mitigation
There are general environmental benefits with agriculture and land management contributing to the mitigation of climate change and future conservation of high carbon soil resources in Scotland. The sector has an important role to play both in adapting its practices in order to directly/indirectly reduce GHG emissions, but also in providing a framework for mitigating the effects of other sectors. It is important that the climate change imperative is not seen as an overarching environmental objective tackled at the expense of other, localised environmental issues. This is particularly apparent in the agriculture sector as mitigation of other sectors' contributions to climate change invariably involves some form of land use.

Business Sector

Anticipated Environmental Effects (of emissions reduction measures) on SEA Topics
Benefits will be realised mainly as a result of adopting energy efficiency measures, development of sustainable transport programmes, reduction in waste, adoption of renewable energy technologies, and more efficient use of resources. These will lead to generally positive (mostly indirect) impacts on SEA topics. Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna Improved energy efficiency reduces demand with positive and permanent indirect benefits on biodiversity through reduction in emissions, and other factors such as land use change, extraction of raw materials. Air Indirect positive impact on emissions to air through a reduction in energy consumption. Direct positive impacts on air from reducing waste, using more sustainable transport. Water Direct permanent benefit on consumption of water resources, and indirect positive effects on water pollution through reduced emissions and waste generation. Soils Potential for significant indirect permanent impacts if new practices lead to a reduction in raw material extraction. Less waste generation implies a reduced need for development of further landfill capacity. Human Health/ Population Indirect permanent positive benefits to population through new employment opportunities. Material Assets/ Landscape/ Cultural Heritage & Historic Environment Generally positive permanent impacts on these subjects. The measures described above imply a more resource efficient sector, thereby reducing the need for raw material extraction and generation of waste streams, all of which have positive implications for these topics.
Conclusions / Recommendations & Mitigation
The business sector is very important in mitigating climate change as the financial and social influence the sector wields is well placed to influence the behaviour of employees, suppliers and other stakeholders. Climate change mitigation actions are likely to have indirect environmental benefits relating to reduction in energy use and reduction in waste stream volumes. Business can contribute greatly, for example through the Carbon Reduction Commitment, which sets targets that large businesses must meet in the most cost-effective manner for them. Best practice within certain businesses already link senior grade salaries to emissions reductions and energy efficiency gains. A number of areas particularly renewable energy, waste management and recycling are identified as having particular opportunities for development in Scotland. Other areas such as biofuels, construction and sustainable design, organic farming, tourism and cleaner technologies also have growing potential. The SCCB target should encourage further development of these sectors, with associated employment opportunities.

Industrial Sector

Anticipated Environmental Effects (of emissions reduction measures) on SEA Topics
Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna Moving towards clean technology should offer indirect benefits to biodiversity by avoiding emissions to air, water and soil. Impacts generally positive and permanent. Possible negative impacts depending on development requirements. Air Cleaner production techniques can offer climate change benefits as well as reducing emissions of priority pollutants at a local/regional level. Impacts generally positive and permanent. Water Clean production implies a reduction in release of pollution to the water environment thereby reducing the frequency and severity of pollution episodes. Impacts generally positive and permanent. Soil Generation of new contaminated land sites should be minimised by clean technology adoption so impacts are generally positive and permanent. Human health/Population General reduction in emissions should have a permanent positive impact on human health, populations could benefit from new employment opportunities. Material Assets/ Landscape/ Cultural Heritage & Historic Environment Clean production techniques imply a reduced need for development of new raw material sources with knock on permanent positive impacts on these SEA topics. Transboundary As existing PPC regimes are strengthened or specific measures become more/ too onerous, there is some risk associated with the potential for transboundary effects and impacts in other countries, should polluting industries move away from Scotland, especially where products are then shipped back.
Conclusions / Recommendations & Mitigation
Measures taken in the industrial sector could offer direct benefits to the wider environment through emission reductions to air, water and soil. It is likely that these could be directly realised through development of clean technologies, with indirect benefits arising from improved energy efficiency, waste management, and behavioural changes in employees. Energy efficiency and adoption of renewable energy technologies should offer cost as well as environmental benefits. Regulatory regimes should have the necessary influence to initiate change where voluntary schemes do not produce results. Transboundary or relocation effects are difficult to predict and control as wider market forces also influence these decisions, however this may be more related to wider forms of pollution as opposed to greenhouse gases specifically. Care needs to be taken to address such issues, at the appropriate level, whilst maintaining the focus on emissions reductions through the most relevant mechanisms, eg. the EUETS.

Residential Sector

Anticipated Environmental Effects (of emissions reduction measures) on SEA Topics
Climatic Factors Personal responsibility for energy efficiency and awareness of the need to minimise demand must be fostered to realise any long term beneficial effects. Continued domestic consumption and transport use will lead to highly critical negative impacts and potentially dangerous/ cataclysmic climate change. Air/ Water/ Soil With appropriate consideration of wider environmental impacts of construction resource efficiency, there could be long term positive effects, however soil, water and air will all remain under pressure from domestic housing and business growth, therefore mixed impacts are likely. Biodiversity Direct impacts realised during construction/ land use change phases. These pressures will continue in line with domestic housing and business growth. Long-term negative impacts associated with development, minor positives possible with appropriate planning for biodiversity/ habitat links and green routes. Human Health/ Population - Only concerted and coordinated effort across the Scottish population has the potential to make a difference to emissions reductions. Energy demand reduction is the only feasible option within the short term, with integration of renewables making some headway in the medium-long term. Lack of early action will lead to long term, significant negative effects on health and population due to dangerous climate change effects. Material Assets - New building efficiency standards will have positive effects but possibly not enough to make a huge dent in the level of emissions reductions required. Consideration of embodied energy/ carbon in existing building stock against the energy/carbon costs of new buildings could help focus efforts/ priorities on improving energy efficiency. Considering the energy used in running a building ignores the embodied energy of that building, therefore historic or existing buildings may be recommended for demolition when demolition and construction of a new energy efficient building to replace them might emit far more than appropriate re-use. Incentives required to encourage people with older housing stock to take action also, otherwise potential benefits of new building efficiencies will be lost. Landscape/ Cultural Heritage & Historic Environment - Potential for short term thinking to have long term impacts on landscape; however landscape change may become accepted with time. Loss of historic features to development is usually permanent, but may not necessarily be significant.
Conclusions / Recommendations & Mitigation
Behavioural adaptation is particularly important in the residential sector as regulation has limited reach. Energy performance of buildings is likely to be an important feature in meeting the SCCB targets. Further work on energy performance and standards is progressing throughout government. SEA would suggest that energy standards are extended to cover all engineering and construction projects. Conservation Area issues must be resolved to encourage uptake in older buildings. The general environmental benefits seen in this sector are indirect but far reaching, mainly through reducing requirements for energy generation and reduced waste streams. Integrating the principal of embodied energy into policy development could help address energy efficiency improvements and savings in existing building stock, therefore lifecycle analysis should be considered as a means of determining the most appropriate options for redevelopment.

Public Sector

Anticipated Environmental Effects (of emissions reduction measures) on SEA Topics
Climatic Factors Reductions in energy demand/ consumption through concerted investment in energy efficiency and education (with savings re-invested) will present direct, long term, positive impacts. Air/ Water/ Soil A significant shift towards renewable sources of supply, coupled with a direct reduction in the use of raw materials (including water) and conservation of resources/ reduction in emissions will have long term, positive impacts, if impact of renewables and soil sealing/ SUDS issues are properly considered. Reductions in waste stream volumes would enhance indirect positive effects and reductions in overall emissions. Biodiversity Indirect, long term, mixed impacts likely dependent on measures implemented at the local level. Human Health & Population Indirect, local, positive impacts likely with the majority of measures implemented. Some localised issues may need specific attention when considering energy from waste or biomass and health impacts associated with combustion processes. Landscape Renewables present the potential for negative impacts on visual amenity (will decrease with time). Cultural Heritage & Historic Environment Indirect benefits through conservation of resources
Conclusions / Recommendations & Mitigation.
The participation of Local Authorities is particularly important if targets set out in the SCCB are to be realised. Measures outlined in Scotland's Climate Change Declaration provide a methodology as to how the Authorities intend to contribute to climate change mitigation. The Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 (Best Value and Sustainable Development Duty) provides a driver for work on climate change. SEA processes supplement this with the need to consider climatic factors. However, realising the cross-cutting and priority nature of long-term consideration of climate change impacts and present means to deliver early emissions reductions may be relatively weak. Senior level buy-in is a vital prerequisite to maintain focus across the target period, and reporting on action to meet SCCB targets could provide a platform for Local Authorities to develop climate change strategies, share best practice and maintain the focus on re-investment of energy savings to develop greater efficiencies and further reduce energy demand. All local authorities and public bodies should be required to set targets for emissions reductions across all areas of energy/ resource use and transport. Measures to link senior public sector salaries to emissions reductions and energy efficiency gains could heighten the focus on climate change mitigation and action; encourage a move away from simply buying energy from green suppliers and drive awareness across organisations. Stronger legislative drivers are required for the public sector if the targets of the UK and Scottish Climate Change Bills are to be realised. Reliance on voluntary measures may present a weaker (light green) sustainability approach. The SCCB target should inform the development of future policies, plan and strategies, which should ideally include commitments to emissions reduction action (at all levels), identifying responsibilities for achieving targeted action.

