Everyone is on the same page when it comes to reducing our energy requirements, like the commendable change to LED lighting in South Lakeland, saving over £1million a year.

There is also a sound business and environmental case for the re-opening of the high grade coking coal mine at Whitehaven which will reduce the carbon monoxide (CO) emissions from global shipping from far countries where there are questionable human rights practices.

The same amount of coal will still be burnt to produce 0.25 ton per head of the UK population, where using our own coal would ensure better steel production security and quality. It would allow us to export any surplus to our nearer neighbouring countries while delivering more jobs to the west Cumbrian coast.

The recent blockage of the Suez Canal only too readily demonstrates our over-reliance on imported goods and inevitable delays. So British steel made with British coal offers best quality, value and lowest environmental impact while making the UK self-reliant.

South Lakeland District Council leader Giles Archibald continues to counter the mining case with baseless emotive platitudes offering no substantive reasoning. He previously suggested that the warm Gulf Stream may be interrupted by global warming heralding another possible ice age or a weather system flowing from Siberia. Following this argument, if we reduce CO emissions our climate will continue to stay warm and thus propagate the climate change/global warming argument, conversely increased CO/CO2 emissions leads to a colder climate.

As a Christian, I believe many events that have come to pass are in the bible, yet there is no mention of planetary warming. I believe our climate runs in cycles and warmer periods will be followed by colder ones as in previous centuries in a balanced equilibrium.

It is still imperative that through efficiencies as responsible citizens we continue to reduce our global footprint and share out our natural resources responsibly. However, is it now time for the climate lobby and their unproven and misleading theories to be fact-checked or they are able to produce empirical scientific evidence?


By email