(Very quiet) Hooray for beginning more nuclear power

[SerendipityJane]

Lots more please. Should never have stopped building them.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c87w5ld0p80o

Absolutely disagree.
Not the way to go at all.
Nuclear power is not green. We cannot keep producing nuclear waste.

Wildly expensive. We can get solar, wind and battery storage for half the price, and much safer.

The percentage of renewables in our energy mix is going up year on year.

Nuclear is very expensive, and takes ages to build and get generating.

And we still don't have an answer to what to do with the spent fuel rods.

Jam tomorrow.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz947djd3d3o

Astonishing progress in decarbonising electricity in the UK in the last 10 years. We're a world leader in offshore wind. If you really want to understand pricing look up 'contracts for difference ' as this is how governments purchase renewable infrastructure.

Blue is wind, yellow is solar, orange is gas, grey is nuclear.

Totally agree, should have introduced SMRs years ago and we would not have been dependent on imported gas.
Energy security is as vital as food security.

Or more dynamically

https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

That has the French flag on the top left! 😆

We're still building new gas-fired power stations misleadingly labelled as 'low carbon' because they'll be dumping the CO2 produced under the sea for future generations to deal with. What a wonderful legacy for Ed Miliband to leave.

Nuclear is not the way forward. It’s not a clean energy, and when it goes wrong the pollution is horrific. It uses tons of water for cooling, and the waste byproducts are a real problem.

Nuclear is much better than gas and coal, and can even out the variability of renewables. Bring it on.

Am pretty stunned by the misinformation on this thread!

Nuclear energy does not emit carbon dioxide and is far more green than solar power.

It is of course extremely expensive and if things go wrong, they go very wrong though.

Nuclear energy is the Ghost of Christmas-Yet-To-Come. It was the stuff of nightmares in my childhood and remains the most irresponsible legacy for future generations; a cynical kicking of the can down a road our grandchildren will travel.

Who has said nuclear power emits carbon dioxide?

How is it "more green" than solar?

I live in the shadow of Hinckley Point where a new nuclear power station is currently being built. All my life there has been a nuclear power station here but now a new one is being built with Chinese and French money.

Every single day for a decade truck after truck has constantly been bringing concrete to the site. When it's finished there will be 18 million cubic metres of concrete at Hinckley C. Cement as you know is one of the world's biggest producers of CO2 accounting for 8% of all CO2 emissions.

250,000 tonnes of steel will be brought to the site.

Almost all the materials, concrete and steel comes in on diesel lorries.

New A roads, car parks and accommodation have been built to serve the site and its 12,000 plus workers.

Since 2017 the works have been light polluting the countryside around, notably the dark sky nature reserve at Exmoor National Park. The light emissions are equal to that of a small city. 50 tower cranes (including the world's biggest crane) are lit up through the night 365 days a year.

At Dunkery, the highest point on Exmoor and 27 miles from the power station it is now never completely dark.

A line of 35 metre tall pylons has been driven in across 40 miles of beautiful Somerset countryside from Hinckley to Portbury.

The build is set to take 13 years.

The power station will be in operation for just 60 years.

Then, it will sit on the land forever.

This is the 430 acre Hinckley C site.

I should have added that at the height of its production Hinckley C will only ever provide 7% of the UK's energy.

Last year renewables met almost 50% of the UK energy requirement.

There's no good answer. Wind and solar have their problems too. I don't want the countryside covered with solar panels or birdlife destroyed by wind turbines.

As with every single environmental issue, the answer is to use less, much less.

But that's never promoted because it doesn't make anyone any money.

I too live very close to Hinkley C. We absolutely need the electricity baseload from nuclear if we are to have all of the less polluting things that we want - electric cars, electric heating, AI technology etc. It has to go somewhere and it makes sense to build on that site. The local area has seen enormous economic benefits from the project.

Absolutely not! Nuclear is awful, the waste is horrific. Wind and water is where we should be going. Solar and air source privately if people wish to.

Nuclear needs to be part of the energy mix and, yes, I live near to one. Renewables too. And lowering consumption.

Absolutely agree - nuclear base with renewables on top. Solar and wind need a lot of infrastructure too - that steel & concrete use CO2 too!

But the amount of steel and concrete used in the construction of renewable generation is absolutely dwarfed by that used in the construction of nuclear.

Energy is an international market. The site shows how the various continental interconnectors are working.

It's how the UK sells surplus wind + solar power into the world.

Although I get the amusement.