Waste Management Sector

Anticipated Environmental Effects (of emissions reduction measures) on SEA Topics
Climatic Factors Waste prevention and minimisation is the best long term option, but requires coordination across all sectors. Organic waste management by anaerobic digestion ( AD) and use of resultant methane in CHP most beneficial in terms of reducing GHG emissions from waste. Landfill emissions continue to decline, with associated benefits for climatic factors in reducing methane release. Air/ Water/ Soil Organic waste management and reductions in overall waste stream volumes would enhance indirect positive effects and reductions in overall emissions. However, direct incineration for electricity production increases CO2 emissions (as compared to AD/ CHP combined) and can degrade local air quality. Use of organic waste in dedicated biomass CHP also has implications for local air quality and emissions. Biodiversity Indirect, long term, mixed impacts likely dependent on measures implemented at the local level, including suitable landfill reuse. Human Health & Population Some localised issues may need specific attention when considering energy from waste or biomass and health impacts associated with combustion processes. Landscape Indirect benefits feasible through reduction in wastes to landfill extending lifetimes of existing sites and limiting the need for new sites. Waste management facilities should be designed sympathetically to fit with surrounding landscapes and returned to beneficial use at the end of their useful life-cycles. Cultural Heritage & Historic Environment Indirect benefits through conservation of resources.
Conclusions / Recommendations & Mitigation
Government should consider increasing support for those waste handling measures that minimise GHG production. Anaerobic Digestion and Combined Heat & Power should be supported to drive long-term integration and resultant GHG gains over direct incineration. Government should target local authorities on collection and separation of organic waste for composting, AD/ CHP and biomass. Government should consider measures to ensure all products for sale in Scotland have recyclable/ biodegradable packaging and packaging should be minimised across all sectors.

SEPA Consultation Comment: The most effective means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions from waste is to adopt a waste management regime that deals with waste as far up the waste hierarchy (prevent, reuse, recycle (including composting), recover and dispose) as possible. Since publication of the SCCB consultation proposals, the Scottish Government has announced its vision for waste management in Scotland, which calls for 70% recycling by 2025 and proposes a cap of 25% of all municipal waste being used to generate energy. The assessment notes that energy from waste facilities will have impacts on local communities. While SEPA does not contend this statement, it should be noted that: (a) all waste management facilities will have impacts on those living close to them (eg. from vehicle movements or from emissions from that waste management process); and (b) these emissions will be strictly controlled through both the land use planning and environmental consenting processes, to ensure that adverse effects are prevented or minimised. SEA Response: The comments from SEPA are noted and inclusion at this stage in the revised Environmental Report is considered sufficient to address the points raised.

5.4. Stage 2 Assessment of Potential GHG Reductions

5.4.1 An assessment was carried out on the PPS/ PPP review, the baseline and the e-tests to identify high level issues under each SEA topic that might arise from potential GHG reductions, which helped form the basis for later assessments. The results of this appraisal are given in Table 5.2.

Table 5.2 Key Climate Issues and Potential Emissions Reduction Effects

Key Climate Issues	Potential GHG Emissions Reduction Effects
Biodiversity, Flora & Fauna
Habitats & species Adaptation to climate change Loss of BAP & Priority Habitats or European Protected Species Potential loss of species at the limit of their range in Scotland Potential damage to marine diversity	Move to biofuels/ biomass may lead to re-intensification of agricultural land and associated diffuse pollution effects on aquatic biodiversity Field homogenisation, loss of field boundary features and habitat connections Wind farms may disturb sensitive peat/ moorland/ sub-sea habitats
Soil and Land Use
GHG emissions from Scottish soils Potential to become net GHG emitter rather than carbon sink Temperature and precipitation links Loss of soil organic matter Loss of carbon store and other soil functions Diminished water retention, increasing flooding risks Indirect GHG releases Soil stability - Potential for increased erosion and landslides Indirect GHG releases Fertiliser use/ livestock emissions Nitrates and nitrous oxide release Minor methane release Carbon sequestrations from land use Increasing forestry cover Biomass potential	Windfarm installations and access routes can exacerbate soil losses directly and by affecting soil stability (eg. peat slides) Long-term benefit of renewable source of energy may be outweighed by GHG release from soils Soil disturbance leads to indirect effects on water quality and aquatic biodiversity Fertiliser and other agricultural GHG emissions can be limited but probably not eradicated Land use change to biomass crops could exacerbate intensive agriculture emissions/ soil losses to air and water Key issue is to maintain soil carbon stocks, maximising sequestration potentials across Scotland and minimising flooding and diffuse pollution risks Sustainable forestry management using appropriate woody species may benefit soils, biodiversity, water and air
Water
Water resources - Energy input for water treatment (drinking water and waste water) Precipitation change Increasing summer droughts Increased risk of flooding Sea level rise Coastal areas at risk in Scotland Stronger storm surges, higher waves Water Quality Indirect impact of climate effects on other receptors (esp. soils)	Potential for biomass options to change hydrological regimes due to irrigation demand Hydro renewables (dams or in-river) can impact upon terrestrial receptors Business and domestic growth adds pressure on water supplies, exacerbated by widespread system leakage (poor energy and resource efficiency) Construction of flood defence systems (adaptation) may exacerbate soil losses and GHG emissions from extensive concrete use Construction of more energy efficient buildings can place heavy demand on water resources
Air
GHG Emissions as Air Pollutants GHG Emissions to air incl. CO2, Sox, Nox, CH4, HFC, PFC, SF6 Associated emissions of particulates Associated odour nuisance	Potential for some renewable energy systems (eg. CHP and Waste Incineration) to degrade local air quality through particulate release Widespread change to biomass options may exacerbate local respiratory health conditions (eg. asthma, hay fever) Windfarm development may increase methane emissions from soils (odours)
Population & Human Health
Demographic Change Ageing population could result in higher domestic emissions and increased demand as older people stay home more, in older less efficient properties Heat & Flooding increases demands on healthcare and domestic energy Increasing urbanisation Transport Increasing reliance on private car and limited use of public transport Tourism growth Behavioural Change Patterns of consumption Domestic energy & water use & waste Business & Industry Energy & water use Flooding issues Improving efficiencies	Building efficiencies and standards may help reduce demand but mostly in new builds New construction, flood defences and other adaptations may increase GHG emissions Increasing urbanisation directly affects landscape, biodiversity, soil, water, air and material assets and emissions Reducing private vehicle use benefits emissions reductions and improves urban air quality Tourism growth brings significant revenue but can exacerbate population GHG emissions in peak seasons Consumption levels difficult to control, but improved standards in products sold and packaging levels may reduce emissions Energy efficient consumer products may encourage greater use, hence increasing emissions Increasing housing stock will increase overall water/ energy demand and waste generation Water leakage and resource use increases energy demand also Business growth will similarly increase energy and water demand Potential preventative measures to avoid disruption from flooding may increase short-term GHG emissions
Climatic Factors
Global action required Unilateral action in Scotland/ UK not sufficient Localised GHG emission reductions may have no influence on global climate change	Emissions reduction in UK/ Scotland must be coupled with effective lobbying to drive similar action in other developed nations Use of carbon trading, CDM & JI will go some way to reducing global emissions burden but will not directly affect actual Scottish emission levels
Material Assets
Energy Supply & demand management Energy efficiency Renewables Grid infrastructure/ distributed generation/ micro-generation Conventional production Nuclear	Demand reduction has significant positive impacts by reducing overall energy inputs to electricity supply Energy efficiency presents best opportunity for short term gains in reducing emissions (up to 13:1 ratio, ie. reduce end user demand 1 unit, returns up to 13 saved by not providing energy) Renewables installation may have significant localised impacts on biodiversity, water, landscape Micro-renewables may have impacts on townscapes and historic environment (visual impact on conservation areas) Conventional fossil fuel power generation exacerbates GHG emissions, carbon capture not yet proven, does not prevent upstream energy inputs and may have significant localised impacts depending on location and technology Nuclear power emits no CO2 in operation but requires massive energy and resource use in construction, waste management and fuel processing, also presents long term security and waste issues
Waste management Reduction Recycling Composting Landfill Incineration	Improved waste management and separation of organic waste at source can have wide ranging benefits Reduction in waste presents imperative to minimise packaging, also leading to emissions reductions Domestic composting can reduce burden on waste facilities and aerobic composting reduces methane production Improved recycling reduces energy and emissions burden of primary production Incineration for electrical power production only is inefficient in terms of power produced by calorific input and it reduces local air quality
Development & Infrastructure Construction effects Raw material extraction & use Buildings and energy efficiency	End product/ building efficiencies in energy use do not account for energy used and emissions produced during construction Materials choice and transportation can increase emissions, for example cement imported from abroad produces significant quantities of CO2 in manufacture and transport but emissions would not count as Scottish emissions This might seem a better carbon option than locally-produced, particularly traditional materials, where all the production carbon will be counted against Scottish totals but does not fit with a responsible and sustainable approach to addressing the global problem of climate change. Building orientation may help maximise energy efficiency but could impact landscape/ townscapes Development location and piecemeal encroachment can have serious cumulative impacts
Transport Infrastructure development Growth of transport emissions Private vs. public transport Alternative fuels Aviation Maritime	Improving transport infrastructure could encourage more vehicle use Fastest growing (terrestrial) direct emissions source but also energy and embodied carbon costs in production and transportation Continued global fuel demand increases costs and pollution risk Promotion of modal shift away from private vehicles not yet evidenced as successful Biodiesel from waste offers potential win-win solution for large domestic market Biofuel from biomass may not be viable in Scotland, imports may have local, unknown environmental impacts and increase emissions during transit Aviation and Maritime emissions currently not accounted for in any trading, control or efficiency system and are each responsible for growing levels of emissions
Landscape
Changing landscape pattern Land use change	Move to biofuels/ biomass may lead to increased homogenisation, loss of boundary features and disruption to local water tables Renewables development may degrade landscape/ townscape quality May increase GHG emissions from soil carbon stores
Historic Environment
Potential loss of historic assets Coastal flooding affecting sites Drought and potential loss of assets preserved by water features	Emissions reduction may impact on the historic environment and archaeological remains through land use change

