Sir, - Firstly, I would like to thank the nearly 140 local residents, community councillors and other interested parties who did attend Cluff Natural Resources’ initial round of exhibitions held in Culross and Grangemouth.

The constructive discussions on the day and written feedback gave an invaluable insight into the commonly held misconceptions, genuine concerns and potential local benefits associated with this ground-breaking energy project, which will create significant benefits to the local community.

Further exhibitions will be held as our plans evolve over the coming months.

While underground coal gasification (UCG) technology deployed in shallow depths and operated inappropriately does have the potential to cause the effects set out by Mr [John] Mitchell, a more comprehensive review of the history of UCG would have provided many examples of such operations which have proceeded without incident.

Mr Mitchell’s implication that selected isolated incidents, the majority of which happened many years ago, in different countries, at shallower depths, in different geological settings, under different regulatory regimes, using different production techniques, would result in the same outcome for Cluff Natural Resources’s project is simply not valid.

The previous Labour Government supported an extensive study of the potential of UCG over a period of 10 years from 1996 to 2006. This resulted in a comprehensive feasibility study for a UCG demonstration project titled ‘Coal Mine of the 21st Century – Feasibility of UCG under the Firth of Forth’, prepared by a team of experts from Heriot Watt University.

This report carefully reviewed all aspects of the UCG process and its potential environmental impacts and no significant or insurmountable issues were highlighted.  Cluff Natural Resources firmly believes that using UCG to access our vast, but stranded, indigenous coal resources to reduce our reliance on imported gas from the likes of Russia and Qatar, while at the same time creating skilled local employment and providing a competitive source of gas for both electricity generation and as feedstock for the locally critical petrochemical sector, makes perfect sense as we try and maintain our standards of living during the transition to a lower carbon future. - Yours etc., Andrew Nunn, Chief Operating Officer Cluff Natural Resources Thanks for the support Sir, - As the dust has now settled on May’s General Election I wanted to take the opportunity, through your letters page, to thank the people of Ochil & South Perthshire for their support over the last 10 years as the MP for the area.

I want to pay an extra special thanks to the 16,000+ people across this constituency, from all parties and none, who were able to back me in May, and to everyone who also supported me in previous elections - your support was much appreciated.

It has been and always will be, a source of tremendous pride that the people of our constituency placed their faith in me in 2005 and then again in 2010.

Assisting people locally with their issues of concern, many of them very complex, was always a significant part of my commitment to constituents and I am sorry that I am now unable to bring to a conclusion a number of cases that were active at the time of the General Election.

I do hope that such matters are able to be resolved to the expectations of constituents.

Whilst I am of course disappointed by the recent election result I am pleased that my staff and I made local issues such a high priority, as I believe this is a fundamental responsibility for a Member of Parliament.

I will miss the exceptional working relationships that developed between my office and constituents and hope that I can continue to call as friends many of those who I came to know over the last 10 years.

Finally, I would publicly like to take this opportunity to personally thank my staff of the last 10 years who have worked tirelessly for constituents. I wish them well in their future endeavours. - Yours etc., Gordon Banks MP for Ochil and South Perthshire 2005-2015 End of the wind turbines Sir, - What does the SNP and Don Quixote have in common?

Answer -They both tilt at windmills.

The Conservative manifesto pledges to end any new subsidies for onshore wind farms. Does this herald the end of the wind turbine and the £600 million a year in public subsidies paid for by the consumer through their energy bills?

Is this the reason that the SNP is not calling for control of Scotland’s energy generation to be devolved to Holyrood when £600 million would have to be found to keep the turbines turning aimlessly?

Without the generous subsidies no investor will finance projects that are awaiting planning permission unless they are prepared to build something destined to lose them several million pounds a year. Meantime we will continue to subsidise the 400-plus onshore wind farms and those already under construction because of existing expensive agreements.

This could be the end of projects in Shetland (103 turbines), Loch Ness and The Great Glen (500 turbines), Strath South in Sutherlandshire, Hadyard Hill in Ayrshire, Aikengall in Berwickshire and Allt Duine in the Monadhliath Mountains on the edge of the Cairngorm National Park (31 turbines). Some of the turbines will be will be 475 feet high (Viking wind farm in Shetland).

Have the Conservatives saved the Scots from the seemingly relentless march of the turbines that only generated 14.5 Tera Watt hours in comparison to 1040 TWh in Europe (2012)?. - Yours etc., EA Clackmannan Waiting for the report Sir, - I was bemused to read the comments from Clackmannanshire Council’s chief executive about the concerns of staff and trade unions for the future of education and social services in Clackmannanshire.

Trade unions are apparently ‘coming to conclusions on a purely speculative basis’ about the content of a report which is more than 23 weeks overdue and which has been withheld because of ‘technical redrafting’ for nearly two months now.

The whole reason for commissioning the report in the first place was to provide a business case for moving the responsibility for running vital local services and large numbers of staff to a neighbouring council.

It’s hardly jumping to a conclusion to report staff concerns around such drastic moves and to request to see the report that they have been working on for over seven months.

We await with baited breath the publication of this illustrious document and we can only hope that it has been worth the extended wait. Given the quality of the work we have been allowed to see thus far however, we are less than optimistic. - Yours etc., Andrew Kane Joint Trade Union Committee chair