Foggy logic?

The claim by Steuart Campbell (Letters, 28 February) that the Holyrood Act does not ban the use of gas is a play on semantics to gloss over the fact that over the past year not a single MSP has refuted the costs that will be incurred in meeting their proposed emission targets.

For example, how can Steuart Campbell propose that to meet climate change targets does not mean phasing out the use of natural gas since it is those emissions that Holyrood aims to reduce? In addition, to claim that hydrogen could be used to supply energy needs fails to recognise that expensive wind turbine electricity (15p per unit ) will be required to produce hydrogen from water.

May I also point out that working on hydrogen supplied systems is expensive as there are very strict Health and Safety rules to be followed. Note that Mr Campbell has followed the Holyrood pattern of failing to mention such costs or showing that the proposed replacements for the current 4p per unit natural gas supply will be a cheaper energy supply for Scottish consumers.

Surely the letter from Mr Campbell demonstrates the need for Holyrood to provide the people of Scotland with a comprehensive outline of the economic pain that will be inflicted on the 35 per cent of Scots living in fuel poverty by phasing out the use of natural gas over the next decade.

IAN MOIR Queen Street, Castle Douglas