TCW
Sunday, February 25, 2024
TCW
HomeReaders CommentsLetters to the Editor

Letters to the Editor

-

PLEASE send your letters (as short as you like) to info@conservativewoman.co.uk and mark them ‘for possible publication’. We need your name and if possible, a county address, eg Yorkshire or London. We will include biographical details if you volunteer them. Letters may be shortened.

***

A valuable debate

Dear Editor

Your debate with David Selbourne is valuable. For me, part of its value lies in enabling me to understand better why so many people passionately supported the disastrous mishandling of Covid. It is a good reminder, because I generally feel that anger and disrespect are unhelpful. They fuel fires of incomprehension.

Kathy of course came out on top in the debate, being so well-informed, but David deserves credit for listening.

At the root of the problem is the widespread ignorance of how corrupt medicine has become, now that it is run by bureaucrats and big business rather than at the human level of the doctor-patient relationship. That is one of the take-home lessons of the HIV/Aids scandal that I have written about in How HIV/Aids Set the Stage for the Covid Crisisavailable now on Amazon, and to be launched soon with a series of articles in TCW.


Neville Hodgkinson


***

RAF Scampton: Shame on the lily-livered  bureaucrats

Dear Editor

Many thanks to Henry Getley for his timely and poignant article on the 80th anniversary of the Dambusters raid. I saw the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight Lancaster as it flew over the RAF Museum at Hendon tonight and that wonderful aeroplane remains a fitting tribute not only to the Dambusters, but to the 57,861 men and women of Bomber Command who made the ultimate sacrifice.

My mother’s first fiancé was a Wireless Operator in a Lanc of 49 Squadron, based at RAF Fiskerton, Lincolnshire. He and the rest of the crew of JB 701 were killed when they were shot down on July 29 1944 as they were returning from a raid on Stuttgart. They are all buried in a Commonwealth War Graves Commission cemetery at Saint-Martin-sur-Oreuse, France. And to think that the old RAF Scampton will be housing our 21st century enemies . . . it is a deliberate decision to cancel more of our history because it doesn’t fit with the current political agenda.  Excellent plans, including funding, for the future development of this iconic airfield which would have supported local businesses and residents have been shelved by the MoD. I’d like the bureaucrats who made this decision to stand under the Lancasters and imagine what terrors and dreadful deaths those crews encountered on their nightly trips to liberate Occupied Europe. May the ghosts of the Dambusters – and Nigger – haunt these lily-livered civil servants for the rest of their lives!

Sue Palin

***

The last election?

Dear Editor

If it were possible to arrange for Labour to form a minority government in 2024 propped up by the Liberal Democrats, it might work out to everyone’s advantage. The Lib Dems want proportional  representation (PR) as the price for their support. This means that subsequent elections would probably result in more Green MPs but other candidates would also have a chance of getting into government. The Conservatives have shown they have no intention of implementing Brexit and seem not to care about any of their voters. Not only have they betrayed the ‘Red Wall’ voters who gave them a 80-seat majority but they don’t seem bothered about their usual supporters, small business , farmers and the ‘home counties set’ either. These people have no way of expressing their views at present as FPTP only favours the two-party system. PR has worked out rather well in Europe, noticeably Italy, so why not here?

Kathleen Carr

Sheffield

***

BBC misleads on wind power

Dear Editor

A recent article (in the ‘Climate’ section of the BBC News website) had the headline ‘Wind is the main source of electricity for the first time’. It will not come as a surprise to anyone to learn that the headline is totally misleading. The article was based on information given to the BBC by Imperial College. Using the same data source as Imperial College I found that the actual figures for the first quarter of the year were: wind 28.6 per cent; gas 34.3 per cent.

Lord Clanmorris

***

Let’s get fracking

Dear Editor

The Energy and Climate Change Intelligence Unit (ECIU) said the average UK home could be buying foreign gas worth around £500 a year by 2035. They should drop the word ‘Intelligence’ from their title. They did not mention that the UK has huge proven reserves of shale gas which would make us independent of hostile nations and reduce energy bills. Politicians and the public have been brainwashed by the anti-fracking brigade and Friends of the Earth. The Advertising Standards Authority accused FoE of scaremongering and making false claims in a leaflet campaigning against fracking, saying fracking used toxic chemicals, caused cancer, water to catch fire, poisoned underground water, increased radioactivity and caused ‘earthquakes’. Liverpool University equated the tremors experienced during fracking trials as equivalent to sitting down heavily on an office chair. The Advertising Standard Authority ordered FoE never again to make such unproven and scaremongering allegations, and FoE agreed not to repeat the claims. Friends of the Earth, a registered charity, avoided having its charitable status cancelled by claiming that the anti-fracking campaign was carried out by a non-charitable company called Friends of the Earth Limited. How convenient. The EU recently declared natural gas and nuclear to be green energy so let’s get fracking.

