A new report says Hinkley reactors would pass burdens onto future generations
Scrapping a planned £24 billion extension of Hinkley nuclear power station in favour of renewable energy would provide the same amount of energy, and save nearly £40 billion, according to a new report.
The ‘Toxic-time capsule’ report, released today by the Intergeneration Foundation, calls the proposed Hinkley Point C the ‘most expensive building on Earth’, and argues it would place economic and environmental burdens on future generations.
EDF Energy’s plans for the new reactors in Somerset would cost the government £92.50 per megawatt hour over 35 years of electricity supply.
But the think tank’s research, based on public subsidiaries and construction costs, found that onshore windfarms would cost £31.2 billion less, and solar photovoltaic power £39.9 billion over the same period.
It adds that renewable energy is preferable to nuclear power, as reactors cannot be built quickly enough to curb global warming, handing on the problems of nuclear waste and climate change to our children and grandchildren.
Andrew Simms, co-author of the report, said:
“The government’s current plans for new nuclear power will break spending records, and pass both high costs and large, unknown economic risks onto every UK child for generations to come.
But readily available, cheaper, safer and quicker renewable energy options would help Britain live both within its economic and environmental means, while also protecting and providing for future generations.”
EDF says Hinkley Point C will create thousands of jobs, provide 7 percent of the UK’s energy and help meet carbon reduction targets.
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
6 Responses to “Wind farms and solar energy would cost billions less than Hinkley nuclear plant”
Adam Kirylczuk
I would write something but Mark Pawelek has already written it all, and better. Nuclear power is expensive because of the panic “environmentalists” are spreading and new reactor types are save and reasonably priced. Agreed that Hinkley Point is way too dear, but solar and wind is an exercise in self-satisfaction, not a solution to global climate change caused by rising CO2 levels. It is also evident that enough reactors could be built in time to prevent more climate change, but for the smug faces rejecting nuclear power.