Fukushima - let's see if this makes sense. We design a nuclear reactor 20 years after the first one is created in Chicago. We don't update it or incorporate it for any new safety features that are developed in the next 50 years and then wonder what happened when it failed. That's like driving a 1910s car in the 1960s and wondering why it doesn't perform the same. There has been a lot of knowledge gained in the last 60 years - why don't we use it? Thank you Greenpeace et al.

Regarding Telsas - I drove my neighbor's - I liked it. I considered buying one but I got the opportunity to buy a 2016 991 GTS Club Coupe. Guess which one I bought. Regarding regenerative braking - according to my neighbor it is adjustable - you can program how invasive you want it to be. BTW, in the mid-80s I drove an electric car down the expressway at 70mph. That person's car was a design project for himself and a major Japanese automaker. It's all a matter of batteries. Mark

Well the technology has improved for nuclear power but like anything designed by humans there are compromises. The controls, redundancies and safety features are all designed by humans who try to answer the "what if" question. We've come a long way since the "unsinkable" Titanic, where no one asked what if more than x watertight compartments were breached, but there are still things we haven't thought of. In the case of Fukushima I don't know if the "what if" a huge earthquake is followed by a total power outage and a huge tsunami question was thought through. (A slightly bigger issue than what if the seals fail on this IMSB, oil washes all the grease out and then the bearing fails?)

I would love to see more modern nuclear power built, but would like to see these 3 issues addressed-

1. Elimination of the Price Andersen Act which is the only way owners of nuclear power plants can obtain liability insurance.

2.Require the owners of retired nuclear power plants to use their decommissioning funds to fully demolish and remediate the power plant sites.

3. Establish permanent storage facilities for all spent nuclear fuel and contaminated materials, which has never been done since the dawn of the nuclear age.

In a word, no. There are a few reasons behind this and i'll be short with them.

I live in London where my car lives on the street. We don't have set parking spaces so it's a free for all when parking on an evening. So how am i supposed to plug in, and if i do what's to stop someone just pulling the plug out?
Also the pathetic charge to mileage ratio. The Grand Tour illustrated this perfectly the other day when James May drove his I3 to Devon following Jeremy in his standard Golf. James stopped at 2 charging stations to find them out of service and when he did find one he was there for an hour while it got some charge back. You want to take an electric car across europe, that would take monumental planning!!!!!!
Also the Bmw still has petrol in it to power it's back-up generator.

And as someone rightly pointed out that the more we buy into this bull**************** the more drain on fossil fuels there is through the back door, pretty simple really.

We've seen the future in the Honda Clarity, that's the direction we need to head in. We really do need to stop buying into the electric bull**************** (Californians, i'm looking at you and your bloody Prius. A car proven to be more damaging to the environment due to it's manufacture process) and actually make a viable answer to a petrol substitute.