Readers’ Letters: Councils need to be better informed on road pollution

I read with absolute dismay of the proposal by City of Edinburgh Council to disallow cars from using bus lanes in Edinburgh. The buses and taxis already enjoy clear passage during rush hours and the nearly-empty bus lanes for the rest of the times help to speed up the flows of other vehicles at no disadvantage to buses.

This bampot proposal is following on the heels of the illogical 20mph restrictions (not supported by police) causing increased pollution, killing more children and other pedestrians

Our councillors need to stop pandering to the vociferous minority of so-called environmentalists who clearly have little technical understanding of what they propose. Driving at slower speeds causes cars to be in lower gears and issue more pollution per mile. As a Chartered Engineer I know that is unarguable by any objective engineering assessment (but perhaps not by the paid-for consultants who know which side their bread is buttered).

Edinburgh City Council wants an end to cars being able to use bus lanes in Edinburgh

These proposals will have the further effect of making Edinburgh even less attractive for businesses and shoppers alike. Both of these are what drives the real economy of the city.

Councillors who support these crazy nonsense ideas would do well to consider whether they will survive the next election or need to look for another career. Perhaps they could consider support for common sense and the health and well-being of our citizens and visitors in our patently dying city?

Andrew Clark, Balerno, Edinburgh

Job done

Carbon emissions from Scotland were always inconsequential in terms of global warming. Nevertheless, at significant cost to consumers Scotland reduced carbon emissions to 0.01 of world carbon emissions and the emissions from electricity generation are now only 0.002 of world emissions. Campaigners for further carbon reduction must appreciate that it is only the main polluting countries which can make an effective difference.

We are no longer comparing renewables with coal-fired power stations. We have to decide if more renewables can be both justified and afforded. There are many facts which have been ignored to date. Scotland exports more than 30 per cent of electricity generated. Supporting more renewables to export more electricity is flawed. Introducing more renewables than needed would increase carbon emissions due to carbon from embodied energy in material production, manufacturing, transport, installation and in the eventual deconstruction and disposal.

More renewables also involve major additional costs for strengthening the transmission infrastructure which would be passed on to struggling consumers. Massive electrification is presently unaffordable and even if renewables became cheaper the cost of infrastructure to accommodate them in the grid is overwhelming.

The environmental impact of batteries for electric cars in terms of production, renewal, disposal and fire risk is diametrically opposed to carbon reduction. Heat pumps are not an appropriate choice for existing homes. The upheaval, capital and running costs are unacceptable and unaffordable. Anyone in any doubt could obtain an estimate for their own home.

Taking into consideration the large reduction already achieved and the costs of eliminating the further insignificant 0.002 of world emissions there is no justification for further reducing Scottish carbon related to electricity at this time

JHR Hampson, Kinnesswood, Perth and Kinross

You’re welcome

Stephen Jardine’s article “Anti-oppression training is a waste of taxpayers’ money” (Perspective, 31 May) is a most perceptive piece of writing which has made me realise what has been wrong with me for the past 18 years – “Oppression” brought on by the rule of Salmond/Swinney, followed by Sturgeon/Swinney, then Yousaf/Swinney and now the ever present Swinney himself; and I didn't have to employ a consultant to work this out, just read Stephen Jardine.

I can see now that the extra £60 per month tax that’s being taken from my small private pension is helping to fund a good cause!

Ah well, I will go and have a large whisky to add some more tax to Holyrood’s voracious appetite for our money!

David de Burlande, Kelso, Scottish Borders

Bloated sector

Research by the Conservatives revealed that the Civil Service spent more than £20 million on 380 equality, diversity and inclusion staff with average salaries of £53,000.

There are also 570 diversity networks with 2,965 committee members which cost £534,000 in 2022/23. Disclosure of these facts is good timing since it appears that the UK Government is planning to axe 50,000 civil servants’ posts out of the current 515,000. Those working for the government and the public sector also get eye-watering final salary pension schemes paid for by taxpayers. There are no longer any such mega-generous schemes in the private sector which creates the wealth to employ these public servants.

Clark Cross, Linlithgow, West Lothian

Motivation

A Lewis (Letters, 3 June) laments the high proportion of government expenditure which goes on payments to staff. The yardstick usually applied in determining Civil Service salaries is that they should be at the level needed to recruit, retain and motivate a sufficient number of staff of the requisite standard. It’s said that the only motivation needed is that if you don’t make a reasonable fist of your job you lose it, but in the current state of employment law that could be difficult to apply.

As to recruitment and retention I don’t know if there are any difficulties at present. However, it is clear there are none as regards MPs and MSPs as there are always a number of people applying for any posts that become vacant, which would suggest that their salaries are higher than they need be.

S Beck, Edinburgh

War setting

Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Defence Secretary John Healey this week revealed that the mysterious magic money tree is once again being shaken down for “defence”.

Meanwhile, a former director of Russia analysis at the CIA tells the journal Foreign Policy that: “The Russians recently revised their nuclear-use doctrine, and one of the things that they specifically said in there was that if there are attacks by an adversary on important state or military infrastructure that would disrupt responses, potentially by Russia’s nuclear forces, that is potentially a trigger for Russian nuclear use.”

The fact Ukraine is a non-nuclear nation becomes irrelevant, because it is perceived to be enabled by the US and NATO which ARE nuclear powers, ergo justifying a potential nuclear response.

Long ago, a Westminster political correspondent said if there were to be a nuclear war, he was certain that in the aftermath I would be saying “I told you so”. It gives me no pleasure at all to say we are very possibly nearing that stage, and none of the things Healey and Starmer have announced would make any difference, even if we already had them.

I don't need to remind anybody where Ground Zero in Europe is. Oh yes, aside from the US submarines currently in the Atlantic, Scotland would be the most significant target. In fact, in US nuclear war planning, it's always been “independent”. It's called Unit 11.

Marjorie Ellis Thompson, Edinburgh

Proof positive

Well done Ian Johnston on his article on the virtues of Scotland (Perspective, 4 June). What a welcome change from the gloom and doom pervading in the other news items on other aspects of life in our country. Having lived in Scotland for most of my long life I would not care to live anywhere else – the country and its people cannot be surpassed. We may have shortcomings, but, my goodness, it will take a lot to surpass us!

Sandy Macpherson, Edinburgh

Write to The Scotsman

We welcome your thoughts – NO letters submitted elsewhere, please. Write to [email protected] including name, address and phone number – we won't print full details. Keep letters under 300 words, with no attachments, and avoid 'Letters to the Editor/Readers’ Letters' or similar in your subject line – be specific. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading.