  We reply to the recent Comment [cond-mat/9702231] by J.-M. Duan. Our point of
view is markedly different on every issue raised. Much of the disagreement can
be traced to a different preception of experimentally relevant length scales.
i) We explain the difference between our formulation, which rests on a
microscopic basis, and the phenomenological one of the author. ii) Our
renormalization scheme is fundamentally right, as the "log(log)" interaction
appears only in wires of astronomical lengths. iii) The tunneling barrier is
profoundly reduced by the kinetic inductance. iv) We do make an appropriate
comparison to the data on the thinnest available wires.