5.5. Stage 3 Preliminary Options Assessment

5.5.1 An early draft of the consultation proposals, containing initial alternative options, was assessed by considering anticipated positive and negative effects on SEA topics, along with first thoughts on mitigation. The alternative options were focused around three high level categories; 'What is the target?', 'Monitoring the target', and 'Ways of meeting the target.'

5.5.2 A participatory workshop was held to inform stakeholders of the Bill preparation process and to identify the key concerns of attending stakeholders. The workshop was held on the 5th December 2007 and the following organisations attended:

• SEPA
• SNH
• RSPB & Scottish Environment LINK
• Scottish Government Climate Science Advisor
• SCCB Team
• Halcrow
• AEAT

5.5.3 The 3 high level categories mentioned above were used as a basis for discussion in the workshop. An outline of the assessment worksheets used is provided in Table 5.3 below.

Table 5.3 SCCB Draft Proposal Options Assessment

Draft SCCB Proposal Option	Rationale/ Assumption	Anticipated Positive Effects/ Strengths	Anticipated Negative Effects/ Weaknesses	Major areas of influence on SEA Topics	Recommendations/ Additional Measures
What is the target?
Monitoring the target - measures
Ways of meeting the target

5.5.4 These worksheets were consolidated and additional comments added by the consultants. The populated sheets are presented for reference in Appendix E.

5.6. Stage 4 Preferred Options Assessment

5.6.1 The SCCB consultation document contains options structured around key high level issues, and the Scottish Government has already expressed opinion on some options they wish to adopt. Other options are presented in the form of consultation questions offering different alternatives.

5.6.2 Because of the nature of the range of options, different assessment techniques were employed. Some options were more appropriately scrutinised in the RIA, however, general comments have been made on others. Some options were reviewed under high level assessments and others underwent full detailed assessment using standardised matrices (explained later in this section).

5.6.3 Where necessary, some of the individual questions or proposals were split into components in order to allow effective appraisal. Table 5.4 outlines the options in the draft consultation paper and how they were assessed. The full assessments are presented in Section 5.8 of this report.

Table 5.4 Overview of SCCB Draft Options Assessment Methods

Consultation paper reference	Preferred Option/ Question	Type of Assessment Adopted/ Question Split
Setting the Targets
Para 5.4-5.9	What should be targeted - Production or Consumption?		High Level Assessment Matrix: Target based on emissions produced.
Para 5.10-5.15	How should the target be expressed: a point target or a cumulative target?		General Comments: Point target
Question 1	Should a Scottish target be based on carbon dioxide only or the basket of six greenhouse gases?		High Level Assessment Matrix: Carbon dioxide based target
			High Level Assessment Matrix: Six GHG based target
2	Should the Bill contain provisions to alter which gases are included, for example if the reliability of data for a particular gas improves or if science changes in the future about which gases cause climate change?		General Comments
3	The Scottish Government wishes to ensure that the Bill gives sufficient incentives to invest in energy efficiency and renewable energy. Should the targets be based on source emissions an end-user inventory or have individual targets for energy efficiency and renewable electricity? Do you have any other suggestions?		High Level Assessment Matrix: Should the target be based on an end user inventory?
			High Level Assessment Matrix: Should there be separate individual targets for energy efficiency and renewable electricity?
4	Do you agree that the Bill should allow the means of measuring the target to be changed through secondary legislation to reflect international developments or unforeseen consequences of the Bill?		General Comments
5	Should the method for measuring the target take account of the abatement effort made by companies under emissions trading schemes?		General Comments
6	Do you agree that international credits should be counted towards Scottish targets? Should there be limits on credits counted towards Scottish targets?		High Level Assessment Matrix
Para 5.49-5.52	International Aviation and Shipping not included within the target.		General Comments
Para 5.53-5.57	Level of the target		High Level Assessment Matrix: Reduce emissions by 80%
7	Should the Bill allow the level of the 2050 target to be changed through secondary legislation? If so, should this only be allowed on the basis of independent, expert advice, to reflect international developments or unforeseen consequences of the Bill? Should any changes to the target be limited to an increase in the target?		General Comments
Supporting Framework
Para 6.2-6.3 & 6.14-6.18	Interim Budgets and Annual Targets		High Level Assessment Matrix: Set interim emission budget periods
			High Level Assessment Matrix: Set mandatory annual emission reduction targets
8	What factors should be taken into account when setting the level of budgets?		General Comments
9	How long should interim budget periods be?		General Comments
10	How many years in advance should emissions budget periods be set in order to provide sufficient time to develop infrastructure?		General Comments
11	What should be the limit (in terms of absolute quantity or as a percentage of the budget period) on the amount of emissions which the Government can borrow from a following budget period?		General Comments
12	Should the Bill include an interim point target? If so, what year (or years) should it be for (2020, 2025, 2030 etc)? How should the level be chosen?		General Comments
Reporting and Scrutiny Framework			Parked for attention in RIA
Meeting the Target (Supporting Measures)
Para 8.3-8.7	Energy Efficiency and Microgeneration		Assessed in DAMs ( Appendix G)
Para 8.8	Combined Heat and Power		Assessed in DAMs ( Appendix G)
Para 8.9-8.11	Reducing Carbon Emissions from Buildings		Assessed in DAMs ( Appendix G)
Para 8.12-8.13	Waste Reduction and Recycling		Assessed in DAMs ( Appendix G)
Para 8.14-8.15	Carbon Storage		Assessed in DAMs ( Appendix G)
Para 8.26-8.27	Trading Schemes		Assessed in DAMs ( Appendix G)
23	Should the Bill contain enabling powers to introduce a duty on certain parts of the public sector (i.e. local authorities and large public bodies) to take specified actions on climate change or other specified environmental issues? Why?		High Level Assessment Matrix
24	What should such a duty (or duties) include?		General Comments
25	Should the Bill contain enabling powers to introduce statutory guidance for certain public sector bodies (i.e. local authorities and large public bodies) on specified climate change or other environmental measures? Why? Are there gaps in any existing guidance?		High Level Assessment Matrix
26	What should this guidance include?		General Comments
27	Should the Bill contain enabling powers to create a requirement for certain public sector bodies (i.e. local authorities and large public bodies) to make regular reports on specific measures they are taking to tackle climate change (whether mitigation or adaptation) or other environmental issues? Why? What should be included in such reports?		High Level Assessment Matrix
28	As a potential non-legislative vehicle, should current Best Value guidance be amended to take specific account of climate change mitigation and adaptation? How should Best Value guidance be amended?		High Level Assessment Matrix:
29	Are there any amendments to existing legislation or any enabling powers needed to allow for variable charging (for example by local authorities) to incentivise action or eliminate perverse incentives?		General Comments
30	Are there any provisions to help Scotland adapt to the impacts of climate change which should be included in the Scottish Climate Change Bill?		General Comments
31	Should provisions within the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005, be amended in order to provide clearer links with the Climate Change Bill? If so, how should this be done?		High Level Assessment Matrix
32	What are the equalities implications of the measures in the proposals for the Scottish Climate Change Bill?		General Comments
33	Is there any existing legislation within the competence of the Scottish Parliament (devolved) which needs to be amended so that appropriate action can be taken by sectors in society to take action on climate change?		General Comments

5.7. Detailed Assessment Matrices

5.7.1 For a range of Supporting Measure options it was possible to undertake detailed assessments of significant issues. These assessments were advised by professional judgement and further informed through the baseline and PPS literature review. Potential effects were identified and evaluated within a standardised matrix framework, and assessed against a significance matrix, as outlined in Table 5.5 below.

Table 5.5 Significance Matrix

5.7.2 This technique was employed to assess preliminary high-level alternative Supporting Measures, presented in Appendix F, and the 'Preferred' Supporting Measures, as proposed in the later draft of the consultation document and provided in Appendix G.

