Chamber and committees

I will pass back to the convener, as I am conscious of time. However, I am also interested in your cities’ attitudes to carbon offsetting in your own plans and in other areas, so perhaps your councils can follow up with the committee and provide that information.

I thank the witnesses for joining us. The committee is interested in your work with partners and particularly in the relationship with the private sector and private sector investment. I will go first to Adam McVey, the council leader for Edinburgh, then to council leader Jenny Laing and then to council leader Susan Aitken.

Councillor McVey, the City of Edinburgh Council plan is quite explicit in this area. Given that Edinburgh is an area of financial sector expertise, what amount of private funding are you able to leverage in just now? What projects are you targeting? What is success looking like, and what are the challenges?

Councillor Laing, you talked about your council’s relationship with BP and the hydrogen sector. Are you doing anything similar to what Susan Aitken said is happening in Glasgow in relation to leveraging in private sector funding?

Susan Aitken eloquently set out the scale of the ambition and the need to generate investable propositions. It would be helpful if she could share with us some of the experience of other countries or cities that we can draw on.

I am conscious of our time being limited, so we might have to ask for follow-up information in writing. I will go first to Councillor McVey.

I want to follow up on that. Could the private sector, and the financial sector in particular, do more to work with councils to get those investment propositions?

As I come back to Councillor Aitken, I thank Glasgow, and the people of Glasgow, for hosting COP26.

Councillor Aitken, is there anything further that you want to add to your extensive comments on private sector investment? Perhaps you can give us some insight from your international experience.

I would like to hear from Margaret Davidson on land use and perhaps on the idea of a national standard and double counting.

Thank you. I will pass back to the convener now but, if the two councils want to say anything more on their relationship with the private sector and financial services in particular, maybe they could follow up in writing, as we are interested in that area.

Thank you. I now hand back to the convener.

Thank you.

Finally, I want to ask about cement. The committee was told recently that if cement were a country it would be in third place after the United States and China when it comes to its global emissions. We heard about the potential of carbon capture, utilisation and storage in relation to cement. Should there be more focus on innovation and other aspects in that regard? We know that world capital is interested in the most obvious and exciting investments, particularly in relation to renewable energy generation, but should we be looking at the unsexy subjects, such as cement, given that the message that we are hearing is that we have to do more of everything, rather than just one thing?

I will put that question to Chris Stark, and the convener will let us know whether there is time to bring in Professor Bell, too.

With the 2030 target, the original plans had—[Inaudible.]—of carbon capture and storage. You might be aware that the committee took evidence on that last week. One of the messages that we got was that, if we want to get on with CCS, we must do so quickly.

Clearly, there are questions about the Acorn project being put on the reserve list. What does that mean for Scotland’s target? What needs to be done about CCS in Scotland? If CCS is delayed beyond a meaningful implementation date, is it possible that the emissions removals and reductions that can be achieved through other action on, for example, peatland, diet or aviation could compensate for the lack of progress?

I will go to Chris Stark first, and then to Professor Bell, if he wants to come in.

It is good to see both of you. Thank you for joining us.

Given the risks to meeting the tough 75 per cent emissions reduction target by 2030, which was a cross-party, collective decision in the Scottish Parliament, in which sectors are rapid gains still feasible? What needs to change to deliver tangible reductions in those areas? I know that you set that out in detail in your recent report, but I am keen to hear from both of you about the focus and emphasis that you want to give the committee.