Realities in peat debate
From: Peter Auty, Mappleton Road, Great Hatfield.
THE peat debate is being fuelled by half truths and misinformation by eco-warriors and BBC-funded so-called celebrity gardeners who should know better. Four million gardeners in England and Wales are being denied the use of tried and tested multi purpose compost containing peat with far inferior peat free composts. Peat is known to regenerate faster than it is harvested for horticultural purposes. In Sweden and a multitude of other sensible countries it is classed as a renewable resource. What is the point of denying our plantgrowers the use of peat and then importing plants from other countries grown in peat. Peat free composts contain large amounts of coir, again imported from the other side of the planet. Both imports generate large amounts of greenhouse gasses, where’s the sense in that? The loss of peat bogs is mainly due to being drained for forestry and farming use and not horticulture. Anyone interested in this debate should first read the unbiased peat policy by Glendoickk Gardens, and then lobby their MP, they are also working on a one-sided agenda. If 10 per cent of gardeners respond we should get a compromise. Don’t be brow-beaten by the misinformation, get lobbying now, horticulture and gardeners everywhere deserve better.
From: Bob Longworth,
Glossop.
FRACKING risks are similar to rock fall in a disused coal according to Jacob Rees-Mogg MP ( The Yorkshire Post, April 5). I assume he is drawing on an understanding of how ground movement occurs following a collapse in deep coal mine workings.
It is not a comparison I would draw, but then what do I know?
From: Paul Morley , Long Preston, Skipton.
LET’S hope common sense is starting to prevail now that the sealing of fracking wells has been put on hold. With the way the world seems to be going it is an important matter of national security that we have the ability to produce our own reliable energy supply. All the people in this country who are demanding that we risk our future safety by not mining, fracking, drilling for oil and investing in nuclear energy are lucky they can speak out freely.
From: Neil Richardson, Kirkheaton.
WHILE politician Bex Whyman (Chris Burn interview, April 2) seems ambitious to save our part of the planet by enforcing change, she did not explain which gadgets would achieve this, their investment and operational costs, and the consequential impact on other budgets, like the NHS, defence, social services, and education.
Forgive my nagging doubts, but, for example, some media pundits suggest that even our much-applauded wind farms deliver only a very modest annual contribution to total energy demands if mysterious Mother Nature ain’t blowing strongly throughout the year.