No matter what your thoughts and opinions are around the future make up of the UK power market, claims that the 20% efficiency saving, which is possible when replacing old coal with the latest designs, is 'nothing' is misleading.

Simple analysis demonstrates that a 1.6GW new coal station as proposed at Kingsnorth (45% efficient) operating at a typical 70% load factor would save 2.2 million tonnes of CO2 annually when compared to a 35% efficient station which it would replace.

How many overly subsidised wind farms would it take to generate such a saving?

A glance at the credentials of London Array, the worlds biggest proposed wind project, shows that 341 enormous turbines could be built to provide a capacity of 1GW and reported CO2 savings of 1.9 million tonnes, some way off the annual savings possible from replacing just one coal plant with the latest designs.

Still think a 20% efficiency saving is nothing?

Richard Catterson, Paisley, Renfrewshire

The problem with shifting to other, supposedly abundant, fuel sources to generate power is that they are finite. A fuel that has hundreds of years of reserves has that reserve at present consumption. If we double consumption to replace another fuel we halve the length of time that reserve will last. If we then increase consumption again to power the sequestration of Carbon the reserve gets even shorter. If we add exponential growth in demand at say 2% we double fuel use in 35 years. so those hundreds of years reserve come down to 30 to 50 years supply.

So, we solve our fuel crisis only to leave another fuel crisis to our children. If we invested in Renewable Technologies such as, firstly and most importantly, conservation and then, in no particular order, wind, solar, wave and tidal the problem would be solved for good. Unfortunately our government economists and Prime Minister can''t see past the end of one of their noses.

Ken Neal, Newbury, UK

20% efficiency saving is nothing; the net effect is that we'll have more dirty coal. Carbon capture is at least 20 years away, and saying it's "capture ready" is nothing but greenwash.

We should be investing heavily in renewables: this is the most promising, long-term solution to our energy needs (especially in Britain) and yet receives a tiny fraction of investment.

We have still not finished paying for any of the electricity created through existing nuclear yet: this is a non-sense dangerous technology that should not be invested in further. The promises are way, way in the future, and the reality will be too late.

Kingsnorth should not be built if the UK is to seriously stand a chance of mitigating the effects of climate change.

Rich Lott, Oxford,