What has been missing is any real discussion of "facts on the ground".  So far, it seems to be a debate about the debate.  Nothing wrong with that, as long as it doesn't go on too long...then it becomes akin to arguing about which would be the proper dinner fork to use for such an extended period that one allowed oneself starved to death!

On Carbon: First, we must say that up to the recent time frame, we (meaning the technical/industrial nations) were actually moving on somewhat the right path.  That is, increased efficiency in consumption through better combustion (i.e., fuel injection controlled by computers, combined cycle natural gas electric generation controlled by computers), and to cleaner fuels (i.e. the aforementioned natural gas, light sweet crude oil, and low sulfer Diesel engines.  

We now seem to be running up against the limit of available daily production on these "semi-benign" fuel sources, however, and that presents a sticky wicket....after having progressed over the years up the "hydro/carbon" levels, (that is to say, a move from high carbon (C) but limited hydrogen (H) fuels, from wood (high C/low H) to coal (high C/low H) to oil (a bit better, high C/but higher on H) to light sweet oil, and then to natural gas (best on the C/H equation behind only hydrogen itself (H), we are now faced with the prospect of sliding back down the ladder, to high Carbon/lower Hydrogen fuels (such as tar sand, shale oil, heavy oils).  This is one more indication of something most environmentalists hate to admit:  The best friends the environmentalists had were light light sweet crude oil and natural gas.

Peak OIl, when it occurs, will almost certainly not help the environment, as the world moves back to high carbon content fuel in an attempt to maintain current lifestyle.

This leaves the world with very limited available options:

1.Nuclear Fission
2.Nuclear Fusion

3. Renewables
   
4. Carbon Sequestration or capture on a massive scale
   
5. Massive efficiency and conservation gains, including hgh speed electric rail  to maintain the transport of goods and people.

I detest nuclear fission for all the normal reasons, but unless renewables can be developed very fast, it is the only real alternative for large scale power production, in particular on an island nation like the U.K.  Then if nuclear fusion ever does become a reality, the infrastructure would already be built, except for inserting the new reactor.

One can visualize a future in which the U.K. would have a set of modern nuclear reactors, with a mix of renewables and conservation to stretch the kilowatts, and importing enough LNG and propane combined with methane recovery from waste for what road transportation was still needed and any additional electric power, but with the bulk of goods and people moved about by electricified rail.   Great Britain is not that large of a country, and the rail infrastructure could be easily recovered from it's decay of the last couple of decades (much easier done there than in the U.S.)  Increased strategic storage for natural gas and propane would also assist in energy security and planning.

This leaves us with the above mention "massive efficiency gains", by way of very modern appliances in homes, insulation, solar hot water, etc.

It is not an unworkable situation for the U.K., and in the long run, the island geography might pay off in creating a "defense-able" nation that would be "carbon clean"  (the above prescription is the only way the U.K. has a hope of making the Kyoto Protocol mandates) and sustainable with it's current population (no population growth, however, but like the rest of Europe, the birthrate is already dropping in the U.K.)

Note that many of the above methods can also apply to other island states (Japan, Cyprus and Malta come to mind, and our U.S. state of Hawaii) and on mainland European countries (the French are actually going in the direction we have discussed, but please, Brits, don't dismiss an idea just because the French use it! :-)

So we are not ready to give up on the future of our Limey cousins yet, they still have a few cards to play, and cheers to Jonathon Porritt for pointing up that the changes must start now, for the United Kingdom and for all of us.

Roger Conner  known to you as ThatsItImout