5.7.3 The significance of effects has to be considered within the perspective of the long-term environmental implications of climate change and the potential benefits of emissions reductions. However, this must be tempered by the understanding that reductions in Scotland and actions undertaken in other countries, and attributed to Scotland under international agreements, may have no significant (even negligible) climatic effects, but may have significant local or regional effects on other receptors.

5.7.4 By determining which geographical scale an impact occurs over and comparing this with the perceived magnitude of the effect, a resultant significance can be determined. In this SEA, certain assumptions have to be made:

• Impacts associated with CDM or Carbon Offset programmes will occur in a receiving country, not in Scotland. These would generally be assumed to be localised effects in another country, but could equally be attached greater significance due to the international nature of the impact. The decision was taken to treat these effects as local.
• Temporal scales in this assessment were assumed to be:
  Short-Term = Up to 15 years, Medium-Term = 15-35 years, Long Term = 35 years plus.

5.7.5 Options considered under detailed assessments include:

Appendix F -

• Use of International Credit Schemes and the Clean Development Mechanism
• Use of Carbon Offset Schemes
• Increasing Renewables Integration
• Increasing Energy Efficiency Measures
• Changing Industrial Processes (promoting clean technology)
• Improving Resource Efficiency
• Reducing Consumption

Appendix G -

• Energy Efficiency
• Microgeneration
• CHP and District Heating
• Reducing Carbon Emissions from Existing Building Stock
• Waste Reduction and Recycling
• Carbon Capture and Storage
• Trading Schemes

5.8. Preferred Options Assessments

5.8.1 The assessment of Preferred Options, as contained within the latest draft of the consultation document and explained in Section 5.6, is provided below. The overall approach answers consultation questions from an environmental sustainability perspective. The discussion below identifies potential environmental effects of each consultation proposal/ question, including consideration of possible mitigation measures.

5.8.2 Sections 6 and 7 go on to provide summaries of the likely significance of these effects and the potential mitigation/ enhancement, by SEA topic. As previously stated, the assessment may not address all proposals within the final consultation document, in the event that further additions or amendments may have been made.

Setting the Target

Para. 5.4-5.9 What should be targeted - Production or consumption? Decision to base target on emissions produced.

• 'Designing out' the use of greenhouse gases at the production stage of goods and services is the most effective way to limit the resources used and ensure that the energy consumption over the whole lifecycle of the good or service is considered.
• Targeting emissions produced is likely to increase overall resource efficiency and reduce the overall amount of resources used resulting in major benefits on other aspects of the environment. Using fewer raw materials, such as mineral and water resources will directly benefit water quantity and soil resources. An overall increase in efficiency is likely to reduce to pollution incidents' also benefiting soil, water and air quality. These improvements will have secondary benefits on biodiversity, flora and fauna which may also benefit from reduced pressure on land use activities such as agriculture or mineral extraction. Landscape character is also likely to benefit from a targeted approach to reducing production emissions.
• Reducing emissions will have a direct positive impact on air quality.
• Care will need to be taken to ensure that a drive to reduce emissions does not result in the development of alternative sources of energy which have different negative impacts on the environment. For example, inappropriate renewables development that does not take account of site conditions may have an adverse impact on landscape character. Care will especially need to be taken with regard to the development of biofuels which could potentially have a negative impact on soil resources, biodiversity and landscape character if specific site conditions are not fully taken into account.
• Improvements in air quality and a reduction in pollutants will cumulatively benefit human health, especially respiratory conditions and benefits to the environment will improve the quality of life for those in Scotland.
• As highlighted in the Bill consultation paper, care has to be taken to ensure that wider global emissions caused by consumption in Scotland (not only produced here) are also addressed by policies. Consumption of high emission goods (high levels of embodied carbon) from other parts of the world will have a negative impact on the populations and environment in those countries. Also solely targeting production of goods and services in Scotland, rather than seeking to reduce the demand for goods and services at the same time, is likely to increase the costs of production which are then likely to be passed on to consumers. This may cause equity problems, especially when the goods are fuel and food.
• As systems for carbon footprinting measures and input-output analyses are developed, refined and more widely accepted and used, these could be incorporated into target and measurement systems.

Para. 5.10-5.15 How should the target be expressed: a point target or a cumulative target? Point target

• An overarching cumulative target would aim to limit the total emissions burden to a fixed amount over time, which could require quite drastic reductions over a very short period. On a global scale, this would be more beneficial in limiting the overall stock of GHG's in the atmosphere, however with no internationally agreed mechanism, and at the national scale for Scotland, driving sustained emissions reductions and support for the target framework means that a more realistically achievable point target is likely to be acceptable to businesses.
• Efforts to reduce emissions are likely to have an overall beneficial impact on the environment as a target is likely to lead to measures to reduce resource use with resulting air quality, water, soil and biodiversity benefits. There are also likely to be knock-on benefits on landscape and human health. Specific environmental effects/benefits are likely to be similar between point and cumulative targets, with perhaps only variations in timing. A cumulative target may limit total emissions more quickly than a point target, which may lead to action being taken too quickly, with resultant adverse effects. However, the longer the time taken to make appropriate reductions, the more severe climatic change may become.
• Significant effects on the environment will only become obvious when more detail about which emission reduction measures are to be implemented are available. Identified measures should undergo a thorough environmental assessment, as different measures could vary widely from having significant environmental benefits, outwith the effects on climatic factors, to having significant adverse effects.

Q1. Should a Scottish target be based on carbon dioxide only or the basket of six greenhouse gases?

• Targeting either CO2 or all 6 GHG's will have significant beneficial effects on air quality. Air quality improvement will have secondary benefits on human health and the historic environment, as air pollutants are often damaging to historic buildings.
• Reducing carbon dioxide, or all 6 GHG, emissions is likely to benefit quality of life through reduced air pollution; however tighter controls and the increased regulatory burden on emissions of either CO2 or the basket of 6 GHG's are likely to increase the costs of some goods and services. Care needs to be taken (and detailed Equality Impact Assessments undertaken) to ensure that no one group in society is significantly more adversely effected than any other, and to ensure measures are in place to support existing disadvantaged groups.
• Reducing CO2 and other GHG emissions as a whole is likely to lead to a reduction in resource use, benefiting material assets. This would be significantly environmentally beneficial with respect to coal use around the world, with secondary beneficial impacts on air quality, human health, biodiversity, soil and water resources in those countries still currently producing coal. Similarly, environmental benefits would be gained from a reduction in oil and gas use.
• Targeting CO2 alone may inadvertently encourage the production of other greenhouse gases, as people look for alternatives. Banning the use of CFCs under the Montreal Protocol led to an increase in use of HFCs (one of the basket of 6 GHG's) as a substitute. Care would need to be taken such that focussing on CO2 does not cause a switch to alternative technologies with alternative GHG emissions produced, or miss the subtleties of looking at the whole picture when it comes to GHG emissions. Decision tools and systems such as life cycle analysis can help identify embodied carbon within the capital lifespan of technology or infrastructure, which may be poor in terms of emissions, to limit lock-in and promote more sustainable choices.
• Considering all six GHG's however, may reduce the focus of efforts. With CO2 produced in the largest volume, the largest and easiest cuts may be possible by primarily addressing CO2. However there are still potential gains from reducing high GWP emissions and a holistic approach to greenhouse gases needs to be adopted. Some HFCs and SF6 are growing sources of GHG emissions and, by considering all GHG's, expressed in terms of the GWP and CO2 equivalents, more options are open to the Government to meet the 80% GHG reduction target. If all figures are quoted as CO2(e), then small savings in high GWP emissions could equate to large CO2(e) reductions. Therefore it is more environmentally beneficial to allow for the basket of six GHG's to be included in the Scottish target, whilst developing a priority on reducing the bulk of CO2 emissions.
• For example, if the basket of 6 greenhouse gases were to be considered, there would be increased pressure to identify savings from agriculture; such as methane from livestock farming and nitrous oxide from fertiliser use. This could have significant knock on benefits for biodiversity, soil and water resources associated with a shift to less intensive agriculture and a move a way from intensive cattle rearing. Less intensive agriculture is also likely to benefit landscape, field patterns, boundaries and features, however these issues must be balanced with consideration of CAP reform, Land Management Contracts, productivity and the existing burden of regulatory measures to improve farming techniques and reduce the impact of farming activity.

SNH Consultation Comment: In the Table of the Preferred Options Assessments, the assessment for 'Q1 carbon dioxide based target' is positive for soils. However, a CO2-only target could lead to perverse outcomes. For example, the emissions saved by some windfarm developments on peat-rich soils could be substantially overstated if the assessments fail to take account of potential emissions of greenhouse gases (including methane) resulting from land use change. The overall assessment for a CO2-only target on soils should therefore be '+/-' (potentially positive or negative (mixed) effects). We agree the assessment that reducing emissions of methane and nitrous oxide in the agriculture and land use sector and a shift to less intensive agriculture could bring benefits for biodiversity, landscape, field patterns, boundaries and features. We suggest that the assessment for Q1 Basket of greenhouse gases should be '+' while for Q1 Carbon dioxide-based target might be '0'. SEA Response: This reviewed version of the ER now reflects SNH's determination of these impacts on the above table. The inclusion of this comment box and the amendments to the table above, are considered sufficient to address SNH's comments.

