Green job opportunities are far from clear-cut, we need to be pragmatic - Yorkshire Post Letters

Re: Letter from Mr Edon of Morley regarding the green agenda.

I welcome the response to my recent letter regarding the green agenda, especially from a Morleyite coming from there myself.

However, Mr. Edon, Mark, is not comparing like with like. His argument would be far more compelling if it were based on facts. In recent years, fossil fuel subsidies (7 trillion worldwide) were to secure energy supply and protect consumers in a surging global market. The Lib Dems who commissioned a study on the subject have a habit of misinterpreting the facts for political effect.

As to the green agenda, green opportunities, and green job creation, it is far from clear-cut. We are experiencing climate change, and being careful not to confuse this with freak weather events; there is a strong assumption that the climate emergency going forward is real and threatens the existence of future generations.

But we cannot foretell the future, and almost all attempts to do so are wrong. A good scientist should also be a sceptic. There is no last word in science.

Therefore, current decisions are based on sophisticated computer modelling, prediction, educated guesswork and, for all I know, science fiction. The prophecies taken as the truth may be highly probable, but they are not irrefutable facts.

We have taken the path to 2050 net zero, a figment and political legacy imposed upon us by Theresa May, which we must reconsider. Rather than fiddle around, we should stop coal burning worldwide now (if only). China has pledged to stop by 2060, but the end of the century or never is more likely, and the same goes for Russia and other rogue states.

As to the sanctimonious Chris Skidmore, he wears the badge of ‘environmentally friendly.’ With a stake in net zero policies, it appears to give him immunity from scrutiny. Net zero will ‘leave us all richer,’ he says. Who’s he trying to kid?

In the meantime, if we stick to our present course, our manufacturing sector will shrink further as it competes with low-energy-cost countries. We become even more dependent on imported raw materials and goods, making economic growth increasingly difficult and our citizens and public services poorer.

It’s a grim picture, whichever way you view it.

Mark’s arguments regarding green opportunities and jobs do not convince me.

Adding insulation and solar panels to homes may create jobs, but the public purse will subsidise them. Similarly, heat pumps look great on paper but won’t work in most of our housing stock. For the reason stated, these products will continue to be imported, as will EV batteries.

Then, against all logic, we continue to import gas, shale gas, crude oil, wood pellets and inferior coal in large quantities when we have such resources here to service our needs until technology catches up with dogma.

On a brighter note, which Mark does not mention, it does get more sensible when looking at wind, geothermal, nuclear and tidal, so perhaps there is hope for the green agenda after all.