Dear Editor,
In making the case for the creation of the first new deep-mined coal mine in 30 years, in Cumbria, Roland Morris criticised those who have ‘the least understanding of’ the principles underlying climate science. Unhappily, he himself obviously doesn’t understand that the ‘Case for Cumbrian mine [is] undermined by doubt over UK market for coking coal. Sulphur content of the coal could mean British companies are unable to use it’ (Emma Gatten, The Daily Telegraph, 1 March 2021). As a result the Telegraph concluded (8 December 2022), that ‘The case for the Woodhouse Colliery to be allowed to start production isn’t just flimsy, it’s non-existent’. The Conservative peer, Lord Deben, Chair of the government’s own Climate Change Committee, has described the proposal as ‘absolutely indefensible’.
Similarly, Sir Alok Sharma MP, appointed by the government as the President for COP26 in 2021, says that ‘Over the past three years the UK has sought to persuade other nations to consign coal to history, because … coal is the most polluting energy source. [This decision] would send completely the wrong message and be an own goal’.
John Kerry, US Special Presidential Envoy, interviewed by the BBC’s Emily Maitlis on 9 March 2021, stated that: ‘All over the world, people have made a decision to move to cleaner fuel than coal, which is the dirtiest fuel in the world … The future is very clearly in new technologies.’
Mr Morris can develop his ‘understanding’ of these new technologies by looking at the OECD Green Growth Papers, No. 2020/02 (OECD Publishing, Paris), whose author, Dr Chris Bataille, concluded that: ‘Very low and zero emissions from the iron & steel and cement and concrete industries is a technically and economically reasonable challenge’.
Are the sources quoted above the sort of people whom Mr Morris had in mind as having ‘the least understanding’?
Yours sincerely,
David W. Golding CBE PhD DSc DCL Whitstable, Kent; and, formerly, Associate of the Institute for Sustainability