Q2. Should theBill contain provisions to alter which gases are included, for example if the reliability of data for a particular gas improves or if science changes in the future about which gases cause climate change?

• Once the Bill becomes law and is adopted as an Act of Parliament, further primary legislation is required to amend details. Options for secondary legislation can speed the process and it may be more beneficial to be able to change quickly due to increasing climate change, improved knowledge and unforeseen impacts. The possible addition of gases included under the Bill could have significant environmental effects, depending on the measures introduced to reduce emissions.
• The ability to add new gases is likely to increase the effectiveness of the Bill in its attempts to mitigate climate change, but the effects beyond those on climatic factors is unknown until such time as the gases are to be included are identified, their sources known and the measures to be brought in to reduce emissions are proposed. If necessary, further environmental assessment could be carried out at that time.

Q3. The Scottish Government wishes to ensure that the Bill gives sufficient incentives to invest in energy efficiency and renewable energy.

Should the targets be based on source emissions, an end-user inventory, or have individual targets for energy efficiency and renewable electricity? Do you have any other suggestions?

• Each of these approaches would lead to air quality improvements however; an end user inventory would also reflect any reduction in energy demand and therefore help promote demand reduction. This would have wide ranging environmental and social benefits, however, as shifts in lifestyle would be required there maybe short term quality of life impacts whilst people adapt and energy or product prices change. Conversely, a separate individual target for energy efficiency may not reduce overall demand; as people may use a greater number of energy efficient products. An end-user inventory which allocates emissions produced in Scotland to end-users across the UK, may spread the cost of and responsibility for emissions reductions, but may not be as environmentally beneficial as removing the emissions at source. Measures would need to be individually assessed to understand their environmental impacts and ensure that appropriate mitigation was implemented.
• A reduction in overall energy demand is desirable from an environmental point of view as it implies a reduction not only in non-renewable energy use, but also reduced demand for renewables technology and associated infrastructure development, which can also have an impact on GHG emissions. Whilst largely beneficial, promoting renewable energy brings with it new problems such as the potential for landscape, biodiversity, soil and water resource impacts that can arise from inappropriate renewables schemes for a particular site. Biomass for example, has particular environmental problems associated with it that need careful consideration. Therefore measures need to undergo detailed environmental assessment to ensure these impacts are taken into account.
• Basing the target on source emissions provides an option where emissions are already well documented and monitored. As a large volume of Scotland's domestic emissions are currently from point sources, it may be more sustainable to introduce energy efficiency and renewables targets that augment a targeted framework to reduce emissions produced in Scotland, with mechanisms to ensure that point sources are phased out or reduced as far as possible.

Q4. Do you agree that the Bill should allow the means of measuring the target to be changed through secondary legislation to reflect international developments or unforeseen consequences of the Bill?

• Once the Bill becomes law and is adopted as an Act of Parliament, further primary legislation would be required to amend the Act. Options for secondary legislation can speed the process and it may be more beneficial to be able to change quickly due to increasing climate change, improved knowledge and unforeseen impacts. If necessary, further environmental assessment could be carried out at that time.

Q5. Should the method for measuring the target take account of the abatement effort made by companies under emissions trading schemes?

• Currently, there is no clearly preferred option, with both pros and cons applicable, as discussed in Sections 5.35-5.46 of the SCCB consultation document.
• Discounting abatement effort in the Scottish target is unlikely to make a difference to the global emissions environment; as allowances traded represent savings made somewhere within the scheme as a whole. Environmentally conscious domestic abatement effort is likely to benefit the Scottish environment; however the sale of surplus allowances may reduce the likelihood of localised improvements elsewhere (where allowances are bought).
• The Government's preference is to develop a mechanism that includes allowances, in order to allow efforts made within the EUETS to be reflected in the Scottish target. Pre-set EUETS allowance levels could help inform and advise domestic carbon budgets, however reporting on progress towards the SCCB target may be better advised to identify and separate domestic emission reductions from CDM credits and traded allowances to maintain transparency.

Q6. Do you agree that international credits should be counted towards Scottish targets?

Should there be limits on credits counted towards Scottish targets?

• Clear and open reporting on domestic emissions reduction should be highlighted as moving Scotland towards a real low-carbon society. In the long-term, once direct domestic emissions are as low as possible, other mechanisms for crediting remaining emissions, offsetting and clean development will really come to the fore to help maintain a trajectory towards 80% reductions.
• International credits are likely to have a neutral impact on the Scottish environment, as efforts to realise emissions reductions in other countries are more likely to affect the local environment. International credits, independently verified as attributable to effort by Scottish firms or Government, should therefore be counted towards the Scottish target through the appropriate CDM and JI mechanisms.
• If credits are counted, however, and are cheaper to realise, becoming preferable to domestic effort, they could indirectly result in reduced benefits for the Scottish environment, when potential emissions reductions are not carried out domestically.
• International credits can present mixed environmental and social effects upon the countries that they are implemented in and, wherever used, these impacts should be taken into account with full environmental and social assessments undertaken for the projects.
• The impacts on the receiving countries are unknown, but presumed negative (following the precautionary principle) as often poor legislation or limited enforcement exists to ensure stringent controls on development siting/ impacts. Care needs to be taken to ensure that schemes only occur in appropriate habitats and that great care is taken to understand local circumstances and needs.
• Air quality impacts are likely to be positive in the receiving country as measures will be installed to prevent, improve or remove emissions, and other schemes could provide low emission public transport etc. Programmes to improve local air quality through reducing emissions from existing industrial plants and transport should be a high priority. Best practice Scottish and EU guidelines should be employed to ensure projects do not negatively impact air quality.
• CDM programmes must take full account of the precautionary principle to ensure water quality and resource management does not exacerbate local problems. Local soil conditions must be fully taken into account in any projects and not adversely affected. Measures should be taken to protect and enhance soil quantity and quality. Projects need to take into account the health needs of the local population and take great care not to adversely affect the conditions of the local population who may already be living in extreme poverty.
• Schemes which improve environmental quality will benefit standards of living, and in subsistence farming communities' protection of soil and water resources will bring significant benefits. Technology transfer, job creation and knowledge sharing can all have positive social and economic impacts. CDM must ensure transfer does not lead to local environmental degradation or have a negative impact on local populations and their livelihoods. Ideally, transfer is based around the principles of sustainable livelihoods and long-term, may lead to enhanced opportunity and new local industry. Care needs to be taken in the planning and implementation of projects to minimise resource use and schemes should identify means to reduce impacts of future increases in resource use on the assumption that standards of living may increase.
• Schemes will have unknown impacts on landscape in the recipient country, but effects are presumed negative (following the precautionary principle) as often poor legislation or limited enforcement exists to ensure stringent controls on development. Care needs to be taken to ensure that schemes consider visual and landscape impacts and the most stringent UK / EU legislation and best practice is applied. Full understanding of local conditions and local community needs is a pre-requisite.
• Schemes will have unknown impacts on cultural heritage and the historic environment in the recipient country, but are presumed negative (following the precautionary principle) as often poor legislation and limited enforcement exist to protect the historic environment and archaeological features. Care needs to be taken to ensure that schemes consider cultural heritage, the historic environment and archaeology and that the most stringent UK/ EU legislation and best practice is applied. Full understanding of local conditions and local community needs should be gained.

Para. 5.49-5.52 International aviation and shipping emissions not included in the target.

• Scotland should make every effort to pursue and promote an internationally accepted method so that these emissions can be satisfactorily included in reduction targets. Difficult choices and decisions to be made under climate action will include a satisfactory solution to this situation.
• A satisfactory solution should inspire confidence across targeted sectors that these sources of emissions are being addressed in an equitable manner.

Para. 5.53-5.57 Reduce emissions by 80% by 2050.

• Setting a target of 80% is at the upper end of the recommended range for developed countries and under SEA, can be considered likely to be of significant benefit for climatic factors (specifically emissions reduction), air quality and, in turn, generally beneficial for Scotland's environment.
• The specific nature of effects on the environment will be dependent on the measures employed to meet the target and should be assessed further when more is known about what shape they are likely to take. In general, the target is likely to lead to overall benefits for the environment and society, however shifts may occur and aspects of the environment, or different parts of society, may be affected in ways as yet unknown.
• There may be short-term issues as regulatory controls and measures come into force and changes occur in the supply and demand of goods and services. Ongoing monitoring, consideration of changes in effects, and mitigation is required to ensure that the maximum beneficial effects of this target are realised.
• Significant emissions reductions can only be achieved by reducing the overall amount of fossil fuels used, which will have significant benefits for air quality, human health and on material assets; by reducing mineral extraction effects. It will also significantly benefit landscape, biodiversity, soil and water resources both in Scotland, and overseas; in countries that currently supply Scotland with fossil fuels.
• To meet the target, and to help move away from fossil fuels, renewable energy is likely to be significantly promoted. This will have considerable benefits socially and for all aspects of the environment with a significant reduction in air, soil and water pollution. However, there are adverse environmental impacts associated with renewable schemes, especially if the scale and siting is inappropriate, and these impacts need to be acknowledged and addressed.
• Certain renewables schemes may have significant soil and landscape impacts, for example large scale wind farms and the widespread uptake of microgeneration, including solar panels. If biomass is promoted then great care will have to be taken in ensuring appropriate crops and sites are chosen. Inappropriate planting can cause significant disruption to landscapes, changing the character and blocking views. Inappropriate crops can also significantly adversely affect soil and water resources and biodiversity.
• A push for modal shift towards public transport, walking and cycling is likely to occur, along with a number of regulatory measures. Although this may have significant benefits for the environment, human health and people's quality of life; there may be sections of the population who experience significantly more adverse impacts than others, for example those in rural areas and those with disabilities who rely on private vehicles for mobility, etc.

