Energy policy in tatters as two more companies scrap plans for new nuclear

Posted by Richardg — 29 March 2012 at 12:16pm - Comments
RWE Nuclear powerstation
All rights reserved. Credit: Paul Langrock / Zenit / Greenpeace

This week two more energy companies abandoned their plans to build new nuclear power stations in the UK. It’s left the government’s energy strategy in tatters – and it’s time for them to admit that the future is not nuclear and start investing in cleaner, safer renewable energy.

Today’s announcement by RWE and E.ON isn’t really a surprise. People working in the energy sector have been saying privately for months that it was just a matter of time before they pulled out, because the economics of nuclear didn’t stack up without billions of pounds of subsidy.

Building nuclear reactors requires lots of money up front and has a very long payback time, which isn’t a very attractive prospect for investors – as E.ON and RWE admitted this morning.

The government is determined to pretend that it’s business as usual, which isn’t a surprise. They’ve been too close to the nuclear industry for years. When the energy companies and private investors said they were reluctant to build nuclear, the government response was to push the risk onto bill payers – saddling millions of people with the risks of massive delays and inevitable overspend.

This simply isn’t good enough. There are better, faster and cheaper ways to save us from climate change. It takes too long to build new reactors. Even if new companies stepped in to replace RWE and EON, it would be years before they got any project of the ground. Gas, despite the best efforts of a very vocal lobby, isn't going to help either.

The only solution is to start investing in a wide range of sustainable energy options that are much faster to build at scale. They also need to start taking energy efficiency seriously.

Last October, research by WWF showed that renewable energy was the key to cutting CO2 emissions from the power sector. They calculate that renewables could provide 60% of our electricity by 2030. Not only would that be cheaper and less risky than nuclear power, but it has the potential to get our flat-lining economy off life support.

But the only way that this will happen is if the government wakes up to the fact that its nuclear dream is crumbling.

This morning two more energy companies abandoned their plans to build new nuclear power stations in the UK. It’s left the government’s energy strategy in tatters – and it’s time for them to admit defeat and start investing in cleaner, safer renewable energy.

 

Today’s announcement by RWE and E.ON isn’t really a surprise. People working in the energy sector have been saying privately for months that it was just a matter of time before they pulled out, because the economics of nuclear didn’t stack up.

 

Building nuclear reactors requires lots of money up front and has a very long payback time, which isn’t a very attractive prospect for investors – as E.ON admitted this morning. <link to EON PR>

 

The government is determined to pretend that it’s business as usual, which isn’t a surprise. They’ve been too close to the nuclear industry for years. When the energy companies and private investors said they were reluctant to build nuclear, the government response was to push the cost onto household bills – saddling millions of people with the risks of massive delays and inevitable overspend.

 

This simply isn’t good enough, because nuclear power isn’t going to save us from climate change. Neither is gas, despite the best efforts of a very vocal lobby. The only solution is to start investing in a wide range of sustainable energy options, including wind, solar and wave power – and to start taking energy efficiency seriously.

 

Last October, WWF published a new report that found that renewable energy was the key to cutting CO2 emissions from the power sector. They calculate that renewables could provide 60% of our electricity by 2030. Not only would that be cheaper and less risky than nuclear power, but it has the potential to give out flat-lining economy some much needed CPR.

 

But the only way that this will happen is if the government wakes up to the fact that its nuclear dream has become a nightmare.

Thanks for your question Ian. A lot is being said about different types of reactors, fast breeders, liquid flouride thorium reactors (LFTR), fusion reactors etc But no one has been able to build one on a commercial scale, even if they could it would be decades before a commercially viable reactor could come online, certainly not in time to plug the energy gap facing the UK over the next few years. The UK, France, Japan and USA have all tried, and failed, to build fast breeders and the Chinese government are attempting to build a LFTR reactor but say it will be decades before it will start generating electricity.

Ultimately, there is only so much money available for researching new technologies. We have to choose whether to spend billions trying to build working fusion, thorium or fast-breeder reactors – which have a track record of being costly failures – or invest our money making already proven renewable technologies cheaper and more efficient and combining them with energy efficiency to reduce overall demand for energy.

Follow Greenpeace UK