Well, deal with terrorism as a seperate issue, the energy crisis needs to be addressed, and neither biofuel or solar panels or wind turbines will be enough to replace fossil fuels as our primary source of energy. Simple fact is that the question of nuclear power is already simmering under the surface and will be raised seriously in the near future.

P.S:  Numerous nuclear plants already exist, including Sellafield, so if the danger is already there, how can you use the threat of attack as a valid reason to discount further, more safe and secure nuclear plants? 

It is a known fact that if every inch of today's agricultural land was tranferred to biofuel, it still would not be enough to cover our energy needs.

Ireland's hydro-power has already been maxed out, with just under 2.5% of our energy coming from it. Wave power is, as already said a useless innovation. The wind potential has been grossly exaggerated, and there are numerous reports of low-frequency humming in the vicinity of turbines, causing headaches in people and not allowing livestock to flourish. There is also only a very small proportion of countries that can realistically avail of wind power, with Ireland as an island having the greatest potential in Europe, yet only through putting turbines in every concievable corner of the country, including 200 off the Wicklow coastline, and even at that they would only cover 25% of our energy needs. We have no option at the moment but use more and more of our finite resources and as pekau rightly said we are just procratinating and making the problem worse for ourselves in the long run.

I am an honest person, and I can honestly say that I have no intention of giving up my home comforts, my television, my gas heater, my car (if I had one) or any other energy requiring luxury we are all accustomed to nowadays. In fact I go to a college 90miles from where I live. Am I going to cycle?? Neither are you. The only thing I will cut down on is air travel..BUT I will do some little things like everybody else, unfortunately these little things are acedemic on the larger scale and we need a realistic and progressive solution.

Denis, Of course I read the article on concentrated solar power and it sounds very exciting and innovating and fantastic, and if it is feasible, as it 'appears' to be, then brilliant. We're all saved.

·        Following the accident 116,000 people had to be evacuated and between 1990 and 1995 an additional 210,000 people were resettled.  This created a need to build a new town named Slavutich for the personnel of the Chernobyl power plant.

·        Villages had to be decontaminated and major work had to be carried out on infrastructure for example water and gas. The closure of Reactor 4 and the “freeze” on construction of new reactors reduced the availability of electricity supplies.

·        Demographic indications in 'contaminated' areas suggest that these areas are experiencing a decline as:

o       The birth rate has decreased

o       The work force has migrated from contaminated areas to uncontaminated areas thus in turn resulting in a shortage of labour and professional staff.

·        The effected areas suffered major disruption to normal life and economic activity in particular with regard to agriculture and forestry production.

·        $12.8 Billon of disruption occurred to the Soviet Economy.

·        A “victim” mentality has occurred in the area due restrictions of activities making life difficult and unsettling.

Of course endorse the development of alternative sorces of energy, but unless our behaviour as a race changes, then alternative sources will not be enough to cover ouf increasing energy needs. 

I think everyone can agree on that.