Q7. Should the Bill allow the level of the 2050 target to be changed through secondary legislation? If so, should this only be allowed on the basis of independent, expert advice, to reflect international developments or unforeseen consequences of the Bill? Should any changes to the target be limited to an increase in the target?

• Once the Bill becomes law and is adopted as an Act of Parliament, further primary legislation would be required to amend the Act. Options for secondary legislation can speed the process and it may be more beneficial to be able to change quickly due to increasing climate change, improved knowledge and unforeseen impacts. Additional environmental assessment could be undertaken at this stage, if required.

Supporting Framework

• The overall 80% reduction in GHG emissions by 2050 is an ambitious long-term target. Interim budgets will help focus efforts by setting targets and limits within more accessible timescales and help the successful achievement of the target. This is likely to have significant beneficial effects on climatic factors and air quality with secondary benefits for human health.
• It is difficult to predict what effect interim budgets will have on wider environmental receptors. Without them there is potential for adverse environmental impacts; as it is possible that reduction measures are left till nearer 2050 with severe action then required, which could potentially have significant adverse effects. This may still happen within interim budget periods, but on a smaller scale; as action to limit emissions within budget periods will be less severe. Specific effects will depend on implementation measures however, and are therefore not possible to predict at this stage.
• Interim budgets will allow a degree of flexibility such that long and short term reduction strategies can be developed within sectors and across government departments. They should also encourage continued improvement and sustainable management/ phasing of measures to minimise disruption to other environmental receptors.
• There is significant merit in assigning budgets towards achieving the overall target as early as possible; to encourage significant early reductions and leaving more difficult reduction measures towards the end. This allows time for technological development and appropriate phasing of replacement measures. Interim budgets should drive short term gains and result in significant reductions in the medium to long term.
• EUETS allowances and projections could be used to help set interim carbon budgets; this allows a greater degree of transparency and will help maintain confidence in the target and the interim budgets.

Para. 6.14-6.18 Set mandatory annual emission reduction targets

• It is cumulative GHG's emitted over time which causes climate change, rather than the level of emissions in any single year. Mandatory annual emission reduction targets could help drive early gains; however should the focus shift to short-term action to meet annual targets at the expense of sustainable management of measures to protect biodiversity, water and soil resources, annual targets may impact negatively upon wider environmental receptors,
• The specifics of these adverse environmental effects will be dependent on the nature of the measures implemented. Medium and long term planning is required to ensure that significant adverse effects are avoided and mitigated against.

Q8. What factors should be taken into account when setting the level of budgets?

• Early action to reduce global emissions will have more significant benefits in limiting climate change impacts (and be more cost-effective) than later action. Even though Scotland's total emissions are comparatively small on a global scale, setting challenging budgets as early as possible is likely to be significantly beneficial for climatic factors and air quality.
• Independent advice on budgets must take into account environmental factors, sustainably balanced against business competitiveness issues. Ideally, budgets should consider sectoral performance. Budgets that are not sector specific may not be as effective, as some actors within sectors may not take action unless specific targets are identified.
• Setting the level of budgets is likely to influence the extent of adverse or beneficial environmental effects. Budget levels will determine which measures result to meet reduction targets, and the environmental effects will be dependent on the emissions reduction measures employed. When more is known about the relevant measures, a more detailed review could help assess the effects of setting the level of budgets.
• In general, at the national scale and over the longer term, more ambitious budgets should be more beneficial for the environment. However, care will have to be taken to ensure that the manner in which budgets are met does not adversely impact local environmental factors, or that acceptable environmental trade-offs and mitigations are identified.
• Appropriate environmental factors and indicators should be identified and integrated into the reporting and advice processes, likely to help determine the level of budgets. As measures implemented are reviewed and monitored, any apparent environmental effects must be taken into consideration for future budgets, with suitable mitigation measures employed, as appropriate to scale and location. These are currently impossible to identify specifically.
• Potentially, conflicts exist if emissions reduction budgets do not account for installations operating within the EUETS (accounting for around 50% of current Scottish emissions). Installations with allowances should be allowed to trade on the ETS market, however this may affect Scottish budgets, as the required rate of reductions may differ. Appropriately identified mechanisms should not add to the regulatory burden of the EUETS, but aid an accurate means for measuring overall domestic progress. See the discussion provided under Question 5 above.
• The ideal should be to drive actual domestic reductions and phase out high emission sources; as such, budget reviews should take account of the latest climate change science and work to increase the rate of reductions as necessary.

Q9. How long should interim budget periods be?

• The pre-determined length of interim budget periods will not have direct environmental impacts. However if periods are too short, it could cause short term reactive measures to be brought in, with little planning, that could be harmful to the environment and not see the benefits to climatic factors.
• Budget periods should be long enough to implement change and measure progress, but short enough to take remedial action if implemented measures do not prove sufficient. The UK Government intends to use 5 year budgets and, if the Scottish Government plans to utilise the services of the independent Committee on Climate Change, it would make sense to align the budgeting periods with the UK system. This will maintain transparency and efficiencies across reporting mechanisms, thereby maintaining energy and resource efficiency as far as possible.
• This question is more appropriately considered through the Regulatory Impact Assessment.

Q10. How many years in advance should emissions budget periods be set in order to provide sufficient time to develop infrastructure?

• The UK Government is planning to set budgets up to 15 years in advance, this again would appear sensible as it allows sufficient time for infrastructure development, forward planning and adjustment of future budgets to account for any shortfall in current or previous budget periods.
• As before, this would also improve transparency, reduce duplication and maintain efficiencies as far as possible. There are unlikely to be any direct effects on the environment that can be attributed specifically to this issue.

Q11. What should be the limit (in terms of absolute quantity or as a percentage of the budget period) on the amount of emissions which the Government can borrow from a following budget period?

• Borrowing between budgets will allow a degree of flexibility within the system however, borrowing may add to the burden of reducing emissions at a later date, with associated knock-on effects for climatic factors. This may have an impact on the timing of environmental effects.
• Borrowing between budgeting periods must be completely transparent and only occur under exceptional circumstances; with limits set as low as possible to maintain the focus on driving actual reductions within agreed budgeting periods and limits.
• Ultimately, borrowing and budgeting mechanisms should be designed to encourage continued improvement and sustainable management/ phasing of measures to minimise disruption to environmental receptors.

Q12. Should the Bill include an interim point target? If so, what year (or years) should it be for (2020, 2025, 2030 etc)?

How should the level be chosen?

• Stern reports that early action to reduce emissions is significantly more beneficial with respect to climate change and more cost effective; therefore setting an interim point target, based on agreed preliminary budgets, could be seen as a positive motivator for action. Similarly, wider environmental benefits are to be gained through effective early action on emissions reduction.
• Depending on the methods of emissions reduction implemented, mixed impacts are likely across all SEA topics under this option, with an increasing risk of adverse impacts if measures to meet targets are implemented at later stages.

SNH Consultation Comment: Q12 (interim targets) is discussed on including a proposal for an interim target of a 40% reduction by 2025. This is referenced to 2008 to give a slightly front-loaded emission reduction pathway (40% of the total target in the first 17 years and 25 years to meet the remaining 40%). This is confusing because the consultation paper proposes baselines consistent with international agreements (1990 for CO2, N2O and CH4, and 1995 for F-gases to accord with the Kyoto Protocol and subsequent developments under the UNFCCC) - and we support this. Referenced to 1990, a 40% reduction by 2025 produces a pathway more consistent with the less desirable upper curve in Fig 6 of the consultation paper (i.e. delayed emission reductions and greater cumulative emissions). Interim targets of at least 40% by 2020 against a 1990 baseline are required to front-load emission reductions and move towards the lower, more desirable curve in Fig.6. SEA Response: It is accepted that the discussion of interim targets within the ER did not correlate with the discussion within the consultation document, and this is accepted as an error. The ER discussion would have been improved by simply removing the last two bullet points in this section, which would have prevented any discrepancy and confusion. The inclusion of this comment box and the removal of the discussed options, are considered sufficient to address SNH's comments.

