This is rubbish, and so it can be proven. According to these Scottish Executive/DTI figures, Scotland's total electricity output is 45,517 GWh. Of this, nuclear accounts for 15,863 GWh, or just under 35% of total output. A lot, but nothing like half of Scottish output. It's not even half of Scotland's requirements, as you find if you delve further into the figures.
Of Scotland's total electricity output, just 32,068 GWh is consumed in Scotland. Some 5,208 GWh is lost (mostly in transmission); while 8,034 GWh is exported to England and Northern Ireland through the two interconnectors.
Hunterson 'B' itself produces something like 7900 GWh, or just under 50% of Scotland's total nuclear output (the remainder coming from Torness). In other words, when Hunterston closed, it would have been enough to reduce exports to almost zero, unless the 'slack' was taken up by excess capacity elsewhere.
But common sense should tell us that if nuclear accounts for half our requirements, and Hunterston accounts for half of our nuclear output (which it does), then Hunterston alone would be responsible for meeting some 25% of our needs. Therefore, the outage would have reduced Scotland's capacity to just 75% of normal levels, which would have meant the nightmare of the lights going out becoming a reality.
Did you notice that happening last year? Me neither. This 50% from nuclear figure only holds if you assume that unlike every other form of generation in Scotland, nothing is lost in transmission, and further that it's only coal, hydro and wind power etc which we export.
Lies, damn lies and statistics, eh?