Clark Cross

Linlithgow

***


EVs: Reality check (1)

Dear Editor

Those who have been lured by the siren call of politicians and environmental pressure groups into the belief that a swift transition to electric vehicles (EVs) can help to steer us away from dangerous climate change on to the road to Net Zero should reflect on some uncomfortable realities. 

The current generation of lithium batteries that power EVs are manufactured principally from either hard rock spodumene in Australia or from salt brines in South America. In the first instance it requires 500 tonnes of ore to produce just one tonne of lithium, a process that emits a staggering 7,500 tonnes of CO2. Alternatively if lithium is sourced from the salt flats of Chile where the rainfall is a scant 3mm per year, it requires 500,000 gallons (2,273,000 litres) of extremely precious water to produce a tonne of lithium. This is resulting in appalling impacts on human health, general wellbeing and environmental destruction. Regardless of such consequences it is little wonder that even as the supply of lithium carbonate currently outstrips demand at £33,000 per tonne, investors are enjoying 400 per cent returns and Chile’s chief exporter has earned a quarterly revenue of US$1.6billion. While we’re familiar with the term ‘blood diamonds’, could the same apply to lithium which has become known as ‘white gold’?

It is projected that by 2040 there may 2billion cars in the world of which around four hundred million (20 per cent) will be EVs. This would replace just 6 per cent of petroleum demand and would not register any reduction in the global temperature. When considered in addition to the battery-centric and the green energy future envisaged by misguided policy-makers, mining for the vital lithium, graphite, rare earths and cobalt would need to increase by at least a staggering 500 per cent. Then there is the massive unresolved question of end-of-use disposal to consider.

It is obvious that hydrocarbons are a finite resource but their high energy density means that they will have to remain a vital component of transition for the foreseeable future. Instead of the massive subsidies that support unreliable energy technologies such as wind and solar and the deluded promotion of EVs that all hide behind their zero emissions smokescreens, funding should be directed instead to basic, radical research and development.

Neil J Bryce

Kelso

***


EVs: Reality check (2)

Dear Editor 

In case anyone tries to sell you an EV:

You can fill an ICE car for a 400-mile journey in three minutes, paying at the pump. It can take more than 20 times that to charge an EV with a 100kW charger – if you can find one that works where there is no queue. That assumes you get 4 miles per kWh.

On that basis you’ll need 20 times the number of petrol/diesel pumps plus much more space, per service station. 32 x 100kW points per service station would add 3.2MW to substation maximum demand. Increased by 20 times would add 64MW – enough for a town of 64,000 people.

But EV makers recommend that battery charge should not fall below 20 per cent and should not be charged to above 80 per cent, leaving 60 per cent of charge available. Battery performance falls off with ambient temperature, with age and the number of charge/discharge cycles that it is put through. So after a few years we can expect the available energy to have reduced below 50 per cent of nominal.

Thus Tesla Model X with a nominal 360-mile range EV might do only 180 miles in practice during daylight hours and with an ambient temperature of well above zero. On a cold night with heating and lights on, you would be better not to set out on a journey of much more than 120 miles, ie around 33 per cent of the nominal range, if your battery is a few years old.

The UK is to get 300,000 charging points on the strategic road network by the early 30s, with a prospective 30GW increase in grid demand, plus another 30GW due to heat pump load. That totals more than the current grid system maximum demand.

Then don’t forget that around 1,500million vehicles have to be replaced globally and probably at least 100,000,000 EV batteries will need to be replaced each year, driving up the price of materials.

Indeed, it will take hundreds of years to mine the materials needed to achieve Net Zero and the emerging material shortage is already beginning to impact on EV costs, as is the rising cost of electricity, plus EV road taxes which are still to come.

That is all to help eliminate the UK’s CO2 emissions of 0.00048ppm pa at a cost of around £300,000 per household – a cost which no one voted for.

Roger Arthur

W Sussex

If you appreciated this article, perhaps you might consider making a donation to The Conservative Woman. Unlike most other websites, we receive no independent funding. Our editors are unpaid and work entirely voluntarily as do the majority of our contributors but there are inevitable costs associated with running a website. We depend on our readers to help us, either with regular or one-off payments. You can donate here. Thank you.
If you have not already signed up to a daily email alert of new articles please do so. It is here and free! Thank you.

Sign up for TCW Daily

Each morning we send The ConWom Daily with links to our latest news. This is a free service and we will never share your details.