Dear Sir/Madam,

In view of the Telegraph's rather pro-nuclear stance (e.g. in the editorial: "Nuclear must be part of Britain's energy mix"), I was surprised to find the above cartoon in yesterday's edition. It expresses extremely well how I feel about nuclear power and gives me hope that you may yet recognise your folly. Far from being "irrational", as you boldly state in your editorial, the wide-spread fear of civil nuclear power is very well founded. It is your over-confidence in our long-term ability to handle it wisely and safely that is really irrational.

Recognising the folly of others is relatively easy, of course; it's recognising one's own that is so difficult. In fact, it is by far the biggest problem, threat and challenge that we all face. But, firm in our belief that WE (at least) are well-informed, rational and responsible human beings, we are not facing up to it.

My opposition to nuclear energy is based on the realisation (gained over many years of observing myself, other members of my species and society at large) that, although there are individual exceptions, in general and effectively we are neither well-informed, rational nor responsible. For us to pursue the nuclear option is like giving matches to a child and leaving it alone in a room full of flammable materials.

But, of course, we ARE that child, and like many children (at that difficult age!), are over-confident of our own powers; we certainly do not want to be told by anyone else what we should or shouldn't do. And besides, the matches we want to play with will give us POWER to do what we WANT. What child can resist that?

This is where Abrahamic religions, for all their faults, have something extremely important to teach us: the need for humility and submission to a higher authority.

Christmas is approaching and genuine Christians will be celebrating the birth of Jesus, paying homage to a child. You cannot get a lot more humble than that. Of course, Jesus is not any old child, but the perfect "Son of God", the embodiment of love and wisdom. Personally, I believe him to be a myth, but myths can be very useful when we project our higher - more enlightened, human, rather than animal - aspirations onto them.

We need to ask yourselves (Christian or not), what the "embodiment of love and wisdom" would be saying to us and urging us to do?

Would it be to go for the nuclear option, so that we have power enough to drive all our toys (cars and planes, etc) and satisfy our childish (animal) desires in continued pursuit of the grossly materialistic way of life we have become not just accustomed but also addicted to, and for the sake of which we are being driven to plunder (quite literally) and spoil our beautiful planet?

I don't think so, some how.

The debate about Britain's future sources of energy, and whether or not nuclear should be among them, needs to be a debate about fundamental attitudes: towards the human condition, the purpose of life (which, judging by our behaviour rather than our professed ideals, is to have as much wealth, power and social status, i.e. money, as possible), and the kind of future we want for our children and grandchildren: one shaped by love and wisdom, or by the same geo-political and economic forces which have shaped and blighted, and are now threatening to destroy, our world, because rooted in our more animal than human nature.

www.spaceship-earth.org