As we brace ourselves for the big increase in the price of gas, I wonder, as I did two years ago, why our beloved leader decided to commission two new power stations fuelled by gas when common sense indicated that our own supply of this from the North Sea is finite and will not last for ever.

I was surprised, however, just how quick that point came along. Perhaps, like Don Quixote, his head was full of windmills, but common-sense and simple arithmetic once again should have told him we would need to cover the whole of the UK, plus the best part of the North Sea, with these machines to meet our present and future demands for electricity.

The only solution we have, to stop us being at the mercy of other countries for fuel, is to bite the bullet and start building new-generation nuclear power stations as the French and Germans do. We have 50 years' experience building these and should be well versed in the art by now.

To avoid all the hassle of shipping the spent fuel rods around in about 25 years time, as we do at the moment to get rid of them, the solution is to build the nuclear reactors in the deep mines we no longer use, and when their useful life is over just seal off the mine and safely leave in situ, several thousand feet of earth would prevent radiation causing problems and the power plant would be built on the surface as normal. There is no atmospheric pollution with nuclear generation likeÊburning gas, oil or coal in a power station.

Growing crops for fuel sounds like a good idea but I have not seen the sums to prove it is viable and the burning process still produces pollution.

Wind generators always seemed like a nice clean alternative but you can't conveniently store the power for when the wind is not very strong and at night they could have a lot of power on tap that no one needs at that time, which makes the whole idea a rather expensive alternative. Unless someone else knows better . . . ?

This is cache, read story here