The public discussion of energy options tends to be intensely
emotional, polarized, mistrustful, and destructive. Every option is
strongly opposed: the public seem to be anti-wind, anti-coal,
anti-waste-to-energy, anti-tidal-barrage, anti-fuel-duty, and
anti-nuclear.

We can't be anti-everything! We need an energy plan that adds up.
But there's a lack of numeracy in the public discussion of energy.
Where people do use numbers, they select them to sound big, to make an
impression, and to score points in arguments, rather than to aid
thoughtful discussion.

My motivation in writing "Sustainable Energy - without the hot air"
(available both on paper, and for free in electronic form
[withouthotair.com]) is to promote constructive conversations about
energy, instead of the perpetual Punch and Judy show. I've tried to
write an honest, educational and fun book.[2] I hope the book will help
build a cross-party consensus in favour of urgently making an energy
plan that adds up.

"Sustainable Energy - without the hot air" presents
the numbers that are needed to answer these questions:

• How huge are Britain's renewable resources, compared with our current
  energy consumption?

• How big do renewable energy facilities have to be, to make a
  significant contribution?

• How big would our energy consumption be if we adopted strong
  efficiency measures?

• Which efficiency measures offer big savings, and which offer only 5
  or 10%?

• Do new much-hyped technologies such as hydrogen or electric cars
  reduce energy consumption, or do they actually make our energy
  problem worse?