It's time to stop the scaremongering over heat pumps
If you take away the cost of a gas boiler, which would not be required, this makes the cost difference about £10,000 maximum.
Is he suggesting that the housebuilders should leave out the insulation and double glazing as well?
The difference in heating costs between a standard house built around 1970 and current standards is significant and I doubt if anyone would want to live in a basic 1970s house or pay the heating bill.
The housebuilding standards in the UK for insulation have been extremely poor compared to the standards in Scandinavian countries for at least the last 60 years and we are paying the price now in high retrofit costs to bring them up to a similar standard.
Most of the hype about additional measures required to install a heat pump result from this failure in building standards, and any changes to the heat emitters of new-build houses should result in a reduction in costs as less heat output is required.
For interest, you only need to replace the heat lost from a building and a heat pump can do this just as effectively as a gas boiler although it may be necessary to increase the radiator size as the flow temperature is lower. This does not apply to new-build and therefore it will not result in additional cost.
There was no incentive for builders to build houses with decent insulation and this could have reduced the potential profit per build and it was only when the Government eventually started introducing proper building standards that this situation slowly improved.
The before-tax profits of one major housebuilder last year were £359.1 million for 10,664 completions which amounts to £33,674 profit per house (11.1%). Some of these properties will include most of the standards for net zero and should be heat pump-compatible if they are still fitted with gas boilers.
I am not suggesting that housebuilders should not make a profit as that is how capitalism works, but perhaps it might put Ross Lambie's claims in perspective.
There are lots of reasons why we should be moving from gas to electricity, reducing global warming and saving the planet is only one of them, but misinformation is making a sensible transition more difficult.
Iain McIntyre, Sauchie.
Read more letters
Pride has had its day
I found the first half of the letter (June 4) from Rebecca Don Kennedy, CEO of the Equality Network, regarding the removal of Pride flags from lampposts on Arran quite enlightening. I read it thinking that we may well have an outbreak of common sense. Until.
The CEO went on to accuse Mark Smith of hypothetical and imaginary views, indeed, accusing him of victim blaming. There then followed a completely non-evidential, truly hypothetical and imaginary reasoning of what someone must be thinking if they dislike a flag.
The removal of a flag is straightforward vandalism (if damaged) or theft, and nothing else. Until the perpetrator is found nobody knows what their thought process was. They may just have been having a laugh. Under no circumstances is that then a hate crime.
For me, and many like me, I'm afraid that Pride has had its day, and it seems to me that it, and the "inclusive" groups of people behind it, are more about continually causing and promoting division in society.
Why can't we all just let people be?
Gregor McKenzie, East Kilbride.
A Pride march in Glasgow (Image: PA)
Frustration over hospital parking
Today (June 4) I failed to make a significant appointment at Glasgow Royal Infirmary (GRI), booked at a specialist unit in October 2024. I spent two hours attempting to find a parking space, and failed.
I recall that there was some problem in making the GRI car park free, which was eventually resolved. As a regular patient, I enjoyed a brief period when outpatients had an allocated parking area: that privilege did not last.
A missed appointment costs the NHS around £233 and I have now to wait until at least September for a new appointment.
I do not believe that the GRI car park is solely occupied by staff and patients. Glasgow is restricted and punitive in parking, and I suspect that this car park has a high occupancy of selfish non-entitled healthy parasites.
Stewart MacPherson, Kilsyth.
Dictionary corner
The faulty English usage Steve Barnet despairs of (Letters, May 29) doesn't exasperate me as much as the profusion of malapropisms that have become common.
Educated writers can no longer use the following, for fear of being misunderstood: apprise, which will be confused with appraise; beg the question will be supposed to mean pose the question; deprecate (an obscure theological term) seems to be supposed to be a posh modern variant of depreciate; enormity is used as a synonym of magnitude; fulsome is used instead of full (it is cognate with foul); ilk is presumed to mean sort; iconic is used as though it means special rather than totally standard; the verb loathe is used where the adjective loth would be correct; the adjective staunch is used where the verb stanch would be correct.
This stems from the modern practice of guessing at meanings instead of consulting a dictionary. Some hold that words should mean what people think they mean rather than what a lexicographer declare them to mean, but this leads to degeneration into baby-talk shorn of all subtlety.
Robin Dow, Rothesay.
Cruise control
It annoys me that CalMac ferries, the latest Glens Sannox and Rosa in particular, are referred to by several of your correspondents as "cruise liners". They are actually "crew's liners", a very important distinction and the root of a large number of the problems imposed on CMAL and CalMac by each other.
