I WISH to congratulate the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) for scrapping the Feed in Tariff (FIT) scheme’s pre-accreditation element which provided developers with a financial security blanket for their hare-brained micro and mini- hydro schemes (“Subsidy rules hit hydro projects”, The Herald, October 19). We should scrap the whole idea of paying any subsidies for this junk electricity issuing from micro hydro, wind and tidal turbines. However, money should be paid out for every unbroken supply of renewable electricity at full capacity over a minimum of 24 hours.
Scotland has got to be one of the worst countries in the world for hydro; Norway is the best because it rains a lot and has glaciers that fill the rivers during the summer months. Hydro in Scotland works for about 25 per cent of the year, whereas Norway's hydro keeps on running for around 98%.
Fergus Ewing should wake up to the reality that renewable energy is just not working despite the Scottish Government crowing on and on about meeting this target and that target on renewables. I have written to Amber Rudd at DECC urging her to scrap all subsidies and payments for random intermittent electricity to force the Renewable Energy Industry to give us the right kind of electricity that is there for us 24-7-52.
This renewable energy gravy train has been on the tracks for more than 40 years and has still not produced a single unit of reliable and firm electricity. Despite Scotland having more than 7,000MW of installed renewable energy machines, which includes hydro built in the 50s and 60s, our country’s carbon foot continues to rise and has done so for the last three years, and will continue to do so, because intermittent renewable electricity is simply the wrong kind of electricity. It is time this particular train was put into the sidings of history and broken up for scrap.
It is time we moved on and started generating the right kind of electricity that will keep our lights on.
Andrew H Mackay,
Causewayside, Glenaldie, Tain.
YOUR report on the performance of ScottishPower owner Iberdrola includes reference to its Whitelees wind farm now "capable" of generating 539 mw (“Profits rise for Iberdrola”, the Herald, October 22).
It is ironic that in the same edition in your "50 years ago" section(From The Archives, October 22) there is reference to the proposed Dungeness nuclear station. It is quoted that “it will develop 1200 mw”.
A little research shows that Dungeness required a mere 0.5 sq km for a reliable 1200 mw.
By contrast Whitelees smothers 55 sq kms on a skyline visible for miles. And of course it only supplies much less than half of 50-year-old Dungeness’s generation and only when there is a wind, but not too strong of course and seldom when there is high pressure like winter cold spells.
Are we mad covering Scotland like this?
John A Taylor,
19 The Fieldings, Dunlop.
IT is quite astonishing that the UK Government gives the same winter allowance to everyone in the country irrespective of the average temperatures in the different areas. Having family based in West Sussex. my wife and I look frequently to compare the temperatures in that area with areas in Scotland. Even casual observation will show that on average the South of England is about five degrees warmer than Scotland. How does this equate with a caring Westminster Government who say they have the interests at heart of all social classes?
There is no dispute that the poorest in society spend a proportionately higher slice of their means on their heating bills.
If higher benefits can be paid to those living in London because of their costs why does such a scheme not exist to those living in fuel poverty in the coldest areas of the UK?
Sorry, I forgot … there aren't many votes for the Government in Scotland and the North of England.
Dave Biggart,
Southcroft, Knockbuckle Road, Kilmacolm.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel