A CORRESPONDENT suggested arguments against the Woodhouse colliery are emotive platitudes ("Is climate science ‘fake news’?", The Mail letters, April 20).

I beg to differ. Indeed, the argument against the establishment of the colliery has been well put by a panel of experts who constitute the statutory climate change committee.

In a letter to the Secretary of State on January 29 they stated: “The opening of a new deep coking coal mine in Cumbria will increase global emissions and have an appreciable impact on the UK’s legally-binding carbon budgets”.

I have consistently based my comments on facts. I would draw your correspondent’s attention to an environmental statement produced by the colliery itself.

Dated April 2020, it clearly shows (on page 55 of that document) that the operation of the mine, leaving aside the burning of the coal, would initially create CO2 equivalent emissions that were much greater than the saving achieved through less shipping.

Your correspondent also suggested that there was a contradiction in my statement that global warming may interrupt the circulation of ocean currents, thereby potentially causing a future ice age for parts of northern Europe. There is no contradiction in this. We enjoy warmer winters because of the ocean currents. There is a danger that these currents will be changed by global warming.

I was simply stating that while the rest of the world heats up, Britain might find itself suffering much colder winters.

The evidence of human-induced climate change is overwhelming. These are not unproven theories. The dangers are clear, and if anyone has any doubts, I would encourage them to read the IPCC reports that are available online.

Giles Archibald