Britain could build seven nuclear power stations, minister says

40 comments
  1. Could? The Tories have fucked up at least to two. Who will they contract these seven to screw up? Or does this count the two existing clusterfucks plus five existing stations they’ll give a new coat of paint?

    How on earth is using private money and private industry to run these going to help with energy security?

  2. They’ll have hospitals attached and freeport status, also Bridges to Ireland.

    All delivered under budget and in a couple or maybe 3 decades.

    …… Energy crisis avoided for your children’s children’s children.

    Time to party… Bring your own beer.

  3. Is that like the mythical 40 new hospitals?

    In other news, Hinckley B to get a fresh lick of paint and be called a new nuclear plant. Consultations as to whether the new colour will be industrial grey or military grey.

  4. “bring together private firms to run each site.”

    And there we have it. Outsourced energy to an overseas government just like the rest of our energy and rail.

  5. > The Sunday Telegraph said ministers have agreed to set up a new development vehicle, called **Great British Nuclear**

    Of course it fucking is.

  6. Investing more in nuclear power is a good idea, but it isn’t a short term fix.

    Hinkley Point C, Sizewell C and Bradwell B are all behind schedule, with 2 of them not even beginning construction.

  7. But it won’t because a) it’s the tories, and b) the hippies will get in the way.

    This country is fucked.

  8. We couldn’t do it, not since the end of the CEGB. All the expertise in this country is gone now.

  9. Britain COULD, but most likely will add a garden shed to the existing decommissioned nuclear power stations and call them new ones! Thanks Tory voters, for fuck all.

  10. I actually don’t think we could. Maybe he means the mini ones?

    I actually dont think they could find seven sites for them to even discuss.

  11. Maybe if we clap for Great British Nuclear every Thursday we might one day bring our children’s energy bills back to a reasonable level.

  12. Great, better schedule a meeting, about setting up a committee, about a sub committee, about setting up a report, about the findings of a not yet researched report, and…. is it 2037 already? Better extend the budget.

  13. we needed to start building them 10 years ago

    but we were still cozy with russia back then

  14. You mean they will raise funding for 7, half build 1 with plenty of over budget commitments and eventually abandon the project but the funds to build all 7 will magically disappear and unaccounted for? Got it.

  15. Well fucking do it, and by do it I don’t mean pay mind boggling amounts of money to brand new companies suspiciously linked to your mates as contractors to do it and then construction ceases and the company mysteriously vanishes or completes the project for a tenth of what was paid to shoddy standards

  16. > “There is a world where we have six or seven sites in the UK” by 2050, Kwarteng told the newspaper.

    6 or 7 sites **under construction** because unless something radically changes with nuclear power station building they take about 30 years to complete to be operational.

    This is more empty “levelling up” hot air. Unfortunately we can’t harness it to turn turbines.

  17. britain is like the second most windy country in Europe and why they dont want to build more wind turbines instead of nuclear? whatever they build the politicians can tap money.

  18. Even if we could, would you trust this government to give the contract to build them to the people most qualified to do so? Or would those contracts go to their corrupt cronies just like those PPE ones did?

  19. /u/masterpharos *could* also build seven nuclear power stations.

    I hope that news tantalises you all sufficiently, I will let you wait and see my progress as it comes.

  20. We probably could, and it would likely cost less than test and trace did or the amount wasted on bounce back loans that will never be recovered.

  21. This is fucking nonsense. This is a solution to the problem 20 years ago – unfortunately the problem has continued developing whilst the political class has been studiously ignoring it except for sound bites and token gestures.

    The only real solution now is a massive national infrastructure programme of improving efficiency, insulation, and rapidly built renewable power.

  22. Fuck off it’s taken years to fail to build two (Hinkley C and Sizewell C). This is just another way to waste taxpayers money.

  23. Well it’s a good plan to sort the energy crisis, and end reliance on foreign energy production. WTAF haven’t we done this sooner, rather than waiting for a global crisis to put up energy prices so badly?

  24. Could’ve should’ve would’ve, about 20 years too late on this one. Nuclear is never delivered on time or on budget, Hinkley Point has a strike price of £92.50 per MWh. Up until the recent energy crisis the price has been about half that.

    Rather than large vanity projects, they need to take the approach developers do when delivering work. Short sprints, quick deliverables, failing fast and making improvements.

    Renewables combined with battery storage, and by battery storage I mean really high tech stuff…like pumping water up a fucking hill, it’s really not that hard

  25. UK can. But it just takes years to build but who gets the contract China France Japan, and what price per unit will they charge as part of the deal.

Leave a Reply