Say NO to Hunterston
The proposal for a new coal-fired power station in Ayrshire is Scotland's most unpopular planning application ever.
Thanks to people like you, some 22,000 objections have been sent to the Scottish Government.
Local WWF supporters also helped persuade their council to vote against the proposal.
Now the government has announced that the matter will go to public inquiry. Let's stop wasting time and money on this unwanted development. We need to be investing in clean, green energy, not climate-wrecking fossil fuels.
This is the only live application for a coal-fired power station in the UK. If it is built, it would not only increase greenhouse gas emissions, it would damage important wildlife sites and pollute the air. Not to mention the social and environmental impacts in the countries supplying the coal.
The man to convince now is John Whittaker, chair and majority share-holder of the company behind the proposal. Along with several other organisations, we've written to Mr Whittaker to ask him to withdraw the application. Please join us and show just how unpopular this proposal is.
Ask John Whittaker to withdraw his application for the new power station today.
Three reasons why should this proposal not go ahead
1. It undermines global efforts to tackle climate change
Having set the example for other countries to follow, if this proposal is accepted, the Scottish Government will be undermining the international leadership it has demonstrated through the Scottish Climate Change Act and the accompanying ambitious commitments to reduce Scotland’s climate emissions.
The developer is required to fit some limited capacity to capture carbon emissions from the power station. However, this technology has yet to be tested on a large scale and crucially, current government policy means the station would only be required to capture around 20 per cent of the emissions. So instead of moving rapidly towards a zero-carbon power sector by using renewable energy and implementing energy efficiency measures, CO2 emissions from the UK’s power sector could actually increase by 32 million tonnes by 2025 compared to business as usual.
Of course it is important to see if carbon capture technologies can be made to work on a commercial scale, but the type of technology proposed at Hunterston could be tested on an existing station such as the one at Longannet – which would also result in a decrease in the UK’s overall emissions from the power sector. Surely this is the better option.
2. We just don’t need it
There is a misconception that we need to build this power station to “keep the lights on”. But this is not true. Research has shown that Scotland can meet or exceed its electricity needs without additional fossil fuel power stations. In fact, by 2030 renewable energy and improved energy efficiency mean we could meet well over Scotland’s projected annual electricity demand. As well as addressing greenhouse gas emissions, the shift to a sustainable zero carbon power sector and a massive scale up in energy efficiency measures presents an enormous opportunity for Scotland to reinvigorate its industries, create new jobs and reduce dependency on imported fuels.
3. The proposed site is nationally important for wildlife
The proposal would seriously damage one of the last remaining areas of intertidal habitat on the Firth of Clyde, which are vital feeding grounds for large numbers of wading birds such as curlew and redshank, and important stopover points for migrating wildfowl. The importance of this site has been nationally recognised as it is designated as a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). Not only would this power station contribute to the impacts felt by people and wildlife around the world due to global warming, it will have a significant local impact too.

Newsletter sign-up
Sign-up to get the latest WWF news delivered straight to your in-box.
Like us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter