I must take issue with some of the remarks made by Amory Lovins that you reported.
Recent studies by the Royal Academy of Engineering, the Organisation for Cooperation & Development, the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the Swiss Scherer Institute have confirmed that nuclear is competitive with fossil fuels and cheaper than renewable energy.
Both the Public Accounts Committee and the National Audit Office have looked at the subsidies paid to renewable.
They found that 10% electricity from renewables would cost consumers £1bn a year with an additional £1.5bn to connect them to the grid.
Nuclear power needs fair play not subsidy. The government puts the climate change levy on both fossil and nuclear generation even though the latter has no CO2 emissions.
Insulating homes is worthwhile but results in saving two or three times as much gas as electricity.
Domestic energy accounts for only some quarter of the national demand.
I believe renewable energy and conservation have a role to play in future energy supplies but they do not have the potential needed to replace old generating plant that will close by 2020. Nuclear has the ability to provide much greater capacity and would do so without CO 2 emissions.
Michael Gammon (F), michael. email@example.com