Energy Holy Grail
I have to take issue with Tim Flinn’s perspective on energy issues (Letters, 6 October). He criticises Clark Cross for pointing out the simple but uncomfortable reality that the electricity generated by renewables (primarily wind) singularly fails to deliver a regular reliable service to industrial and domestic consumers. It should be abundantly clear to anyone who does not see the world through green-tinted spectacles that for the foreseeable future the reality is that we must remain largely reliant on fossil fuels in order to allow modern and developing economies to function.
It is said that necessity is the mother of invention but the current obsessions with all things electric powered by intermittent energy are nothing better than stopgap measures. As fossil fuel use is gradually scaled back over the decades, more rational technological advances will fill the vacuum. Thus it could well be with nuclear power. The disposal of radioactive waste has long been an emotive issue and the nuclear industry is working on practical solutions that could both minimise radioactive waste as well as provide high density energy with a much greater degree of safety. Meanwhile, the International Experimental Nuclear Reactor in southern France – a co-operative venture involving 35 nations – is working on massive technological advances to replicate the awesome power of the sun by fusing the atom, as opposed to splitting it, as is currently the case. This would be humankind’s Holy Grail, providing limitless zero carbon energy with minimal short term radioactive waste.
With COP26 just around the corner it is baffling to learn that the Government declines to allow representatives of the nuclear industry to take part in any discussions when the hot topic of the day is focused on net zero carbon emissions.
Neil J Bryce, Kelso, Berwickshire
Get real
Tim Flinn wrongly accuses regular correspondent Clark Cross of mocking “renewable green energy” whilst he “lauds fossil and nuclear”.Like most of your correspondents who know something about the subject of energy, it’s not so much that they mock renewable energy, but rather the absurd claims made for it by a combination of vested interests and poorly informed environmental worriers.In Mr Flinn’s case, the same can be said of his suggestion that finite fossil and nuclear fuels are in danger of running out any time soon. The truth is that there are sufficient reserves of these fuels to last for many, many decades to come, which is maybe just as well for the proponents of renewables because not only are these materials essential for the production of every aspect of wind farm construction, but are, of course, necessary to provide base load generation for the frequent occasions when the sun doesn’t shine or the wind doesn’t blow.The renewables industry perpetuates the falsehood that we have “enough renewable generation for x zillion homes” but as they well know, their false claims refer to installed capacity, not actual power generated.Mr Flinn asks Clark Cross what he intends to use when the finite fuels run out. I’m sure Mr Cross would agree that that particular threat is not imminent, but without them, the threat of power cuts is not only likely but certain, particularly when we consider that during last month, which was not atypical, renewables contributed a decidedly unspectacular 18 per cent of requirement to the National Grid.
Alan Thomson, Strontian, Highland
0 Comments