I've studied the alternative sources of clean energy for I guess all of the last 20 years as a professor and before that as a PhD and master's student, since those were also the topics I worked on at that time. Clean energy systems is what I focus on.
What's happened to me is I've become less and less an advocate of any particular solution. I believe much more now that we should put policies in place—in my case it's for the environment—that meet our environmental objectives, whether it's greenhouse gases, or acid emissions, or local air pollution, and then see what happens. I hope you've understood that this has been the thrust of my comments here, that I think it's very dangerous when governments get overly involved in deciding as politicians that this solution—nuclear or oil or coal or tidal or wind—is better than another one. I've learned to try to be much more humble about that. Whatever I thought five years ago, new technological developments, new environmental concerns, new shifts in public preferences will prove me and everyone wrong.
I think it's much better to get the policies in place, as Mr. Marshall said as well, that are there for a long time—because we know we have a concern about a risk such as acid rain for a long time and possibly such as greenhouse gases as well—and then let other processes that have a political element to them, but also have a market element to them, determine what kind of mix we'll have going forward.