Peter Wright, West Kilbride.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Guardian
4 minutes ago
- South Wales Guardian
Streeting confident about welfare vote amid criticism of ‘two-tier' Pip plans
Wes Streeting said the changes 'have put us in a much better position' and give 'peace of mind' to those currently in receipt of personal independence payments. The Government's original welfare package had restricted eligibility for Pip, but in a climbdown to stave off a backbench rebellion, the changes will now only apply to new applicants. Mr Streeting said this was not unusual for such a transition. 'When things change and evolve as you bring in new systems, it does change sometimes from group to group, student finance being an example,' he told the BBC's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg programme. He said 'we've got to listen' when asked if further concessions could be made on Pip. Unite general secretary Sharon Graham has called for the Government to start from scratch on the Bill and said the latest plans were 'divisive and sinister'. 'Creating a two-tier system where younger disabled people and those who become disabled in the future will be disadvantaged and denied access to work and education, is morally wrong,' she said. Disabled Labour MP Olivia Blake said the proposed changes had been 'plucked from the air'. 'This could form an unethical two-tier system that treats two people with the exact same injury or illness differently,' she told The Guardian. The Health Secretary told Sky News's Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips that the changes 'have put us in a much better position'. 'As a result of the changes, it means anyone watching this morning who's in receipt of personal independence payments now has the peace of mind of knowing that their situation is protected,' he said. Labour MP Louise Haigh meanwhile said she planned to back the Welfare Bill next week but needed to see the full detail of the new plans on Monday. The former Cabinet minister also said it was a moment for the Government to 'reset'. 'I think this is a moment and an opportunity to reset the Government's relationship with the British public and to move forward, to adopt a different approach to our economic policy and our political strategy,' she told the BBC. On Saturday, the Prime Minister told the Welsh Labour conference the 'broken' welfare system must be fixed 'in a Labour way'. The original plans restricted eligibility for Pip and cut the health-related element of universal credit Existing recipients were to be given a 13-week phase-out period of financial support in an earlier move that was seen as a bid to head off opposition. Now, the changes to Pip will be implemented in November 2026 and apply to new claimants only, while all existing recipients of the health element of universal credit will have their incomes protected in real terms. The concessions on Pip alone protect some 370,000 people currently receiving the allowance who were to lose out after reassessment. Ministers had hoped the reforms would get more people back into work and save up to £5 billion a year, but the concessions left Chancellor Rachel Reeves needing to find money elsewhere and point to possible tax rises in the autumn.
Glasgow Times
19 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Government's new health strategy ‘no more than hiding the crisps', Tories say
Under new proposals, retailers could be made to set targets to increase their sales of less fattening products. Shadow work and pensions secretary Helen Whately said setting mandatory targets for supermarkets was 'nanny state'. 'They had 14 years in opposition to think about what they wanted to do about the NHS, they've had a year in government, and the number one thing in it seems to be hide the crisps,' she told Sky News' Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips. Mr Streeting said the Government wants to 'nudge people in the right direction' (Lucy North/PA) 'It's obviously the nanny state, but it's also not what people want for the NHS. 'People want to hear how they're going to get to see their GP. 'Telling people what to buy, I think, is not up to government. I believe in personal responsibility.' Health Secretary Wes Streeting told the same programme the Government will work with supermarkets to help 'nudge people in the right direction'. 'By taking the approach we're taking with supermarkets, they will decide through the combination of where they put their products, how they do price promotions, the reformulation, what products they choose to put on the shelves,' he said. 'They will work with us to make sure that we nudge people in the right direction without any of us even noticing, in the same way that we've nudged the country in the other direction since the 1990s.' Rejecting suggestions that the idea was too controlling, he said it was different to 'traditional nanny statism, where we regulate more heavily on price, on marketing, on what's sold'. Labour's 10-year health plan is set to be published next week. Other changes could include money for hospitals being linked to patient ratings. According to the Times, part of the proposals will see patients contacted a few weeks after their hospital treatment for feedback. Based on their responses, money could be diverted to a local 'improvement fund'. Another proposal could see NHS users awarded points for upping their step count and eating healthily. Points can then be traded for vouchers, with discounts at supermarkets and coffee shops, according to The Sun. Hundreds of bodies responsible for overseeing and running parts of the NHS in England are likely to be scrapped as part of the changes. Mr Streeting has said the current system is too complex and needs reform.
Glasgow Times
19 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Streeting confident about welfare vote amid criticism of ‘two-tier' Pip plans
Wes Streeting said the changes 'have put us in a much better position' and give 'peace of mind' to those currently in receipt of personal independence payments. The Government's original welfare package had restricted eligibility for Pip, but in a climbdown to stave off a backbench rebellion, the changes will now only apply to new applicants. Mr Streeting said this was not unusual for such a transition. 'When things change and evolve as you bring in new systems, it does change sometimes from group to group, student finance being an example,' he told the BBC's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg programme. He said 'we've got to listen' when asked if further concessions could be made on Pip. Unite general secretary Sharon Graham has called for the Government to start from scratch on the Bill and said the latest plans were 'divisive and sinister'. 'Creating a two-tier system where younger disabled people and those who become disabled in the future will be disadvantaged and denied access to work and education, is morally wrong,' she said. Disabled Labour MP Olivia Blake said the proposed changes had been 'plucked from the air'. 'This could form an unethical two-tier system that treats two people with the exact same injury or illness differently,' she told The Guardian. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has said the 'broken' welfare system must be fixed 'in a Labour way' (Paul Currie/PA) The Health Secretary told Sky News's Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips that the changes 'have put us in a much better position'. 'As a result of the changes, it means anyone watching this morning who's in receipt of personal independence payments now has the peace of mind of knowing that their situation is protected,' he said. Labour MP Louise Haigh meanwhile said she planned to back the Welfare Bill next week but needed to see the full detail of the new plans on Monday. The former Cabinet minister also said it was a moment for the Government to 'reset'. 'I think this is a moment and an opportunity to reset the Government's relationship with the British public and to move forward, to adopt a different approach to our economic policy and our political strategy,' she told the BBC. On Saturday, the Prime Minister told the Welsh Labour conference the 'broken' welfare system must be fixed 'in a Labour way'. The original plans restricted eligibility for Pip and cut the health-related element of universal credit Existing recipients were to be given a 13-week phase-out period of financial support in an earlier move that was seen as a bid to head off opposition. Now, the changes to Pip will be implemented in November 2026 and apply to new claimants only, while all existing recipients of the health element of universal credit will have their incomes protected in real terms. The concessions on Pip alone protect some 370,000 people currently receiving the allowance who were to lose out after reassessment. Ministers had hoped the reforms would get more people back into work and save up to £5 billion a year, but the concessions left Chancellor Rachel Reeves needing to find money elsewhere and point to possible tax rises in the autumn.
