Emotive topics of fracking and Brexit
Over the past couple of years, the letters page has been dominated by two highly emotive topics – fracking and Brexit.
Many letters have been written with passion and, in some cases, venom, but interestingly neither has actually got underway yet.
In the case of fracking, one side tell us it will lead to untold damage to health and the environment, whilst the other side tell us it will slash our energy costs, making us all better off.
My suggestion is to begin fracking as soon as possible at a designated site, and the operation should be closely monitored by people from both sides of the argument.
If the extraction of shale gas is successful, then all well and good, and conversely if it brings serious health and environmental issues, then close it down immediately.
End of argument!
In the case of Brexit, again so much rhetoric and hot air has been generated by both sides ,but it does seem to me that many of our politicians from both sides are more interested in scoring political points rather than respecting the wishes of the electorate.
For my part, I voted in favour of Brexit, and on balance, I still hold that view, but I have one concern.
As I am about to become a septuagenarian, will I still be eligible to claim my free European alpine ski pass?
Please give us visitor permits
Living in Maudland Bank, near the heart of Preston, we, the residents, have been subjected to parking restrictions because of the university.
Being a registered disabled person and a senior citizen, and having, despite my disability, earned my retirement from a 35-year railway career, my mobility is now deteriorating.
I now rely on a care company with four visits of one hour a day.
Due to the restricted parking in Maudland Bank, I approached Lancashire County Council with regard to visitor permits.
My hopes were dashed when they informed me they do not regard Maudland Bank as a residential area, despite reminding them that there are houses and flats in Maudland Bank, presumably occupied by residents.
How do they justify saying that area is not residential?
The carers who visit me daily spend no longer than one hour with me before moving on to their next call.
I did manage to resolve my problem for the carers, having approached a devoted county councillor who referred me to a resident who owns a small parking area for six cars in Maudland Bank.
I recently approached a chiropodist due to the NHS no longer prepared to do home visits.
She tried to come but gave up, not being able to find anywhere to park.
G D Pearce
Be realistic over energy
Rebecca Long-Bailey, Shadow Business and Energy Secretary, put in an appearance outside the Cuadrilla site recently, where she told anti-fracking protestors that a future Labour government would ban shale gas and deliver 60 per cent of energy from renewables by 2030.
Total energy in the UK includes electricity, heat for homes and businesses, and transport – incorporating cars, buses, planes and trains. Like it or not, most of that energy is supplied by fossil fuels.
The earliest we could see a Labour government would be 2020. It’s not feasible to suggest that, in just 10 years, it could totally transform the UK’s energy systems to run on 60 per cent renewables.
In fact, it’s not even all that likely that we’ll be able to get 60 per cent of just our electricity from renewables, 100 per cent of the time, by 2030.
It would require not only enormous additional onshore and offshore wind capacity and much more solar, but also vast arrays of giant batteries to give us some way of storing power when it’s generated for use later.
I’m a big advocate of renewables, pictured, but I’m also a realist. Ambition is great, however, if it can’t be achieved, it risks turning people off.
The basic fact is that while we continue to build renewables and start to think about grid-scale battery storage, we’re going to carry on using a lot of gas. It’s better if that’s British gas, including from under my home on the Fylde, instead of imported gas.
Independent energy consultant
What a terrible tragedy the Alfie Evans case is. What right has anyone to deny the parents, in their eyes, the right to explore any means possible in helping their son to life.
When a mature person pleads for the opposite, the right to die, euthanasia, that request is dismissed out of hand by the judiciary.
Terry Palmer via email