Carbon is an essential good, so scientific practice of applying Frank Ramsey's Mathematical Theory of Saving to Social-Cost Benefit Analyses is a major error by yourself and other central planners. The system under examination is Hobbesian in nature and a Common Social Cost of Carbon a consequence of all governance externalities. This is an all encompassing social contract (national security) problem, not a welfare problem.

Further, on the UK national risk register, nuclear accidents are only one step down in impact from global pandemic. Accidents do happen, even recently in advanced economies (Fukushima). Whilst the UK might deploy such technology safely (Windscale being a lesson learned), I am concerned nuclear generation deployment worldwide would significantly increase the resulting risk profile overall. This may be a particular concern within jurisdictions that lack proper regulation, risk political instability and have uncertain futures (Chernobyl). Therefore, I don't much like nuclear generation as an option.

I'm excited by the potential of wind, solar and deep geothermal to add safe, clean and resilient energy sources to the mix... Gas-fired boilers aren't so bad when taking everything into consideration in my view... Go, go, go for: closer systems control; automated maintenance; common-sense justice and enforcement; and healthier consumer choices (smarter demand management is key - no mistakes there).