Why neglect clean-coal technology but promote wind farms?

JACK Blanchard refers to the Committee on Climate Change as an independent body set up by Whitehall to advise on low carbon issues (Yorkshire Post, May 25).

The report goes on to say that it is vital to have in place a Government commitment to de-carbonise the electricity sector by 2030 to remove uncertainties, thus enabling Siemens to move forward in establishing an offshore wind turbine factory along the Humber estuary 
and prevent the loss of other major investments in the 
area from multi-national companies.

It will be recalled that the Government, probably with advice from Lord Deben’s Committee, turned their back on the huge overseas investment (plus £400m of grants from the EU) lined up for the CCS at Don Valley Power Project, the largest and most advanced scheme in Europe.

This project, as well as potentially supplying a reliable source of low carbon energy to support tens of thousands of households from a ready supply of local coal, would provide over 4,000 skilled jobs in the area and should also attract heavy industry with its ability to greatly reduce their carbon emissions.

With the massive developments at Drax, Ferrybridge and Eggborough Power Stations which between them are developing CCS, biomass burning and black bag waste burning, this will enable them to continue to supply some 15-19 per cent of the country’s energy needs while significantly reducing the carbon levels.

To enhance investment in low carbon energy supplies, Lord Deben should be advising his Government colleagues to halt the compensation payments (said to be £1bn in 2012) to onshore wind farm operators for generating electricity not required, and put these monies towards new nuclear and clean coal developments which, with gas, will still be our major and most reliable source of low carbon energy.

From: ME Wright, Grove Road, Harrogate, North Yorkshire.

GORDON Lawrence mentions “paucity of investment” by the previously nationalised
industries (Yorkshire Post, 
May 25).

We are invited to infer that privatisation has put that to rights. If that is so, why, in connection with energy, do we increasingly hear reference to “crumbling infrastructure”?

Secure in the knowledge that, like the banks, they cannot be allowed to fail, have the 
privateers spent most of the last 30 years on the real business of feathering their own and their shareholders’ nests by a cynical process of rocketing prices and obfuscation?