Coal should still be taken seriously as a source of energy

YOUR Editorial (Yorkshire Post, March 28), saying coal should not be disregarded, makes the point well of coal’s importance to the energy fuel mix in the UK and why it should still be included and taken seriously.

All the green options made little contribution, to the recent peak demand caused by that extreme bad weather. Wind turbines and solar could not even be used during the recent Arctic winds, but coal reserves – which you can store at the power station – not only generated near 50 per cent of electricity but also at 50 per cent of the cost of gas.

This was certainly at considerably less cost than 
the recently imported gas 
and due to electricity demand, 
the coal stations, are running harder and due to EU policies, which our successive Governments accepted, will be closing earlier than expected.
Has anybody seen an audit, to justify our taxes and policies recently?

The point of imported coal is also well made as the UK has more than four billion tonnes of named coal reserves, which at 
the present rate of consumption of 50 million tonnes a year, could make us a self-sufficient unsubsidised source of indigenous energy for a considerable time.

Combined with a carbon capture and storage system, it would release more oil from the North Sea reserves and would be a great step forward to avoiding the increasing fuel poverty which becomes more evident by the day because of the cost of subsidised green energy. How many jobs would that create?

The recent award of the carbon capture and storage competition to the Peterhead Gas Project and Drax’s new coal-fired power station, while positive in principle, will only be commissioned after the next election if the Conservatives get back in. So what are Labour’s policies, if they win and what is their plan?

Around the world and in Britain, as the Editorial explains, coal is always the base and most flexible fuel and to delay carbon capture and storage, will only ensure a loss of security of supply which every electricity consumer deserves.

We continue to procrastinate about a new nuclear power station at Hinckley and try to reach agreement with EDF, owned by the French government, who require the Government to guarantee a price for their electricity of double what we pay now and will not be operational for up to 10 years. What price then? A view of most commentators is why don’t we do it ourselves and keep the money in Britain. Remember the CEGB, this wouldn’t have happened under their watch.

The general principle of an equal balance of power generation of coal, gas and nuclear, plus 10 per cent green power ensuring security of supply and price, has been compromised by the Government’s desire to be “the greenest government ever”, resulting only in huge subsidies to those inefficient sources at a cost to the individual and industry through green taxes, at a time when neither group can afford it.