The UK faces at least two years of peak-time power cuts in five years, despite the Conservatives' pledge to revive nuclear power.

The Tories' energy policy was published Friday, and while a revived nuclear commitment provides some of the promised "energy security", it won't come in time. And amazingly, the party has committed to prop up the carbon price.

By 2015 the high cost of complying with EU environmental compliance will have taken out a third of the UK's coal capacity - the power companies would rather close than comply - followed by two thirds of its oil powered generating capacity by 2020. Nuclear provides 14 per cent of UK electricity today, but all but one of the current generators are due to close by 2022.

That means cuts - or in the ministry's jargon "expected energy unserved" - in just five years' time.

The Tories note that by 2017, the 3GW hour shortfall will mean "a 15 minute power cut for every household in Greater Manchester, every winter night for a month".

Gas will need to fill the gap - almost all of which is imported.

The Conservatives have vowed maintain the EU's 20 per cent renewable target, and reiterated the Millipledge to mandate unproven Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS).

Strangest of all, the party has committed to prop up the price of carbon. Carbon trading is the Kyoto solution to get the energy companies on the global warming bandwagon, and many have indeed signed up.

But the price of carbon is volatile - it's fallen to €1 per tonne, and this week two exchanges (France and the Nordics) were suspended.

"The experience of the ETS has been of such price volatility and market uncertainty that it has had the opposite of its intended effect: it has made long-term investments more risky and therefore more costly, and so less likely to be made," explains the strategy document.

The Tories plan to do this by revising an energy tax, the Climate Change Levy, paid by energy suppliers. This would kick in when European carbon price fell below the desired level.

Of course, energy companies will pass on the cost to the punters. You can see why Tory party faithful call the front bench "BluLabour".

WTF have Labour been doing since 1997 with regard to planning for future capacity? Sitting on their hands?

It's obviously the fault of the Tories before them.

You say that but there will be people in this Forum who would actually believe that.

You say that but there will be people in this Forum who would actually believe that.

It's obviously the fault of the Tories before them.

I founf this story amusing:

Wind farms produce 'fifth of expected electricity

Makes a mockery of all these so-called experts have been saying about using wind farms to generate power.

Experts warned that subsidies for green energy are encouraging wind farms to be built in unsuitable areas.

Technically the power companies are responsible though the fact that the Tories did not mandate the energy companies responsibilities at privatisation does not help. Also never underestimate a government sitting on its hands till there is a crisis then rolling out a nuclear option.

We need to re-nationaise core infrastructure services, and make them answerable to the UK people, not directors and shareholders in other territories. At the moment, we have been weakened by this, and had the Conservatives been in power over the last 18 years does not mean that the situation would be any better, or less precarious than it is now. I would argue that it could even be even worse.

Firstly, it's not in their interest to cut the nation's supply of energy off.

Secondly, even if they did then we just send the army in to restore power (since it's still generated within the UK) and sort out the legal mess later.

No but it is not in their interest to have any spare production capacity either. So we could have power cuts which are not planned for.