I've been opposed to nuclear fission. Still am. And I have no regrets. Were you downwind of Chernobyl in 1986? It rained in Scotland, it rained all over us. And then two weeks later they told us that we shouldnt have been drinking milk either. I don't trust the government safety statements or nuclear power any more. I also have a friend who was in Belarus in '86; his stories are scary indeed. We dont need another disaster like that.

Nuclear fission is bogus power source. U238 is limited and has exceedingly dangerous other uses; there is nowhere to deal with the waste either. Fast-breeder reactors do generate plutionium, and you could argue that the sellafield THORP reprocessing facility is a site in the fast breeder process, but today it just creates more waste.

The biggest issue with nuclear is that it distracts money and effort from alternate solutions for generating electricity. We have wind, we have tide. I dont think Solar is too great this far north, but panelling on housing could probably generate some electricity for less cost than retail electrons.

I also think nuclear fusion is a potentially viable technology, one that should get more support. I think it would take a long while for supplies of H3 to run out in the oceans, and the waste products should be much less. Yet the amount of money being invested in fusion R&D is a fraction of that being spent cleaning up current and past nuclear fission sites.

As an aside, living in the SW UK, the area mentioned in the paper, I have already encountered some diesel shortages. the local petrol stations only have about half their diesel pumps active. This will only lead to more panic purchasing and knock on consequences. Cost of fuel is still less than immediately after Katrina though.