UNLESS defeatism has been redefined as 'not believing in magic,' Anthony Reeve can't label me 'defeatist' for describing as nonsense his idea of solar power as a way of eliminating transmission networks.

He's missed my point, which was not to question photo-electric generation per se – I think it has value – but to see it as one part of an integrated mixed system of electricity generation which definitely does need a transmission network.

There is already a great deal of work being done on photoelectric systems – witness the rapid increase in the installation of panels on roofs and in fields. But the likelihood of such systems supplying all UK electricity demand is nil. Assuming that all the panels were more efficient than the latest design, that they could all be optimally oriented towards the sun and that enough solar electricity could be stored to satisfy night-time needs – absurdly optimistic assumptions which barely even recognise the Shockley-Queisser limit on solar materials – the panels would cover 15-20 per cent of UK land to satisfy current UK demand.

We would lose much of the agricultural land near centres of highest electricity demand yet still need the inter-connecting transmission system which Mr Reeve wants to avoid.

Imagine a street in which every house had fitted solar panels. Sometimes one or two of these systems would fail or need maintenance. If the individual systems were not connected together these one or two homes would be left without power, whereas sensible neighbours would pool their resources as insurance against blackouts. And if some of the homes were flats, were shaded, had roofs oriented the wrong way, or were businesses with electricity demands higher than their individual panels could provide then it would be even more sensible to pool those resources.

The problem of how enough electricity generated during daylight could be stored for use during darkness has yet to be solved. Perhaps if Mr Reeves knows how to do this, particularly for high-demand continuous process factories such as glass or tyre works, he would let the industry know. Or perhaps, given the quality of his commentary on other sources of generation – wind, nuclear, tidal, hydro and so on – he would be better either getting some scientific and engineering training or sticking to writing about subjects he understands.

– David Norman, Longhope.