Energy Secretary misses the point over turbine planning

MY joy at the news that the Government, at long last, is planning to give local residents more say on whether or not to accept wind turbines in their locality, was marred by the interview with Ed Davey (Yorkshire Post, June 8).

In this, he seems to think that if wind farm developers offered even bigger bribes to local communities then any resistance would rapidly disappear. Had he studied the many polls taken throughout the county and country, he would have seen that, despite existing significant bribes, the voting has been most convincingly against wind turbines and it has been only the Government Inspector producing his trump card that has overturned the wishes of locals.

The possibility that developers may offer a new roof on the village hall every other year will, if anything, make locals more determined to oppose the turbines.

As the Energy Minister, I would have thought his overriding priority should be to ensure that households and industry receive a reliable energy supply at a reasonable price to reduce fuel poverty and make industry more competitive in the global market place.

Instead he seems to be almost gloating that the ridiculously high subsidies to developers, and thus land owners, is to be maintained to provide a nominal, intermittent energy supply, when those monies could be put to much better use invested in nuclear, shale gas and clean coal energy which will continue to form the backbone of our energy supply. He has recently snubbed the CCS at Don Valley Power Project which had promises of large grants from the EU and significant investments from global companies to provide low carbon energy using Hatfield coal, generating 4,000 skilled jobs locally.

Hopefully, someone will take him to see the massive changes and developments at Ferrybridge, Drax and Eggborough, all geared to provide up to 20 per cent of the UK’s energy whilst dramatically reducing the carbon emissions.

Hopefully too, if he travels via the M62 to Ferrybridge and South on the A1, he will see what a beautiful landscape we have, one which we do not wish to see desecrated for the sake of a very minuscule amount of electricity which benefits solely the developers and land owners.

From: Philip Wilks, Lumley Street, Castleford, West Yorkshire.

I AM a born worrier and worry about the sanity of the British people, and have decided not to worry about the truths and non-truths regarding climate change politics, of which we have no real proof.

What I do know is that this small country of ours is enormously rich in coal reserves, and cannot afford to waste this national wealth and pretend that we will save the world, when our economic competitors of the rest of the world are more concerned with their own economic advantages.

I note that Germany is building new coal-fired power stations and China is totally reliant on coal, still enormously expanding its use, and they have no intention of abandoning it, but are intent on stealing our clean coal technology.

It is bewildering that the last remaining deep mine, Kellingley, is being considered for closure. This is tantamount to economic suicide. Coal has been demonised for political reasons and should not be abandoned at this last stage.

What is the difference between releasing carbon from coal, and releasing carbon from gas by shale fracking? Our political leaders should decide that coal will be used, and leave it to others to achieve this in an environmentally friendly manner, through clean coal technology and carbon capture storage.

Energy security will be seriously jeopardised if we totally abandon our own grown coal and rely on foreign imports.

From: Dr Bev Wilkinson, White Grove, Leeds.

LAST week’s Energy Bill appears to be consigning Britain to another Dark Age (John Redwood, Yorkshire Post, June 10). Does anybody remember voting for the doubling of our energy bills and a rationing of their energy usage?

This appears to be our fate in order that our politicians can continue to pander to European Union directives forcing us to shut down productive coal-fired plants while Germany writes the rules to allow it to commission major new coal-fired power capacity.

No wonder Nigel Farage is having a field day at the polls, being the only party leader not to be dazzled in the phoney green headlights of the carbon-free energy myth that is causing the country to swerve into energy impoverished suicide.

Only Ukip seems to be prepared to spell out the reality that our draconian carbon reduction targets are clearly ill thought out and in fact, by all reasonable calculations, incompatible with affordable and available power for this country.

CO2 reduction may well be a worthy aspiration but not at the expense of our national productive capacity, especially since we are only responsible for around 1.6 per cent of global CO2 emissions.