Making one of the points I always make, the question also depends on how quickly you can ramp up production/deployment of various things, particularly with regard to suitable levels of safety. Although my understanding is that the generation density of wind power is too low for it to be an ideal technology, it does have the advantage that the absolute worst case if it goes wrong is that you might get in rare circumstances one person killed by a collapsing/exploding wind turbine. On the other hand, whilst I'd really like to see nuclear technologies deployed in an incrementally ramping up way leading to extensive use in maybe 50 years, I really don't want, as a vague estimate, 50 nuclear plants of exactly the same initial design built in the UK within the next 10 years. (Look at Holyrood palace in Edinburgh and the millennium bridge for two examples of typical non-safety critical engineering that have been screwed up in the UK.)

So I'd vote for the "all of the above, plus solar heating and to a lesser extent photovoltaic".

Though there were reports this week of ice being projected from a turbine causing some concerns - though I can't see this becoming much of an issue.

Watch out, if someone gets hit and sues, wind turbines builders will have to install containment vessels.