GB Energy will be headquartered in Scotland and have £8.3bn in capital to invest – and [I] understands that among its first commitments will be a pledge to order a cluster of nuclear plants called small modular reactors (SMRs).
[…]
Asked about the timeline last week, Mr Miliband told Sheffield MP Clive Betts: “Our manifesto made it clear that we support new nuclear, including at Sizewell, and we also support the SMR programme.“Part of our challenge is to examine the legacy left to us by the last government, but he [Mr Betts] should be in no doubt about my absolute support for the SMR programme. It is important, and we will strive to keep to the timetable set out.”
While renewable energy sources such as wind, solar and tidal will have their place in meeting the UK’s future demand, the nuclear sector appears to have won the argument that the 24/7 power it provides must be in the mix in order to reduce carbon emissions to net zero by 2050.
[…]
Proponents argue these mini-reactors are cheaper, easier to manage and safer than a much larger site such as Sizewell in Suffolk or Hinckley Point in Somerset.In theory, once the first SMR proves to be a success, they can be prefabricated at scale, driving down cost. Future governments would then have the flexibilty [sic] to have them dotted all over the country in their hundreds, or even thousands, in order to meet their energy needs.
Rolls-Royce has said it hopes to build its first SMR for around £2bn and then subsequent reactors could cost as little as £1bn.
By comparison, the final cost for Hinckley Point could be as much as £46bn.
[I] understands Mr Miliband is set to order two sets of three SMRs, though they will not be operational until 2030 at their earliest.
Rolls-Royce also has memorandums of understanding in place with Estonia, Turkey and the Czech Republic.
“Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was a real turning point in how nuclear was seen for the positive,” said Mr Evans, [Rolls-Royce director of corporate and government affairs.] “I spend a lot of time talking to overseas governments, who are all looking to do SMRs.
“The energy security argument is really strong at the minute, I’ve definitely seen a shift and a change.”
Challenges remain, however. Nuclear plants have often gone way over budget and faced years of delays, while critics remain unconvinced that concerns over safety and disposal of nuclear material have been overcome.
[…]
A new report shared exclusively with [I] by lobby group the Northern Powerhouse Partnership (NPP) claims that every £1 in public investment in the net zero transition will be worth £2.65 from the private sector and create an extra 168,000 jobs.NPP argues that the North of England, which produces nearly half of the UK’s electricity, and is home to half the country’s most carbon-intensive clusters, is “uniquely vulnerable” to a botched transition to net zero.
But the left is perceived to be anti-nuclear and there’s nothing these people love more than ‘trot bashing’.
Edit: Besides, they’re made GB Energy too big a part of their programme for it to do nothing. Money will go somewhere, whether that’s somewhere useful is to be seen.
It’s almost as if we don’t all have to pick a team and support everything they do. This isn’t sports all, this is politics.
I can support trans-rights, hate the Rwanda plan and like nuclear if i want to.
Sir, this is the internet.
I have plenty of criticism of this Labour government, but I’m still glad when they do things I like (rail nationalisation, scrapping the Rwanda Scheme, commitment to ECHR). I’ll admit, it was unfair for me to suggest Miliband was only committing to nuclear to spite the left. This is an attitude I’ve seen in some Labour activists, but not in him.
The real budget will end up being a fraction of what’s needed and most of that’ll end up in capitalist pockets.
I see every bourgeois media outlet whine about how “expensive” nuclear is. I see others worrying about electricity prices dropping so low it won’t be profitable for the capitalists.