Meeting the Target

Energy Efficiency and Microgeneration

• Assessed in Detailed Assessment Matrices, see Appendix G.
• Energy efficiency and demand reduction offers the most likely source of early gains in overall emissions reductions. With an energy saving ratio which can be as high as 13:1, ie. 13 units of energy consumed in the supply of 1 unit of energy demanded, real benefits are to be found in compelling businesses and households to limit all forms of energy demand. These benefits are significant across all environmental media, in Scotland and further afield.
• Renewable technologies and uptake of microgeneration will offer significant savings in the medium to long term, however this must be aligned with effective grid investment to allow feed-in from distributed sources. This will, in turn, reduce return on investment timescales, making the technologies more attractive to households and businesses.
• There may be localised impacts on landscape/ townscape associated with micro-renewables and other localised impacts associated with larger scale renewables projects, depending on location and environmental sensitivities.
• Long-term, if electricity demands are met by renewables, hydro, microgeneration and feed-in, the level of demand is not such an issue, as the level of emissions produced in supply becomes negligible. Appropriate phasing of investment could lead to the phase out of fossil fuel power generation.
• Ultimately, power generation in Scotland should be from a variety of renewable sources with only a small fraction provided by nuclear and fossil fuels, until such capacity is no longer required.

Combined Heat and Power

• Assessed in Detailed Assessment Matrices, see Appendix G.
• This option has the potential to reduce GHG emissions from centralised energy supply by improving local efficiencies, as well as using renewable local biomass and even processed wastes as fuel. Local impacts must be considered as air quality from combustion processes may be impacted.
• CHP and district heating offer highly energy efficient technologies, where the key is to make beneficial use of as much of the heat energy as possible. Developers, designers and architects should be encouraged to include these systems wherever and whenever possible, providing other environmental considerations are taken into account including local air quality impacts and appropriate fuel supply and transport requirements, to minimise emissions.
• New public buildings, or part financed by public money should be required to include CHP and heat recovery as standard. In general, distributed/ localised power/ heat generation is also more efficient in terms of reducing the transmission losses from centralised power generation.

Reducing Carbon Emissions from Buildings

• Assessed in Detailed Assessment Matrices, see Appendix G.
• Current guidance for new developments will help reduce energy demand for space heating, however the greater challenge is on how to reduce demand for existing, less efficient buildings. Appropriate measures will benefit human health, population, material assets and historic environmental factors.
• The built environment in Scotland is a major energy consumer. A contributory factor to this is the way in which raw materials are used. For example, cement imported from abroad produces significant quantities of CO2 in manufacture and transport but emissions do not count as Scottish emissions. Using this material might, on paper, seem a better carbon option than locally-produced, particularly traditional materials, where all the production carbon will be counted against our local total but this does not fit with a responsible and sustainable approach to addressing the global problem of climate change.
• Integrating the principal of embodied energy into policy development could be a useful way of seeking to address this issue. Scotland's policy framework needs to be sufficiently robust and sophisticated to mitigate against the "export" of emissions.
• Energy advice is available through the Carbon Trust, Energy Savings Trust and Envirowise (amongst others), and some grants are available through, for example, the Scottish Community and Householder Renewables Initiative, however the initial cost of improvements is likely to hamper the uptake of measures by those who are only able to afford the cost of energy spread throughout the year.

Waste Reduction and Recycling

• Assessed in Detailed Assessment Matrices, see Appendix G.
• As the number of households in Scotland increases, the levels of waste produced are likely to increase accordingly. The environmental impacts of Scotland's waste have been reduced somewhat by landfill restrictions, natural gas recovery and increased rates of recycling. The benefits in re-using wastes, wherever possible, are significant if approached in a systematic and sustainable fashion with the ultimate aim of maximising useful energy recovery from suitable waste.
• Localised environmental impacts from energy from waste are generally related to combustion processes. These can be minimised by employing suitable energy recovery systems such as anaerobic digestion or gasification, before incineration in combined heat and power systems.
• Widespread and integrated adoption of the waste management hierarchy requires continued pressure on manufacturers to minimise packaging and to utilise recyclable materials wherever possible. It also requires effective public education on the benefits of separation at source, energy potentials from organic wastes and the reduced energy demands of using recycled materials when compared with raw material extraction and primary production.
• Similarly, construction processes and infrastructure development must consider all means of reusing rubbles and demolition wastes as preferred to primary extraction of aggregate materials.

Carbon Storage

• Assessed in Detailed Assessment Matrices, see Appendix G.
• Carbon capture and storage ( CCS) most often involves the end-of-pipe collection of waste CO2 gases from power generation and industrial plant, and its storage underground in spent fossil fuel (oil and gas) beds or appropriate geological formations.
• As a sustainable energy solution, CCS presents potential environmental impacts which could offset the potential benefits of minimising climate emissions. There is potential for wide ranging impacts when considering infrastructure, transport and actual storage effects; which are further exacerbated when the effects of continued fossil fuel extraction and use are considered, as opposed to the benefits possible by using alternatives to fossil fuels.
• The SCCB target should work to capitalise on Scotland's renewable energy potential and lead to medium to long-term phasing out of high carbon energy sources. Support for CCS should be considered in light of further research to identify and manage potential environmental impacts before it is implemented.
• An alternative use is in carbon capture during the production of hydrogen from coal or natural gas to provide hydrogen fuel. This is mainly a cost consideration as hydrogen can be produced without using fossil fuels, but may be more expensive. In order to seed the energy market for hydrogen fuels and produce enough hydrogen at acceptable costs to encourage a changeover, CCS may be more justifiable.

SNH Consultation Comment: Table 6.1 discusses carbon capture and storage and highlights effects such as ocean acidification and adverse impacts on biodiversity, flora and fauna. We presume this refers to deep ocean storage of CO2 and/ or to the potential for leakage from storage within depleted oil and gas reservoirs or saline aquifers and we strongly agree with this assessment. Hence it is vitally important that carbon capture and storage is directed towards secure geological reservoirs and that the security of these is adequately monitored. SEA Response: It is accepted that the ER did not fully discuss the implications of CCS using suitably porous geological reservoirs (eg. appropriate sandstones) and that this is potentially a more secure/ viable option than ocean storage. This is accepted as a limitation of the report; however, SNH comments on the use and continued monitoring of the security of such sites are fully supported by the SEA. Similarly, although CCS may not be the most sustainable option for widespread use in Scotland, development of the technology and identification of appropriate sites could have transboundary benefits when transferred to other countries more reliant on coal fired power under, for example, the Clean Development Mechanism. The inclusion of this comment box is considered sufficient to address SNH's comments.

Trading Schemes

• Assessed in Detailed Assessment Matrices, see Appendix G.
• Has the potential to realise high emission reductions across the major polluting industries with comparatively minor impacts associated with administration, regulation and verification. Also has the potential to be extended to transport industries.
• Market based instruments have captured the interest of environmental policy makers because of the potential advantages they present over command-and-control instruments. Rather than equating emission levels between firms, market based instruments rationalise the marginal abatement costs, and help keep the costs to society down by internalising the costs of emissions, offering a more cost effective method for management of reductions.
• Within the incentive-based instrument category, auctioned permits generally provide more incentive to reduce emissions than issued permits, and correctly designed and implemented trading schemes will allow a required level of emissions reduction to be realised for the least overall cost to society. Tradable permit schemes provide incentives for reduction in pollution levels by the firms that can achieve those reductions most cheaply; they can also provide possible double-dividends for individual companies by encouraging abatement and realising extra income from selling unused permits.

Q23. Should the Bill contain enabling powers to introduce a duty on certain parts of the public sector (i.e. local authorities and large public bodies) to take specified actions on climate change or other specified environmental issues?

Why?

Q24. What should such a duty (or duties) include?

• The SCCB should contain provisions for far-reaching enabling powers, as it is unlikely that purely voluntary measures will be sufficient to meet reduction targets. It is likely that statutory duties and enforcement will go further in driving action towards meeting the total target, as public sector bodies are compelled to prioritise emissions reductions and re-invest in further transport and energy demand limiting measures.
• It is likely that this would bring about significant environmental benefits as it would also compel all public bodies to act rather than just the more environmentally conscious. Appropriate government support should be considered.
• There are organisations that currently provide advice and support (eg. Carbon Trust, Energy Saving Trust, Envirowise), consideration should be given to developing an initial single point of contact to streamline advice and make it easier for service users to access the correct service.
• Specific duties could include measures to ensure sustainable procurement and supply chain management that focuses on embedded carbon or emissions minimisation. Such measures can drive long-term improvements across private sector suppliers, but these must be properly implemented and vetted.
• All of Scotland's 32 Local Authorities have signed up to Scotland's Climate Change Declaration, highlighting increased awareness and support for action, however this should be specifically targeted within each authority to identify local sustainable resources, cost-effective adaptation measures, as well as short, medium and long-term strategies for reducing emissions across all LA services.
• Some public bodies and authorities have identified sustainability or climate change officers, however the onus of action and responsibility should be set firmly with senior public officials and service managers, such that effective action on reducing emissions is driven from board level. Senior public officials and service managers could even have salaries linked to climate change action and emissions reductions, as a means of driving concerted action across the public sector.
• Many public bodies and authorities already procure energy supplies from 'green' providers and sources; however, the key is to continually improve and combine procurement with energy/resource efficiency and demand reduction across all services. Each public body could be compelled to produce an energy/ carbon management and demand reduction plan across all services and buildings, with identified actions, responsibilities and timescales.
• This option could lead to actions that have significant environmental effects both positive and negative. Due to the range of possible actions, and without further detail on what these actions might be, it is not feasible to look at all the potential environmental effects. Therefore, when more detail is known about the duties a more targeted SEA could be undertaken.

