The Scotsman opinion piece, on Climate, 3 November 2026

3.0out of 10Minor

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.1 finding

The debate over carbon capture and storage technology is sometimes framed as a battle between environmentalists and the oil industry, with the former dismissing it as a smokescreen deployed to obscure the need to reduce carbon emissions from fossil fuels and the latter insisting it has a viable future. However, the reality is that climate experts and the oil industry are, to an extent, on the same page. For example, after campaigning journalist George Monbiot wrote an article in the Guardian about what he supposed was a “great carbon capture con”, suggesting climate change could be tackled without it, Oxford University Professor Myles Allen – dubbed "the physicist behind net zero” – and others wrote a letter saying “physics says otherwise”.

Furthermore, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the UK Climate Change Committee and the International Energy Agency, among others, have also expressed the view that it is part of efforts to reach net zero and deal with the problem of global warming. READ MORE: Only £12m of promised £200m of UK grant funding will be handed over to Acorn carbon capture project Carbon capture is a proven technology, the problem has been making it a commercially viable one.

However, a recent report identified 113 commercial facilities worldwide, up from 77 the previous year, which the Carbon Capture and Storage Association, a trade body, said demonstrated that “the technology is delivering results at scale”. “The UK’s first projects have already awarded more than £4 billion in supply chain contracts, supporting around 350 UK companies and 5,500 construction jobs,” it added. It is, therefore, highly regrettable that Labour appears to be getting cold feet about the Acorn carbon capture project at St Fergus near Peterhead, with a promised £200 million grant turned into just £12m with loans making up the rest.

Given the oil industry expertise in Aberdeenshire and the proximity to wells that could be used to store the captured carbon, there are few better places to develop and refine the technology. While the SNP government may be over-relying on carbon capture to meet its climate targets without actually doing the necessary hard work, it is not the “fairytale” that some suggest. Instead, it is a genuine industrial opportunity and a vital weapon in the fight against climate change.

Read the original article on scotsman.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (1)

The Scotsman's comment piece argues that carbon capture is a real industrial opportunity and backs the Acorn project. Its headline puts 'fairytale' in quotation marks as though scientists and the oil industry had rebutted that word together, and it drops the body's own qualifier that the two sides agree only 'to an extent'. Nothing else in its facts or figures misleads.

Opinion piece: read for false claims of fact and for fairness to the people it names, not for its opinions.

  1. Headline goes beyond the article

    Minor

    “Climate scientists and oil industry agree: carbon capture is no 'fairytale'”

    Why this matters
    The headline says climate scientists and the oil industry 'agree' and puts 'fairytale' in quotation marks as the claim they reject.
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes scientists and the oil industry jointly and fully rejected a named 'fairytale' charge.
    The context
    The body says the two sides are only 'to an extent' on the same page. The word 'fairytale' comes from no named person in the article: the paper itself uses it and attributes it only to 'some'. The scientists it cites, Myles Allen and others, wrote that 'physics says otherwise', and no oil company is quoted.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“to an extent, on the same page”
    • Elsewhere in the article“that some suggest”
    • Elsewhere in the article“wrote a letter saying “physics says otherwise””

    Show it in the article

What it gets right

  • “the Carbon Capture and Storage Association, a trade body”

    It tells the reader that the source of the upbeat figures is an industry trade body, not a neutral analyst.

  • “a promised £200 million grant turned into just £12m with loans making up the rest”

    It gives the exact figures behind its complaint, so the reader can judge the change in funding for themselves.

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from The Scotsman

  1. 3 NovSNP’s climate targets thrown into doubt over Acorn carbon capture ‘fairy tale’3.0
  2. 3 NovScottish energy jobs and billions of investment 'in jeopardy' over Labour renewables pivot3.0
  3. 1 NovThe hidden cost of Scotland's offshore wind bill0.0
  4. 31 OctHot and cold climate extremes push UK’s energy system to its limits0.0
  5. 30 OctOnly £12m of promised £200m of UK grant funding will be handed over to Acorn carbon capture project0.0

Everything we scored from The Scotsman