Brown lighting

It's what I think you get when you mix red and green. it's the colour of fudge. Nuclear plan puts Brown's green image in spotlight

And again I find myself with some small sympathy for the dilemma he faces. Well, as far as being between a rock and a hard place, but that's why he is in the job he coveted. Frankly I'd have more respect if he just turned round and said 'Look, you can't have it all, I'm going this way' rather than trying to be all things to all people but ending up a nothing to no one.

And yes, I heard him 'Speaking on the BBC's The Andrew Marr Show, where he said: "This is a year of very big choices for the British society and for Britain as a whole. It's about equipping ourselves for the future; a year of big long-term decisions. I will be judged by whether I get these right."' And nowt there says anything of substance.

I leave the conclusion to one of his own MPs: "The tragedy of Gordon Brown is the only big decisions he appears capable of taking are the wrong ones."

'No nuclear power station has ever been built without substantial subsidies'

What would I give for a simp.. well at least clear chart outlining the ROI and enviROI of the various energy options we are being presented with.

Be it ring-fencing us with windmills, sticking a nuke in the back-garden or firing up a coal-fired without a CO2 scrubber I'd just like to see where the money is coming from, who it is going to, for what and for how long to deliver what to my socket.

And then I'd like to see what the consequences to my kids' futures are of these from the minute a spade goes into the ground (or, more like, more gets blown on pre-consultancy than the project) to the moment they are decommissioned, including all maintenance consequences.

It surely should not be that hard?

Guardian - Which would you rather subsidise? - in the world of some media I rather have a sense of wishing something to be, rather than reporting on what is.

And another - Don't make us nuke - some media are now rather devalued by being a tad exclusive in their discussions, I fear. I'd say they were preaching to a converted flock, but having read some thread replies maybe not.

What is obvious is that the Guardian quoting BBC links and vice versa is not making for a great debate, or very credible these days as any kind of objective justification.