Winds of change

So Tony Blair's solution to future energy needs is the safest, cheapest and most efficient method, (nuclear energy, if you hadn't guessed). Not sure whether he's going to deal with the £4.5 billion decommissioning costs and storage of the nuclear waste from the last generation of cheap, clean energy first.

Credit where credit's due, though, he's right to take hard decisions to fulfil his Kyoto commitment to reduce CO2 emissions (and not just the hard decision of how to get out of it without anyone noticing). The tireless opposers of windfarm developments who have contributed so maturely to the energy debate over the last decade can take some comfort in their victory: for surely it is the recognition that any substantial increase in renewable exploitation would inspire protests that would make the pro-hunting lobby look like blood-stained sadists pussycats that lies behind this courageous step.

Of course, it leaves the problem of where to put the new nuclear stations- there's going to be a lot. Luckily, they don't spoil views for miles by intruding on the skyline, so presumably right next door to the NIMBYs would suit them fine. Or are they going to start whingeing about that too? Surely not!