Article

Lack of practical measures in Green rhetoric on energy policy

AS with so many of their policy positions, Robin Harper of the Greens (Letters, May 31) chooses to ignore the fact that, like so much of the Green policy rhetoric, their approach to the vexed question of nuclear power and climate issues is one which would reduce us to living in mud huts and eating grass.

AS with so many of their policy positions, Robin Harper of the Greens (Letters, May 31) chooses to ignore the fact that, like so much of the Green policy rhetoric, their approach to the vexed question of nuclear power and climate issues is one which would reduce us to living in mud huts and eating grass. His somewhat naive and juvenile attempts to distract us from the total lack of realistic and practical measures in Green rhetoric by attacking the Liberal Democrats for what they may or may not do in 12 months serve only to highlight their increasing desperation to get attention from a voting public who can actually tell the difference between rhetoric and delivery. Scare tactics in search of votes demean all political parties, including fringe ones like the Greens.

While by no means completely delivered yet, the LibDems' manifesto commitments to tackling the green challenges facing Scotland include a 20m investment in renewables and the setting of some of the highest targets for greenhouse emissions in Europe.

New nuclear power stations in Scotland are not on the agenda for the LibDems, as no-one has come up with a demonstrably safe way of dealing with the waste generated. Rather than engage in pointless... more [truncated due to possible copyright]  

AS with so many of their policy positions, Robin Harper of the Greens (Letters, May 31) chooses to ignore the fact that, like so much of the Green policy rhetoric, their approach to the vexed question of nuclear power and climate issues is one which would reduce us to living in mud huts and eating grass. His somewhat naive and juvenile attempts to distract us from the total lack of realistic and practical measures in Green rhetoric by attacking the Liberal Democrats for what they may or may not do in 12 months serve only to highlight their increasing desperation to get attention from a voting public who can actually tell the difference between rhetoric and delivery. Scare tactics in search of votes demean all political parties, including fringe ones like the Greens.
 
While by no means completely delivered yet, the LibDems' manifesto commitments to tackling the green challenges facing Scotland include a £20m investment in renewables and the setting of some of the highest targets for greenhouse emissions in Europe.
 
New nuclear power stations in Scotland are not on the agenda for the LibDems, as no-one has come up with a demonstrably safe way of dealing with the waste generated. Rather than engage in pointless speculation, perhaps the Greens would do more for Scotland's environment if they would contribute positively to possible solutions to the storage of waste from the current crop of nuclear power stations, a topic on which they have been remarkably silent.

Hugh O'Donnell, Cumbernauld.
 
John Stewart argues that the approaching blackouts due to lack of electricity-generating capacity can be postponed by a 10-year extension of the life of Hunterston (Letters, May 30). Robin Harper, Green MSP, in reply (June 1) says that because we use power in other forms (cars, aircraft, etc) we will not notice when what he acknowledges as "only" one-third of our electricity is cut off.
 
I believe that a new reactor would be cheaper in anything but the short term and safer and would certainly produce less reactor waste than running the current one so far beyond its design life. Whatever the technical case for such an extension, your readers should be informed that at their recent conference the LibDems not only opposed new generators but specifically rejected an amendment which would have allowed such an extension for Hunterston. In which case Hunterston will close in 2011 and blackouts can be expected shortly thereafter.
 
This is in accord with the policy of Nicol Stephen who declared, during a recent BBC debate, that "nuclear is the easy answer" and went on to explain that it must thus be avoided at all costs since if it were allowed to work the electorate would never accept all the massive subsidies for wind, etc. Personally, I do not consider that position can reasonably be called "liberal".
 
Perhaps Scotland deserves some political leaders who do not believe that uncomfortable facts will go away if they bury their heads in the sand.

Neil Craig, Glasgow


Source: http://www.theherald.co.uk...

JUN 2 2006
https://www.windaction.org/posts/2896-lack-of-practical-measures-in-green-rhetoric-on-energy-policy
back to top