THERE was a shiver of fear throughout Europe when Russia cut off the gas supply to the Ukraine on January 1, seemingly as a punishment for the latter's foreign policies. It was quickly restored (for now) but the lesson cannot have been lost.

Now it is a long way from a Russian gas plant to a cooker in Cracoe but we cannot help but be a little uneasy about our fuel supplies. North Sea Gas is beginning to fizzle out and will be gone in 15 years. Our power bills are soaring out of control and everywhere we look we are warned about global warming. With gas supplies and prices erratic and a return to power stations fired by coal (of which we have plenty, except that it is all underground and past Governments decided it was a good idea to shut down the pits) unthinkable, now is the time to look seriously at alternatives.

For the "green" lobby this means wind and wave power but another real alternative is nuclear power. Cheap and clean, its image has been badly tainted by the Chernobyl incident of 20 years ago. Time, and technology, have moved on immeasurably since then.

In France 56 nuclear power stations churn out 76 per cent of the country's electricity needs. In Sweden - a country not normally associated with environmental vandalism - 10 nuclear power stations churn out half the country's requirement with hydro electric power making up another 36 per cent. The Swedish government, bowing to the environmental lobby, wishes to phase out nuclear energy - despite 82 per cent of the population saying they wish to see the nuclear option retained or expanded.

The British response is to run down our old nuclear power stations, close our coal fired plants and switch to gas fired power stations. Gas! We're running out of our own supplies and the likes of President Putin control the taps.

It's time to look more seriously at Britain's nuclear options.