Your leader was right in one respect: more light needs to be shed on this important issue ("Clarity needed on renewables policy", June 5).
In particular, it should be clear that the subsidy which is at the heart of the matter is not paid from some mythical Government fund, but comes from the taxes and energy bills of Scottish voters.
You are right to point out that significant cuts in subsidies would make more wind farms economically unviable. But readers also deserve clarity about what their money might achieve if subsidies remain. In essence, even a 20% cut in carbon dioxide emissions in Scotland, the UK or even the entire EU, is completely irrelevant as China and other rapidly developing economies continue to build the power stations which literally fuel their growth.
Cutting Scottish emissions will hasten the export of energy-intensive jobs, replacing them at best with less secure green jobs, subsidised by taxpayers south of the Border.
And the jobs will go to those same rapidly developing countries from whom we will then import what we used to make. That will include wind turbine components, with Scottish jobs simply being in the construction sector.
St John's Innovation Centre,
We moderate all comments on HeraldScotland on either a pre-moderated or post-moderated basis. If you're a relatively new user then your comments will be reviewed before publication and if we know you well then your comments will be subject to moderation only if other users or the moderators believe you've broken the rules, which are available here.
Moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours. Please be patient if your posts are not approved instantly.