I’ve been through every argument that the nuclear industry makes promoting new nuclear power stations – but scratch the surface and they just melt through the floor. New nuclear is fundamentally not needed – numerous studies, including by Stanford University and renowned energy modellers at LUT show that the UK, and indeed most, if not all, other countries can meet their energy needs with 100% renewables.

Politicians’ fears about the wind and sun and the rain and the waves and tides being unable to meet all our needs are misplaced. Renewables, energy storage, energy efficiency and flexible power with a modern upgraded grid can do it all - cheaper, quicker, safer and a hell of a lot cleaner, and create many more thousands of jobs.

The cost of nuclear power is eye-watering. Look at Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C – nearly £100bn to build them both with massive delays and cost -over-runs. That is enough to install a 5kWh battery in every one of the 28 million homes in Britain, and leave £44bn for other things. Combine that with solar and every home becomes a power station with its own ‘baseload’.

Alternatively, £100bn could fund planned upgrades to the grid needed to facilitate large and small renewables, twice over. The Coire Glas pumped hydro storage project in the Highlands could be built 50 times over. £100bn spent on a nuclear-free transition could be revolutionary.

Study for Miliband finds Scotland suitable for new nuclear

Warning 'Scotland will be left behind unless SNP ends nuclear objection'

'Ideology over science': Scotland’s climate change plan faces nuclear revolt

Why can't people grasp that there's much more to........

© Herald Scotland