SIR – If we had a sensible government – that is, neither Labour nor any of the so-called Conservative administrations between 2022 and 2024 – we would not have been buying gas from Russia and contributing to its war chest (Leading Article, January 2).
Instead, we would have been extracting more oil and gas from Britain’s North Sea reserves (and, hopefully, undertaking fracking projects too). We might even have exported some energy to our European neighbours, reducing their reliance on Russian supplies.
Britain’s headlong – and futile – rush towards net zero has much to answer for, and not just the stupid, self-inflicted increases in energy prices.
John Waine
Nuneaton, Warwickshire
SIR – I’d be interested to know how much energy was generated by turbines and solar panels over the foggy, windless festive period.
Christopher Mann
Bristol
SIR – Matt Oliver’s article (“Why Germany’s wind fiasco is a stark warning for Ed Miliband”, telegraph.co.uk, December 27) points out the cost of linking offshore wind to the grid.
Instead of spending vast amounts on infrastructure for an unreliable supply, surely it would be better to build small modular reactors (SMRs) on land close to where energy is needed, making use of existing power lines.
The recently closed coal power plant at Ratcliffe-on-Soar, for example, occupied 270 hectares. There are plans to turn it into a green technology hub. Five SMRs would be a better bet, and take up less space.
Lord Clanmorris
London W8
SIR – Your report (“Ban hybrid cars or make Britain a laughing stock, Starmer urged”, January 2) quotes the CEO of an electric vehicle lobby group who wants a new law to force people to do what many regard as extremely foolish – namely, to buy an EV.
The green case for these vehicles is far from proven, as it is not clear whether the full cycle of production of all the essential components uses fewer resources and creates less pollution than the possible alternatives. They are also very expensive, and it is said there will not be enough power in the grid to meet the enormous increase in demand.
As for the calls to ban hybrid cars, I would argue that this technology is a reasonable compromise until we find something better.
My wife’s hybrid manages 65 miles per gallon, while my (admittedly larger) diesel achieves less than 40. And the claim that hybrid technology undermines Britain’s “world-leading zero-emission vehicle policy” stretches credulity. A leader is only a leader if there are followers, and who are ours? China? India?
The intemperate pursuit of net zero, despite Britain’s relatively modest emissions, is going to cost us all dear.
Tim Nicholson
Cranbrook, Kent
SIR – If we had a sensible government – that is, neither Labour nor any of the so-called Conservative administrations between 2022 and 2024 – we would not have been buying gas from Russia and contributing to its war chest (Leading Article, January 2).
Instead, we would have been extracting more oil and gas from Britain’s North Sea reserves (and, hopefully, undertaking fracking projects too). We might even have exported some energy to our European neighbours, reducing their reliance on Russian supplies.
Britain’s headlong – and futile – rush towards net zero has much to answer for, and not just the stupid, self-inflicted increases in energy prices.
John Waine
Nuneaton, Warwickshire
SIR – I’d be interested to know how much energy was generated by turbines and solar panels over the foggy, windless festive period.
Christopher Mann
Bristol
SIR – Matt Oliver’s article (“Why Germany’s wind fiasco is a stark warning for Ed Miliband”, telegraph.co.uk, December 27) points out the cost of linking offshore wind to the grid.
Instead of spending vast amounts on infrastructure for an unreliable supply, surely it would be better to build small modular reactors (SMRs) on land close to where energy is needed, making use of existing power lines.
The recently closed coal power plant at Ratcliffe-on-Soar, for example, occupied 270 hectares. There are plans to turn it into a green technology hub. Five SMRs would be a better bet, and take up less space.
Lord Clanmorris
London W8
SIR – Your report (“Ban hybrid cars or make Britain a laughing stock, Starmer urged”, January 2) quotes the CEO of an electric vehicle lobby group who wants a new law to force people to do what many regard as extremely foolish – namely, to buy an EV.
The green case for these vehicles is far from proven, as it is not clear whether the full cycle of production of all the essential components uses fewer resources and creates less pollution than the possible alternatives. They are also very expensive, and it is said there will not be enough power in the grid to meet the enormous increase in demand.
As for the calls to ban hybrid cars, I would argue that this technology is a reasonable compromise until we find something better.
My wife’s hybrid manages 65 miles per gallon, while my (admittedly larger) diesel achieves less than 40. And the claim that hybrid technology undermines Britain’s “world-leading zero-emission vehicle policy” stretches credulity. A leader is only a leader if there are followers, and who are ours? China? India?
The intemperate pursuit of net zero, despite Britain’s relatively modest emissions, is going to cost us all dear.
Tim Nicholson
Cranbrook, Kent