ISN’T Campbell Anderson (Letters, Sep 30) spot-on when he suggests we need credible alternatives for heating homes?
It must be clear by now to all that we should dispense with burning fossil fuels as soon as practicable, and the extension of this must also be that the carbon deposits in the Rosebank field west of Shetland should remain where nature put them.
However, isn’t the starting hurdle in the debate the economic madness Campbell alludes to when he states “at a time when the price of electricity is artificially hiked to match the price of gas”? Surely the burning question is why is this being done?
READ MORE: Perfect storm hits Highland energy costs
We’re told we live in a free-market economy with competition the prime driver to efficiency and price control. So, why isn’t electricity allowed to compete with gas? Isn’t that what “Sid” told us when British Gas was privatised, that prices would come down with real competition?
We know the answer really, don’t we? It’s because government, through Ofgem, deliberately fails to control this broken market, operated as an effective monopoly. It’s not in the interests of the wealthy elite and Tory party donors for competition to spoil profit levels. Prices are set to satisfy profits and shareholder dividends, not to meet the needs of the community for what should be a public service controlled and managed on behalf of consumers who depend on essential energy.
I have absolutely no faith in heat pumps as a heating solution in Scotland, or their ability to heat cold homes to adequate levels. Were I buying a new home, it would not have one installed. They are difficult to retrofit, they are expensive to instal, we’re told they are noisy, the heat exchange panels are much larger than radiators, the piping is also more obtrusive and who doubts that if they ever achieved universal use then the already artificially hiked electricity price would be hiked further?
READ MORE: Chris Packham launches legal challenge against Rishi Sunak
Besides, we already have alternative electricity-based heating solutions and there could be many more, if only we could wean ourselves from the flawed premise that power should be downloaded overnight, stored as heat, and released during the cold winter days.
To achieve direct “generation to use” electricity we would need to invest heavily in the grid and various forms of electricity generation. We would need to encourage independent solar power by restoring and extending subsidies to promote conversion to it. We would need to invest in technology to allow storage of electricity as electricity and not just heat, to allow use as and when required throughout the whole day. And of course retrofitting proper insulation.
But none of this matters without the fundamental reform of the energy market. We need to take that back to public control. If the market is to remain open then all forms of energy need to compete directly, and allow prices to fall independent of each other.
Ofgem already does control the market through its “price cap” but only to the extent of protecting profits for shareholders, not to benefit the millions struggling to finance those profit levels through their bills – the doubling and more of bills demonstrates this.
READ MORE: ScotRail scrapping peak fares sparks hope for public transport reform
Neither does Ofgem reasonably serve consumers with the iniquitous energy tax named the standing charge, a cruelly vindictive disproportionate cost for low-use consumers that is being hiked deliberately and with impunity.
Once again this winter the government is going to dish out heating allowances to various sections of the community. Rather than subsidising energy company profits and dividends in this way with taxpayers’ money, shouldn’t government be taking this artificial market by the scruff of the neck and reforming it in the interests of consumers and taxpayers to produce this essential service at a reasonable price we can afford?
And don’t we need to do this before we can even begin to address the common sense of Campbell Anderson’s argument?
Jim Taylor
Edinburgh
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here