LETTER: Relying on renewable energy not realistic

Readers' Letters
Readers' Letters
3
Have your say

IN his column (Mail, January 29) Iain Wright said that fracking for gas in this country must be carried out in accordance with the strictest possible environmental safeguards.

He is right to make that point.

However, he went on to say that “pinning all hopes of energy security on shale gas would be wrong”.

I’m not aware that anyone has made that suggestion, and Iain may want to explain why he made that comment.

Many people would like renewable energy sources, such as wind farms, solar panels and tidal power, to be the main providers of the world’s energy requirements, but that is not a realistic possibility.

The International Energy Agency, in Paris, forecasts that world energy use, that is oil, coal, gas, nuclear and renewables, will increase by 42 per cent over the next 25 years.

Oil will then be the source of 28 per cent of global energy requirements, with coal in second place, with 27 per cent, natural gas – conventional and fracked – will provide 24 per cent and nuclear six per cent.

All other forms of energy, including wind and solar, will provide the remaining 15 per cent.

So global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions will continue to increase dramatically.

Britain only produces about 1.5 per cent of the world’s CO2 emissions.

Even if we could reduce that by half, by spending colossal amounts of money on many tens of thousands of wind turbines and solar panels, the effect on global CO2 emissions would be negligible.

Most of our politicians in Westminster, Tory, Labour and Lib Dems, are determined to continue to subsidise wind and solar energy “to prevent catastrophic global warming”.

They are mistaken.

And our electricity bills are rising as a result of their confused thinking.

Jim Allan,

Hartlepool.