Chamber and committees

I want to follow up the sustainable aviation fuel issue, which the committee is really interested in and has pursued in previous lines of questioning, including with Ineos and PetroChina last week.

As it said at that time, it is also interested in the opportunity and it is part of project willow. Mr Thomson, you make a compelling case around the notion of repurposing the existing refinery and how it could be done at a relatively low cost. If you are right, why do Ineos and PetroChina not see that opportunity for itself?

This is my final question. Are you still taking evidence, or have you concluded that work?

All right—thank you.

Good morning, gentlemen. I want to follow up on the question of sustainable aviation fuel, or SAF. You have mentioned project willow, which this also references, but opportunities to develop SAF at Grangemouth have been discussed for quite a long time now. From your perspective, how realistic are the prospects of our being able to develop SAF at Grangemouth?

What barriers need to be overcome to make that happen?

It was interesting to see that you launched an investigation in July into the market for energy efficiency and low-carbon heating products. Will you tell me a little bit more about why you chose that area for investigation? What do you expect the outcomes and impact will be from any findings that you have?

Thank you. That is really helpful. Part of the reason why I asked the question is that I have had a number of constituency cases in which individuals have claimed that they were, in effect, mis-sold technologies. It certainly seems that companies have come in and made lots of promises about what will be delivered, but the outcomes have not been what was anticipated.

Part of the complication in this space is that there are various Government schemes that provide funding, and there is an assumption on the part of consumers that what they are offered is somehow an official Government scheme. When it turns out badly, they come to me and say, “Will you raise this with the relevant Government department?”. The Government department says, “Well, the delivery of the scheme has nothing to do with us. We just provide the funding.” There is clearly a perception issue, is there not? People think that, because there is Government funding, what they are offered is somehow an official Government scheme, even though it is delivered by a range of third-party contractors who might or might not be up to scratch. Are you looking at that area?

You might not know the answer to this, but is it currently the case that, if somebody is accessing funding through a Government scheme, there is an accreditation for whoever is doing the installation?

All right. Thank you.

I have one more question on the backlog. Your target is to clear the backlog by February 2027. Are you on track to do that?