ERIC GENDEL (HAS, Jan 18) says none of the correspondents who disagree with his views on global warming have answered his question about the role of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and those scientists that are supportive of the theory.

He is wrong and I hope he will refer back to previous letters, in particular Charlotte Bull’s excellent response (HAS, Jan 15).

I am afraid that Mr Gendle continues to completely miss the fundamental point those of us who remain unconvinced are trying to make.

Until science makes a convincing case that man-made carbon dioxide emissions are having an impact, it is madness for the Government to spend £300bn over 20 years on renewable energy measures that will have no effect on the situation, while simultaneously failing to replace our ageing nuclear and coal-fired power stations before it is too late.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere currently stands at 0.038 per cent.

Several hundred years ago it was 0.027 per cent. We are being asked to believe that an increase of one hundredth of one per cent in the concentration of this otherwise essential gas is worth destroying the UK economy for. I don’t think so, and I’m not alone.

David Lacey, Durham.