Get a grip Mr Darling!

It looks to me like there are certain influential figures in the British government who are proponents of the nuclear industry, for whatever reason, who just do not like the fact that there are substantial difficulties with the nuclear option and show no real sign of having listened to any of the objections other than financial. Take Alistair Darling:

One of the factors in nuclear is that the costs have got to be met. We know it is expensive but to have an energy review that says we are not going to do it, especially given the carbon problem we face, does not make any sense at all.

Alistair, the indications we've seen do address the 'buts' you have. The fact remains that if you really have the kind of government money that redeveloping nukes would require, you'd get more out of it helping to support efficiency measures and renewables or even sequestration. And that's before we consider that the carbon footprint of minikng, building and decommissioning nuke power plants is arguably higher than current carbon-burning options. Come on man! Get a grip. The fact is that energy security could trump plain security if we follow the nuke path: nuclear installations would not be a good thing to have if a terrorist organisation decided that flying planes or launching missiles at them would be a good way to further their agenda.

I could even be paranoid about things and say that given the security problems inherant in a plutonium economy, ID cards seem to be a potential tool to control populations and identify nuclear security risks, or that decisions to renew Trident might require a domestic nuclear industry ...

Guardian Unlimited Politics | Special Reports | The lights will go out if we avoid the nuclear option, says Darling:
Filed in: energy, generation, nuclear, UK, government