Accusations of recklessness by both sides of nuclear debate

Your front-page headline states "Swinney claims nuclear victory", but it could just as easily read "SNP dodges hard decisions on Scotland's future energy needs" (January 11). No-one "loves" nuclear power - you never hear anyone saying "A nuclear station at the bottom of the road? Oh, goody!" - but to rule out, forever, the use of nuclear energy as part of the essential mix of energy delivery is reckless and irresponsible in the extreme. To take the decision on the basis of pure ideological prejudice, as the SNP has done, is unforgivable. It shows that Mr Swinney is more concerned about the fundamentalists in his party than about producing a balanced energy plan for the future of the country There are undeniable problems with nuclear generation, including decommissioning and the disposal of waste, and these should not be underplayed. However, for the sake of the planet we need to find alternatives to fossil fuels, and nuclear is "green" in that it does not contribute to global warming in the same way as oil or coal. Projections for existing green alternatives show that they are entirely insufficient to cover the gap in energy needs as current nuclear capacity is run down. It must be asked: how does Mr Swinney propose to power the country and its industry in the medium term if he does not intend to utilise all available technologies to do so? What are his proposals for when the lights go out?