The biggest problem we face is the ignorance of climate change deniers

Imagine an attic water tank full of water. Then carry on adding water until it overtops and floods. This imbalance creates problems. Those effects are polluting.

As far as atmospheric CO2 is concerned the problem is that the natural carbon cycle, which both creates and then absorbs the gas, is out of balance.

The source of the extra carbon can be easily identified from the isotopes measured in the atmosphere. It is anthropogenic - that is the 4%+ that is man-created.

The rate of these emissions has long outstripped the ability of natural systems and habitats to reabsorb them and adapt - and the rate at which this is occurring is still increasing - such that half of increased CO2 emissions have occurred in the last 40 years.

The 4% of human-created CO2 in the atmosphere cannot all be taken up by the natural cycle and reabsorbed, so has increased. The level of atmospheric CO2 has risen from 280ppm in 1800 to 415ppm in 2020.

Even some of that CO2 which can be reabsorbed is a problem. The oceans are becoming more acid, and as they warm, they expand and cause sea level rise. Worse still is that warmer water cannot hold as much dissolved gas, so oxygen levels fall, and marine life is adapted to things as they are, and not able to cope with rapid changes in acidity or gas concentrations.

Many of the complex impacts of this imbalance have yet to hit us ... salmon prefer cooler water and, fairly soon, increasing sea temperatures will start reducing the efficiency of Scottish salmon farming.

The 96% of atmospheric CO2 is not creating any polluting impacts because it is part of the natural carbon cycle, and in balance.

The 4% of human-created CO2 is polluting because it is creating a wide range of problems - from temperature rises to increased floods and wildfires and sea level rise. The loss of over half the coral reefs already is a huge impact because coral reefs support 25% of marine life world wide.

One of the nastiest "pollutants" we currently have in society is scientific ignorance, and I am afraid your regular climate change-denying correspondents are guilty of that egregious failing.

Tony Philpin, Isle of Gigha.

Read more: Unrealistic proposals from eco-zealots simply won't work

Heat pumps are not for me

IT seems that the jury on heat pumps has returned a Scottish "not proven"verdict on their viability and effectiveness.

Unless your house in Scotland is insulated to modern high standards you will not get a satisfactory performance from a heat pump system and will have wasted your money.

I will keep my gas boiler for the time being and wait to change to a green hydrogen boiler system when I can.

Dennis Forbes Grattan, Aberdeen.

The problem with lithium

THE UK charity Electrical Safety First said that current regulations are not enough to prevent catastrophic fires caused by the lithium batteries on e-bikes and e-scooters.

Lithium batteries release a similar amount of stored energy as the TNT contained in six hand grenades. Last year 116 fires in London involved e-bikes and e-scooters and resulted in eight deaths. Three people also died in Cambridge after an e-bike caught fire whilst being charged. Transport for London has banned e-scooters and e-bikes from its trains, buses and trams.

If the UK Government, against overwhelming public opinion, allows a million e-scooters on the roads early next year there will be more fires, more injuries and more deaths.

EVs have been banned from underground garages all over Europe because of numerous EV battery fires. Lithium battery fires cannot be extinguished but must be left to burn out. Is buying an e-bike or e-scooter or EV worth dying for?

Clark Cross, Linlithgow.

Harper right about the Greens

ROBIN Harper's resignation from the Scottish Greens is significant. It is a loss to politics in this country. He said the present group of Greens in Holyrood have "lost the plot" and who could possibly argue with that?

In his days as an MSP, Mr Harper was liked and most of all respected by everyone it seems, even those with whom he fundamentally disagreed.

I do not think a single member of the present Green group in Holyrood will ever be remembered in a positive sense at all, much the opposite, and as for respect, no chance whatsoever.

Alexander McKay, Edinburgh.

Why would expats return?

THE SNP is determined to offer offspring of expats Scottish citizenship after independence. Its leaders should ask themselves a question. Why did the Scots leave? Could it be for a better life and opportunities? Do they think that they will tell their children to join the queue to claim citizenship and rock up on our shores to nothing?

They seem to think that this is Utopia, however, when questioned about the cost of this latest independence paper, the response from a spokesman was: "We can spend our money on whatever we want".

A democracy is what they claim to be, more of a dictatorship if you ask me.

John Russell, Airdrie.

Hollow gesture on bank closure

HUMZA Yousaf has posted on social media his concerns about the Govan Bank of Scotland branch closing. But is this merely virtue-signalling?

His post suggests no solution whatsoever, presumably because he has no solution. Most of us regret bank branch closures and particularly the impact on older customers while we simultaneously carry out banking transactions online. The Bank of Scotland, wholly owned by Lloyds Banking Group, is, in turn, owned by shareholders. Ultimately, banks are businesses, not charities. Surely, the reality is that if the SNP administration wants to stop branch closures, it must intervene financially with all major banking groups operating within Scotland. Hypothetically, Mr Yousaf could hand taxpayer cash to banks to incentivise them to keep open branches.

Obviously, it would be financially imprudent and politically unacceptable for him to gift our money to highly profitable banks to enable them to pursue non-profitable commercial activities. Instead, all he seems capable of doing is desperately attempting to win votes by whinging about a longstanding business process, which, while arguably regrettable, is inevitable.

Martin Redfern, Melrose.

Read more: The problems in the inflated price of electricity

Don't punish car owners

THAT the SNP/Green coalition long ago lost its marbles has never been clearer.

Its failed attempt to introduce its Deposit Return Scheme which brought the company to manage it to the point of extinction, costing the public purse millions, its current project to force houses with gas boilers to convert to heat pumps looks like another unnecessary white elephant and the most recent bright idea - to fine motorists for parking on pavements, perhaps devised to recoup the money lost through the demise of DRS - all reveal a waywardness of political thinking far removed from realpolitik.

How ludicrous the ban on parking on pavements is when you consider that most roads in both council house and residential areas were constructed without any anticipation of the explosion of automobile ownership.

Those roads can just about accommodate two lanes of traffic, one in either direction. That necessitates parking on pavements to minimise any bottlenecks which otherwise would occur. To fine motorists for trying to improve traffic flow in such heavily built up areas should never have been countenanced .

The proponents of such an idea may argue that parking on pavements restrict pedestrian movement especially where prams or buggies are concerned. Most motorists do their best to leave sufficient space on the pavements to allow for the safe passage of such vehicles.

To consider punishing car owners for their consideration of the needs of both mechanised and pedestrian traffic has to be considered the height of absurdity when the problem did not originate with them but with the lack of foresight by the town planners of yore who had no crystal ball and so no powers of clairvoyance.

Denis Bruce, Bishopbriggs.