I live in the UK, and they are fairly gun-ho on low carbon elec....

I live in the UK, and they are fairly gun-ho on low carbon elec. with the eventual cost of power the main driver.

They are pro-wind and gas, however they don't want to be puppets of east European, Russian gas whims and security of supply is a key issue. Hence why they are allowing initial testing of shale gas reserves for a domestic supply when much of Western Europe has banned hydrofracking out-right.

Wind is beneficial from a low-carbon, renewable point of view but they also understand the limitations of it not being baseload, or capable of being baseload until a lot more work is done with smart grids and on-grid storage.

Reliability and industry supportive pricing and stability will win out. Despite the MP's being namby-pamby, corrupt, old-money-types they are realists and understand economic reality vs fairy dust, wishful thinking.

Nuclear is not taboo amongst decision makers and is definitely on the table.

The key paragraph in the story above is "The eight sites are: Bradwell, Essex; Hartlepool; Heysham, Lancashire; Hinkley Point, Somerset; Oldbury, south Gloucestershire; Sellafield, Cumbria; Sizewell, Suffolk; and Wylfa, Anglesey. All are adjacent to existing nuclear sites. It is the first major announcement on the future of nuclear power in the UK since the Fukushima disaster in Japan."

So not only are they saying that nuclear sites that they currently have are fine, but they are good for expansion and further investment.

Coal is definitely not going to happen. Further elec expansion will most likely be 40:40 gas:nuclear with 20% of wind on the side. There are various other projects on the side biomass, tidal etc, however these are small scale and maybe for the next generation.

Choice

PS. Ignore everything Clegg says, he is a muppet.