Sir, The Prime Minister is quite right to promote high technology as the way ahead to combat global warming and climate change (report, Mar 29).

We live in a technology dominated society and the solutions offered by various green groups who suggest that improved energy efficiency and renewables are all that is needed to deliver a low-carbon dioxide, sustainable-energy future do not stand up to any kind of engineering scrutiny.

Two thousand wind generators are required to replace one nuclear power station. Renewable energy will play its part in the solution to our problems but it should, in any event, be used to replace gas and coal generation, not carbon-free nuclear power.

The bulk of future electricity supply will have to rely more and more on nuclear power from new generation stations which will include breeder reactors and possibly fusion reactors as we move through the century, quadrupling our demand for electricty.

Nuclear technology can ensure a supply of electricity to the world for 1,000 years if we have the courage and sense to choose this high technology route.

PROFESSOR IAN FELLS
Newcastle upon Tyne

Sir, You are right to say that “climate change is a formidable challenge” (leading article, Mar 29), but the Government’s climate change review was a lost opportunity that will not tackle the problem of climate change in the long term.

The Government wants people to cut their emissions, but the reality is that most people will not pay a premium to be environment-friendly nor will they accept a performance degradation to be environment-friendly. We cannot keep building more nuclear power stations.

To protect the environment for future generations the Government must embrace the development of environment-friendly energy technologies, which will deliver a sustainable, secure, low-carbon future.

Fuel cells are an exciting technology that is now making enormous advances in its capability simultaneously to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, contribute to energy security and offer money-saving energy efficiencies.

They have the potential to provide a real alternative to mains-supplied electricity for countless household and industrial appliances, thereby reducing demand for electricity from the power stations.

Politicians love to talk about how important sustainable development is. However, this talk must be turned into real commitments to develop fuel cells and other technologies that will provide viable solutions to climate change for the long term.

STEPHEN VOLLER
Chief executive, Voller Energy
Basingstoke, Hants

Sir, A 1982 encyclopedia that I recently bought included a few paragraphs on geothermal energy and its possibilities. The most surprising was the use of “hot rock” geothermal, that is the heat that is literally beneath us as opposed to hydrothermal vents where steam naturally occurs. The article on this “wet” heat states that “experiments were taking place in Cornwall, the US, Germany and other places and if no snags arise the energy that could be made available is prodigious.”

That was 24 years ago. What happened? Could geothermal in this form be the Cinderella energy form we are looking for?

GRAEME CLARK
Menzieshill, Dundee

Explore Letters

• Feedback