Climate fears cloud sound judgment

A NATIONAL energy policy is among the most basic responsibilities we require of a government. Ideally, the supply of electricity should be constant, adequate, reliable and economical.

In response to any suggestion that our energy policy is in any way inadequate (Bernard Ingham, Yorkshire Post, May 29), we are fed the well-worn notions that the production of carbon dioxide is the ultimate crime against the planet, that fossil fuels must be avoided at all costs.

But trees are our greatest blessing in that they absorb nasty carbon into their structure and give back lovely oxygen.

So we chop them down and burn them in our power stations in place of the hateful coal and oil, thus causing them to release their stores of carbon dioxide. However, it is planned to eliminate this dangerous by-product by pumping the gas under pressure into undersea fissures in the rock. The process has yet to be proved workable. I’d imagine the gas would escape as fast as it was pumped in, gas under pressure having this tendency, or if held captive would prove a growing problem to future generations. As an energy policy for meeting a shortage that is staring us in the face, all the above appears, dare I say, airy-fairy nonsense.

An honest explanation is due, preferably avoiding such theories as global warming, the greenhouse effect, rising sea levels and the destruction of the planet, but taking account of variations in cosmic and solar radiation. Unless there is a means of controlling these rather basic forces I think the policy should be to leave well alone.

Maths shows
folly of speed

From: Allan Davies, Heathfield Court, Grimsby, North East Lincs.

JOANNE Ginley’s article (Yorkshire Post, May 27) prompts me to set out a few simple calculations based on details from the Highway Code.

The stopping distances of cars travelling at 40, 30 and 20mph are given as (in feet) 40+80=120, 30+45=75 and 20+20=40 respectively with thinking and braking distances shown separately.

Simple observation shows that a car at 40mph will still (just) be travelling at that speed as one at 20mph comes to a halt. Simple arithmetic shows that such a vehicle as it comes to a halt will require a distance of 75ft before its speed falls to 30mph, and 100 feet before falling to 20mph. Likewise, one at 30mph will cover a distance of 55 feet before its speed falls to 20mph.

Since the severity of an accident, and in particular in a vehicle-pedestrian collision increases disproportionately as speed increases, we need to recognise the contribution higher speeds make to road accidents.

Can Coun Merrett help in providing details of the manner in which the probability of a fatality increases as speed increases?

Folly of war in
Middle East

From: Geoffrey Thorpe, Lister Avenue, East Bowling, Bradford.

IT seems that governments never learn. Why is it that the British Government wants to interfere in Syria? (Bill Carmichael, Yorkshire Post, May 31)

Tony Blair and co involved Britain in Iraq and Afganistan and many British troops were killed and seriously injured.

The British supported Saddam Hussein in his fight against Iran and then we ended up invading Iraq because of faulty intelligence.

This country is now unstable with people being killed and seriously injured.

Over 200 years ago Britain tried to rule Afganistan and failed. Russia tried not too many years ago and failed. We read in the press and hear on the news that terrorist groups are fighting with the people that Britain and France want to arm.

If that is so how long will it be before troops are sent to Syria and troops die in another unwinable situation?

Prince bangs
gong for status

From: John Watson, Hutton Hill, Leyburn.

AS a lifelong monarchist, I was intrigued by the regalia Charles had pinned on his chest at the State Opening of Parliament. I realise that the Prince of Wales has status to maintain and that the regalia goes with the job.

The Order of Merit, of which there are only 25 members in the country, the Order of the Bath with Star, and the Order of the Thistle. He is ranked as Admiral of the Fleet, Field Marshall, and Marshall of the RAF.

I wonder what some ex-servicemen will be thinking, especially those who had to campaign for medals?

I think dressing down like continental royals would go down very well.