Our old reactionary looked at the recent riots and got a vision of what might happen if the UK followed other countries' reactions to power loss

The riots that spread across England following the ignition in Tottenham were led by greed, hooliganism, gang culture and a subsequent complete breakdown in law and order. It is argued by some the root cause lies in poverty, the failure of the education system and a lack of employment prospects for the disaffected youth. I'll leave you to decide what your opinion is.
Imagine however, the potential consequences if there was a distinct and tangible reason for rioting to break out.

At the end of June this year, thousands rioted in Senegal and burned the offices of state electricity company Senelec. The reason? Prolonged power cuts.

And Senegal is not alone in this reaction to lack of power. In the same month last year days of power failures in Iraq triggered fatal riots in the south of the country prompting the electricity minister to resign. In May 2008, Northern India suffered lack of electricity and rioting there saw not only power transformers set ablaze, but electricity supply staff were also physically attacked in various cities and towns.

The point is that if we as a nation can be driven from the streets by marauding mindless gangs, what would happen if our lights went out?

Which leads me on to the government's measures to transform (pun intended) the electricity market over the next two decades. Energy Secretary, Chris Huhne, being the politician he is, claims the measures will save money for consumers. This statement was of course followed immediately by a notice from my supplier that my electricity prices are going up by 11% and gas by 18%!

The government reckons £110bn is needed for new electricity supplies - I reckon one can double that figure realistically, just on the basis that government figures are always out by about 100% (or more). A key platform (pun intended) of the reforms will be contracts which guarantee long-term stable prices for electricity from low-carbon sources including nuclear and offshore wind farms, in order to give investors certainty over their returns.

That the government proposes so called "Contracts for Difference" might favour nuclear energy with its base level output (as opposed to demand led) is not necessarily a bad thing. However, some argue it removes the incentive for the investment in the installation of wind generators.
We need at least the equivalent of 20 new major power stations according to the government. How does it expect to provide investors with certainty over their returns in the short term? The amortisation of infrastructure will always be long term and the investment cannot be seen as one for profit, but rather as one for the survival and energy independence of the UK.

That we see price hikes currently, will only be exacerbated as we are compelled to import more and more electricity. While we mainly import nuclear generated power from France, that does not mean we will not be prone to price spikes - especially as we inevitably have to import greater quantities of electricity from fossil fuelled generators.

So what would happen if the lights went out in Britain? We have witnessed the social carnage of rioting in England - apparently over a single incident involving the police. Imagine if greater numbers of ordinary citizens were riled enough to take to the streets.

Of course that would never happen here would it?