Letters to the Editor - 24/10 - Energy prices, Best of Twitter

Energy prices

[Re: EDF nuclear subsidy is a naive gamble on the future price of carbon and gas, yesterday]

Government support for nuclear is not a gamble on gas prices rising, it is a hedge against them doing so. Even at today’s power price, the impact on bills of new nuclear (indeed renewables) is a few tens of pounds per household per year. This is insurance – against high gas prices, a power sector dominated by gas, and against gas supply interruption due to politics, markets, terrorism, or technical faults. If gas prices go up, power prices follow in an in-built hedge for the power companies paid for by consumers. No source of energy is without its problems, but a diverse mix of power sources helps maintain reliable supplies. If we want homes, power stations, and industry powered by gas, then we can leave it to the market. But if we want a sensible and diverse mix, I believe the government has to intervene.

Dr Robert Gross, Imperial College London

[Re: Major’s windfall tax idea is as silly as Miliband’s energy price cap, yesterday]

Good article. Sir John Major has shown he lacks a proper grasp of the issues. Such a windfall tax would not be out of place in a Labour party manifesto. It lacks economic credibility.

John Becker



One in seven young people in the US are starting an enterprise; one in 17 in the UK. Culture divide.

The way to cut energy bills is for the government to stop wasting billions on climate change measures.

Major makes Labour’s argument. Cameron stands up for energy companies, not hard-pressed families.

New figures show Greeks are on average nearly 40 per cent poorer now than in 2008.