Just weeks ago, the Climate Assembly set up by parliament rejected nuclear power as an answer to creating a zero-carbon economy. This was due to cost, safety and difficulties with waste storage and decommissioning. Yet Boris Johnson is reported to be about to commit Britain to buying another hugely expensive nuclear power station. As this new plant would not be producing electricity until about 2040, it means it cannot reduce the UK’s carbon emissions with the speed necessary to avoid catastrophic tipping points, whereas cheaper renewables can be up and running within a couple of years of being commissioned. Consider the following analogy. Four years ago, you needed to replace your gas boiler and a company came along and offered to sell you the world’s most expensive experimental boiler ever. It’s been trying to build the first four of them for over 20 years but had not yet got any actually working. The first one it tried to build, in Finland, is already 13 years behind schedule and has more than tripled in price. The second one it tried to build, in France, is 10 years behind schedule, now costs six times the original quote and has encountered monumental safety issues.
Independent 6th Nov 2020 read more »
Engineering students at a coastal college have urged the government to “give us a future” as they call on senior figures to back the development of Sizewell C.
Eastern Daily Press 6th Nov 2020 read more »