Q25. Should the Bill contain enabling powers to introduce statutory guidance for certain public sector bodies (i.e. local authorities and large public bodies) on specified climate change or other environmental measures?

Why? Are there gaps in any existing guidance?

Q26. What should this guidance include?

• Should enabling powers placing a duty on the public sector be introduced, it makes sense to include a provision for introducing statutory guidance if required. Introducing statutory guidance in its own right (ie. in the absence of placing a duty on public bodies) is likely to be more beneficial than non-statutory guidance, as any activity falling within the attention of the statutory guidance, effectively places a duty to act in accordance. Over time, appropriate guidance could be extended to the private sector, eg. construction and development.
• This option could lead to actions that have significant environmental effects, both positive and negative. The potential environmental effects will be dependent on the statutory guidance provided. Appropriate guidance must include information on the consideration and benefits of energy demand reduction, transport measures (including reductions in fuel use and aviation) and potential environmental consequences of ill-considered action.
• Guidance could also include information from the energy advisory bodies previously mentioned, on the costs/benefits of localised energy supply systems, improving energy efficiencies of current building stock, embodied energy and life cycle assessment options. Therefore it is recommended that if guidance is developed, a more targeted SEA is undertaken.

Q27. Should the Bill contain enabling powers to create a requirement for certain public sector bodies (i.e. local authorities and large public bodies) to make regular reports on specific measures they are taking to tackle climate change (whether mitigation or adaptation) or other environmental issues?

Why? What should be included in such reports?

• This option is likely to have significant environmental benefits if it helps increase uptake of measures to tackle climate change and should help with best practice, lessons learned and information sharing.
• A requirement for public sector bodies to report on specific measures should be recommended in conjunction with a statutory duty to act and statutory guidance. Reports should be designed to improve transparency on climate action (mitigation and adaptation) and to feed into national reporting systems.
• Single, one-off, actions are not sufficient; climate change mitigation and energy demand reduction should be a continuous process. Reporting at least establishes a requirement for action and awareness, and will maintain focus over time. However, care must be taken (possibly through statutory guidance) that reporting requirements do not promote focus on action simply to demonstrate progress, as any action taken could have significant localised effects.
• A requirement could be included for public bodies to report on any environmental effects of measures taken to tackle climate change and emissions, which could help build an evidence base for future review or other SEAs.
• Any sectoral targets could feed into public body climate/ energy/ carbon action plans and reports with information on actions, effects, benefits and targets.

Q28. As a potential non-legislative vehicle, should current Best Value guidance be amended to take specific account of climate change mitigation and adaptation?

How should Best Value guidance be amended?

• Currently, the Local Government in Scotland Act (2003), Best Value Guidance includes a Chapter on making a contribution to Sustainable Development, but makes no specific reference to climate change, greenhouse gas emissions, energy efficiency or energy demand reductions. The Guidance document makes no reference to transport or transportation. There is no guidance on making reductions of any kind, in fact the word 'reduce' does not appear throughout the document. There is one occurrence of the word 'waste' in the accountability Chapter (10) on value for money.
• Best Value Guidance should be reviewed to reflect the changing priorities of national policy on climate change and to provide Local Authorities with clear direction on the wide range of issues to be considered as being within the remit of Local Government. Climate change mitigation and adaptation, and environmental considerations as a whole, should become a central feature of Best Value guidance. This could have significant environmental/ sustainability benefits. An SEA should be undertaken of any new Best Value guidance, as it is being drawn, up to ensure that unforeseen impacts and effects are limited.

Q29. Are there any amendments to existing legislation or any enabling powers needed to allow for variable charging (for example by local authorities) to incentivise action or eliminate perverse incentives?

• The SCCB should contain enabling powers to introduce such powers as a wide range of available mechanisms and incentives will be required to meet the overall reductions target. Any amendments to existing legislation or enabling powers should undergo environmental and social, or equality, impact assessments before being introduced as they could result in unforeseen social and environmental impacts.

Q30. Are there any provisions to help Scotland adapt to the impacts of climate change which should be included in the Scottish Climate Change Bill?

• In light of a future Scottish Adaptation Strategy, the SCCB could include provisions that ease the planning process for appropriate adaptation measures.
• Maintenance and protection of Scotland's high carbon (peaty) soils should be a priority for adaptation, as these have been identified as having the potential to become large carbon emission sources, rather than carbon sinks, as a result of warmer, drier weather. The SCCB could include provisions designed to limit the exploitation and degradation of these important soils.

Q31. Should provisions within the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005, be amended in order to provide clearer links with the Climate Change Bill? If so, how should this be done?

• Many SEAs pay little attention to GHG emissions and focus primarily on flooding as the key climate issue. Amending the Act could enable commitments on actual emissions reductions and monitoring methods to be required for all public PPS in the wake of the SCCB. Similarly, future monitoring under SEA should identify key indicators related to climate change, emissions reduction action/measures and potential environmental effects.
• The SCCB could initiate a requirement that all national plans and strategies in key areas (eg. finance, enterprise, tourism, land use, transport, energy efficiency and generation) are revised to include quantified, and measurable, carbon reduction budgets and targets, in line with the proposed interim carbon budgets and 80% target. Associated reporting regimes, informed by appropriately designed SEA monitoring frameworks, would enable Government to assess which sectors are contributing equitably, and better identify the environmental consequences of action.
• Amending the Environmental Assessment (Scotland) Act 2005 to provide clearer links with the SCCB could require greater consideration of both likely greenhouse gas emissions and climate adaptation measures required within all public policy and decision making across Scotland. The Act could be reviewed to require that SEAs assess how the particular policy/ strategy/ plan or programme will work to meet the 80% reduction target.
• Depending on the policy under consideration, some key environmental factors should be given greater attention with respect to identifying likely climate implications, especially the anticipated effects on soil resources and carbon stores, effects on biodiversity adaptation and appropriate migration, effects on material assets and embodied carbon and the consequences of policy or guidelines on development decisions likely to result in emissions.
• Climate issues and inter-relationships must be recognised more effectively in assessments, which will have benefits across SEA topics. The strategic policy review element of SEA could adopt a hierarchical approach with the SCCB target heading the list of associated environmental protection objectives to be considered, such that all future policies are developed within the context of the statutory target for reductions.

Q32. What are the equalities implications of the measures in the proposals for the Scottish Climate Change Bill?

• This question is more appropriately addressed through a dedicated Equalities Impact Assessment ( EqIA), however as SEA requires an assessment of impacts on population, it is likely that some measures to reduce emissions may lead to increased fuel bills both for power and transport during the transition to low carbon systems; therefore some of the most price sensitive members of the population may be further disadvantaged.
• Extreme care must be taken to ensure that action to meet SCCB targets does not exacerbate the conditions of those already in fuel poverty. Increasing fuel costs must be matched with use of the Scottish Fuel Poverty Indicator, improved identification of those in need, and appropriate mechanisms for support.
• Difficulties lie in the fact that those who are fuel poor are already energy conscious and most likely minimising demand, whilst it is those members of the population and business community that can afford higher rates that may be the most wasteful.
• Government must be willing to consider the implications of the SCCB target for those on welfare, in healthcare and in social housing and identify means to support those in most need to reduce fuel bills, improve efficiencies and insulation.
• In the long-term, as different mechanisms on carbon pricing, personal carbon budgets and allowances are considered, equality assessments should advise the adoption of specific options to ensure equality impacts are minimised.

Q33. Is there any existing legislation within the competence of the Scottish Parliament (devolved) which needs to be amended so that appropriate action can be taken by sectors in society to take action on climate change?

See comments box below.

Consultation Response: RSPB Scotland would like to see changes to the legislation covering muirburn under the Hill Farming Act 1946. Recent published studies show the growing season starting up to three weeks earlier in much of Scotland since 1961, with predicted changes of a similar magnitude over the next decade, as a result of climate change. The breeding season for moorland birds is similarly advancing in spring and therefore it is important that the legislation allow for changes to the muirburn dates. It would be helpful therefore, if the Climate Change Bill could facilitate such changes. SEA Response: The ability to amend dates for Muirburn activities could be classed as an adaptation measure that allows flexibility in response to climatic and seasonal change in Scotland. This SEA was restricted to consideration of emissions reduction measures and therefore such issues were not originally addressed. At the specific request of the SCCB Team, provisions to allow amendment of muirburn dates were assessed as part of the Post Consultation stage of the SEA. The assessments are attached as Appendix I to this revised Environmental Report, and will be referred to in the SEA Statement.