Sir, – A planning application for a large anaerobic biodigester (AD) plant, to be sited at the east end of Carlogie Woods on the edge of Carnoustie, has been submitted to Angus Council.
Readers living in Carnoustie will be as surprised as I was to hear this.
The time for public comment has ended and any claim there has been adequate public consultation is meaningless.
It will be a large industrial plant sited on unspoilt land by a main access road into a town that depends on tourism.
If passed and built it will be a blot on the landscape.
To give an idea of scale, among other structures there will be three tanks up to 13 metres tall and 32 metres in diameter.
The release of foul odours is associated with existing biodigester facilities and I expect this one will be no different, even with the assurances given.
An annual production of four million cubic metres of methane (90% of which is to be fed into the National Grid) is planned.
Is it sensible to site a plant that produces great quantities of combustible and explosive gas within 800 metres of a school? I think not.
The intended fuel is agricultural produce; 24,000 tonnes of maize, 12,000 tonnes of rye silage and 12,000 tonnes of sugar beet each year, grown locally.
Would it not be better to retain the many hundreds of hectares required to grow these crops for food?
The intention to use maize is questionable. It is a crop that is alien to Scotland and even with recent genetic improvements, its growth in central and south-east
Scotland is described as marginal. Maize production damages soil.
The Soil Association informs us that “the biogas from maize, while described as a renewable energy, is not providing any net benefit because of damage to the soil and fresh water”.
It is because of this the association has called on the UK Government to stop subsidies for anaerobic digesters fuelled in whole or part by maize to discourage the practice.
Angus Council must reject this application. Our local councillors should add their voices to those of the objectors.
Charles Lloyd. 18 Linefield Road, Carnoustie.
Cash exists to save Fife libraries
Sir, – Throughout Fife, in places like Crail, East Wemyss, Kinghorn and Markinch, people are being told that the savings to be made from closure of their library is around £8,000.
The combined spending each year of Fife Council and Fife Cultural Trust comes close to £1 billion.
Now we learn that the local authority has reserves which amount to £40 million (September 12).
On top of this there is some evidence to suggest that the council did not compensate the trust for savings in non-domestic rates which amounted to more than £400,000.
The message for campaigners against the library closures must now be clear.
The money is there to keep these libraries open. It just needs the right amount of political pressure to force council and trust to climb down.
This is not to say that library services should not change.
Even the casual visitor to facilities like Rothes Halls and Glenwood in Glenrothes can see that they have changed considerably in the last 15 years.
It was interesting to read that council leader David Ross has asked his officers to look at the impact on local areas of the closure proposals.
Has he just really only woken up to this crucial point?
He needs to wake up, too, on the council’s policy of promoting community engagement.
Much of this will sound very hollow indeed if the council and the trust do not sit down together and produce a scheme that keeps the libraries open and communities secure.
Bob Taylor. 24 Shiel Court, Glenrothes.
Wisdom of nanny state
Sir, – I am currently visiting family in Seattle and discovered that the local authority saves money in one very original way. It bought three goats to clear overgrown blackberry plants, ivy, and so on, from school grounds.
The particular area is temporarily fenced off, the three fluffy workers are let loose (named Larry, Curly and Moe), and in a short space of time their four-chamber stomachs and their insatiable desire to nibble anything resembling a plant, has solved the problem.
There is no contract to negotiate, they work 24/7, they are very eco-friendly, they even fertilise the area for free and they are available again in the future, thanks to an employee who happens to live on a farm, loves goats and has a suitable trailer.
In these days of cutbacks on both staff and money, surely this should be given serious consideration by Perth and Kinross Council.
I am sure the electorate next year would be hugely impressed by councillors who backed such a green initiative.
Roger Ward. Kyles, 5 Main Road, Luncarty.
Do not trust parents to teach
Sir, – Both David A. Robertson and Mrs J. Taylor (September 12) express concern about parents not having enough say in their children’s education.
This is worrying. Our children are emphatically not ours. We procreate and give birth to them but they are not our possessions or playthings, to be manipulated, indoctrinated and abused at our own whim.
They are burgeoning human beings and should be respected as such, which means exposing them to as many diverse influences as possible in order to let them become whoever they might turn out to be.
The damaged products of home education I have encountered unfortunately confirm that parents are generally the last people to be entrusted with bringing up children.
Grahame Miller. 53 Millgate, Friockheim.
Environmental role of farming
Sir, – I refer to the letter from Andrew Dundas (September 12) in which he proposes that farming families in Scotland should not be protected against produce competition from the EU and elsewhere.
He ignores two rather important points.
Firstly, food security and welfare.
Since the horsemeat scandal of recent times, the public has become more aware of the provenance of the produce displayed so attractively in our supermarkets.
Food labelling may have improved but it is by no means 100% credible.
Competition from foreign producers including those in the EU and Scandinavia is achieved on the basis of cost and with less regard for animal husbandry that has long been a trademark of UK farms.
Secondly, landscape.
The rural landscape in Scotland is the result of long-term care and management by generations of small-farming families.
Large-scale industrialisation of farming will result in the prairie landscapes seen in the south of England, where traditional farms have been amalgamated to achieve the economies of scale proposed by Mr Dundas.
Farming is a way of life for most owners and tenants and it is of social and cultural significance for the reasons outlined. It is more than just an exercise in bean-counting, as suggested by Mr Dundas.
Derek Farmer. Knightsward Farm, Anstruther.
Show respect to no voters
Sir, – With reference to Alex Salmond’s column of September 14: Scotland is being pushed into a referendum by Westminster, I would like to make the following points.
For a man who seems to pride himself on such high moral standards compared to his fellow Westminster politicians, it is obvious why Alex Salmond would feel the need to construct an elaborate justification for the staggering about-turn on his stated position last year that the referendum was a once-in-a-generation event.
Clearly, that position was never more than a tactical ploy to push people into voting yes, leaving him in a tricky position when the tactic failed.
No amount of word-play can disguise the hypocrisy of his position now.
He would do himself credit if he showed a modicum of respect to the 55% of the population who voted no, and acknowledge, however much he disagrees, that many of them did so not necessarily because of the vow but because they have a belief and pride in the union which transcends the party politics of the day.
Richard Haviland. 45 Inchbrakie Drive, Crieff.
Charities may lose support
Sir, – When shopping today at a major UK retailer, I was offended when I reached the till to pay for my purchases and was asked if I wanted to give a £1 donation to a cancer charity.
I think this approach is totally inappropriate.
If I want to give to charity I will, however, I do not expect to be asked when I am shopping.
I fear that people not assertive at saying no could feel pressurised into donating money.
This practice could make customers feel obliged to donate after they have spent a lot of money on clothes or other purchases.
These customer may not actually want to make a donation.
As shoppers, we are surrounded by charities with their begging bowls outs.
The High Streets are overcrowded with zealous chuggers and charity shops and, if that is not enough, we are bombarded with expensive manipulative adverts on the television, mailshots and through telephone calls.
When are charities going to learn that enough is enough and once-keen givers are being sickened of overkill marketing tactics.
Charities may lose the very people they are trying to reach.
I, for one, will not go to this shop again.
Gordon Kennedy. 117 Simpson Square. Perth.