THE letter (JEP 2 February) from Dr Luke Shobbrook, a counselling psychologist, attacking Graeme Phipps and the Jersey Climate Forum follows the normal pattern of behaviour against those who challenge the argument that it is human activity that is causing the earth’s climate to change, ignore the facts and try to discredit the person or the group making the case.

I am one of that small group of Jersey citizens who, out of our concerns that Jersey rushed headlong into declaring that there was a climate emergency, failed to take into account either the cost of net zero to the government finances (at least £260 million) or the cost burden that ordinary Islanders would have to endure.

Our group also takes the view that it isinevitable that if Jersey continues on this path, the only way to pay for it will be by increasing taxes, and this has been confirmed by the Jersey Fiscal Policy Panel of outside economists who oversee the Island’s finances. This cost does not include the extra cost every householder who owns a car, heats their house or cooks their food using oil or gas will have to personally incur replacing all of these.

The group does not think this enormous cost and financial sacrifice is worth it to save a tiny fraction (estimated at .0001%) of the world’s emissions of carbon dioxide, especially when it is obvious that China, America, Russia, India and so many other large carbon-dioxide emitters show no signs of changing their systems.

I am not a scientist. The nearest I got to science was how to turn on a Bunsen burner at school. But I am open-minded andintelligent enough to know that if 1,800 scientists from all over the world – including two Nobel prizewinners for science – have signed a declaration saying “there is no climate emergency” and the case put by the IPCC is based on a flawed computer modelling system, it is totally misleading to give the impression that “the science is settled”.

How can it be “settled” when so many scientists disagree with the conclusions of the IPCC, which is a political organisation, not a scientific one? This group of dissenting scientists has written three times to the secretary of this UN organisation pointing out their findings and have never received a response.

Regarding the Jersey Climate Forum membership. It is currently small, but includes scientifically qualified local people and those with knowledge of the climate argument from years studying it.

Dr Shobbrook also wants to know about how the Jersey Climate Forum are funded.

We have no funds. The upcoming visit to Jersey by Dr John Constable, one of the world’s leading experts in energy, organised by the Jersey Climate Forum, is free.

We care that much about the future of our community.

My interest lies not just in the science, but my concern is about the huge dislocation and cost that is going to be borne by the people of Jersey, especially those less fortunate. My common sense shrieks that it cannot be worth the sacrifice.

Dr Constable is to address a public meeting at the Town Hall this Thursday, 8 February, at 6.30pm and it is open to anyone with an interest in hearing about the problems of renewable energy, such as wind farms and solar. He will also make a presentation to States Members on Friday 9 February.

I hope Dr Shobbrook will attend our Town Hall meeting and join us in our mission, which is “to research and share knowledge and understanding of the effectiveness of various forms of renewable energy such as wind farms and solar in providing low-cost but reliable energy for the people of Jersey now and in the future”.

1 Osborne Court, First Tower, St Helier.