THE arrival of the Ineos Insight in Grangemouth with its first cargo of US shale gas (“Ineos chief’s challenge: Visit US and see the success of fracking”, The Herald, September 28, and Letters, September 29) raises uncomfortable questions for the Scottish government.

Whilst the shale gas carried by Ineos’s new fleet of liquefied gas tankers will ensure the future of 10,000 Scottish jobs, tens of thousands more have been lost in our oil industry. As a result of decades of fracking for oil in the North Sea and elsewhere, the redundant oil workers have exactly the skills we need to frack for gas onshore in Scotland. Why then is the Scottish Government denying these workers new opportunities, which will benefit them and the Scottish economy?

The ethane gas imported on Ineos’s tankers has to be paid for; it adversely affects our balance of payments and the value of our currency. Shale gas extracted in Scotland would, however, protect our economy, and any excess could be exported. Why is the Scottish Government having no regard to the strength of our economy and our balance of trade?

We know from the GERS figures that if Scotland was a separate country today its deficit would be calamitous. Onshore fracking for shale gas with the benefits in jobs and tax receipts would be a start towards bridging that deficit. Why then is the Scottish Government unwilling to tackle Scotland’s implicit deficit?

Otto Inglis,

6 Inveralmond Grove, Edinburgh.

IT is hard to understand the logic of the SNP Government stance on fracking.

Had Scotland voted for independence two years ago we would have been in a much bigger financial black hole than at present. But the answer is at hand in fracking which could be bringing us back to a balance but for the dogma of the minority.

We need only at the American example where rejuvenated areas similar to our mining and industrial ones have prospered beyond belief.

Let us remember that "Paraffin" Young in the 19th century in West Lothian was the inventor of such a system, albeit with less sophisticated technology and safeguards.

Our Government must accept fracking to balance the books and provide cheap fuel for the masses with acceptable emissions. It must not prevaricate any longer.

Norman McLean,

38 Seafield Drive, Ayr.

MARK Ruskell MSP informs us (Letters, September 29) that "on one windy day last month, wind turbines covered all of our electricity needs". August has 31 days. Will Mr Ruskell kindly comment about wind turbine performance on each of the other 30 days? I suspect not. If wind turbines had performed so well on even one of the 30 days, he would be telling us so.

An addendum: will Mr Ruskell predict the date of Scotland's exit from the National Grid which will carry for the foreseeable future electricity generated by nuclear power?

William Durward,

20 South Erskine Park, Bearsden.