IN the Western Telegraph letters section of October 30 last I was castigated by a Mr D Haskell for being 'gullible and incorrect' in my statement that the power blackout of August 8 was the result of a lightning strike.

This opinion we were told was very naive.

We were then treated to a detailed description by the same gentleman of the near-foolproof technology that meant that to claim lightning affecting two major generators at the same time could result in a large power outage would be 'stretching credibility a bit much'.

Well, Ofgem has now reported on this incident and it appears that the power cut was in fact caused in the first instance by a lightning strike.

Even though some shortcomings were discovered in the Grid's technology, without this lightning strike, despite Haskell's protestations, a power cut would appear to have been most unlikely.

Perhaps Mr Haskell is lacking a degree of credibility here and a little humility is called for?

At no point in the report was it suggested that wind energy specifically was the cause of the problem. The three energy companies (one wind, one gas and one distributor) involved have now been fined a total of £10.5m for failing to prevent this power cut.

I am sure many of your readers would also be most impressed to hear that the National Grid has been able to report that in 2019 zero-carbon energy became the UK's largest energy source, delivering nearly half of the country's energy and outstripping fossil fuels for the first time.

Windfarms, solar and nuclear energy, together with energy imported from under-sea cables, provided 48.5 per cent of the UK's energy. Fossil fuels provided 43 per cent. The remainder came from biomass. Windfarms, solar panels and hydro now generate just over a quarter of UK energy. In 1990 it was just 2.3 per cent. And I am sure we are all pleased to note that, as yet, there is no sign of the 'dark ages' predicted by some.

We are told by the same people that it is a waste of time and money for the UK to be aiming to reduce its carbon footprint to zero.

After all we are responsible for only about two per cent of the planet's greenhouse gas emissions. That figure is correct.

However, there are 180 other counties with similar levels of emissions and these together with the UK produce approximately 25 per cent of total global greenhouse gas emissions.

Is it in any way likely that the 15 countries responsible for the other 75 per cent would be prepared to cut their emissions whilst those of the other 180 countries remain unaddressed? I leave it to your imagination.