THOSE of us old enough will remember the duel between VHS and Betamax formats to capture the video recording market.
After a close-run initial race, VHS won hands down and Betamax was consigned to the dustbin, a not-so-glorious failure.
I fear we are seeing a similar duel in terms of fuelling our nation, and transport in particular, and we are in danger of backing the Betamax horse.
Industry figures are rightly angry at the UK Government’s narrow vision (or complete lack of it) in terms of a replacement for carbon fuels.
The rush to electric vehicles is ill-considered and badly thought through. It will end in failure and frustration.
The huge gaps in recharging infrastructure and the impracticality of providing this on a comprehensive scale are in danger of driving us up this Betamax of a cul-de-sac. We have the ability to provide the necessary infrastructure required for hydrogen at a fraction of the cost (and time) of that required to fuel electric vehicles.
There is a fantastic opportunity to embrace a hydrogen economy and it would be heartening to see that the Scottish Government had the vision to be at the forefront of this. It could fund Scotland’s prosperity for generations to come. (If Shell has identified the potential of hydrogen, then we should sit up and take notice.) Never has it been more important for the Scottish Government to diverge from Westminster policies.
But, instead of allowing the revenues which could be gained from a hydrogen-based economy being frittered away a la Thatcher in the 1970s and 80s, we can use them to reshape and rebuild our economy. Plus we have the chance to adopt a Norway-style approach and ensure that those revenues generated from this clean, renewable resource are banked for future generations so that we baby boomers can leave future generations the legacy they deserve. It is our opportunity to recompense them for the way we have frittered away our resources, for the austerity they have had to endure because of our financial hubris and for the despoliation of our planet we have left them to deal with.
It is our chance to atone.
William Thomson, Denny.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel