As much as nuclear isn’t ideal, it still seems the most pragmatic way to build baseload for the grid for the UK. Its good to see a party taking a holistic approach to this alongside the proposed wind and solar investment. The next thing is the improvements to the grid but that doesn’t grab headlines
Keir Starmer banned from r/energy
However, I don’t see where Labour policy sets out how they will encourage new nuclear or remove the barriers on the current projects… the previous Labour government ™ did little either.
Just as long as he moves us away from this fucking stupid experiment to try and have private funders from around the world take care of our domestic nuclear energy program. It is clearly not working and even if/when it does produce results will lock us into pretty high energy costs for the forseeable future.
It’s the only way we can support the energy needs of the country. We also have potential to bring investment to different areas of the country.
Of course it should be.
Ah, good old Labour…
Now Mr Starmer, just clamp the mouth of Darren Rodwell, the leader of Barking and Dagenham council and tell this *rising star* to stop threatening families and their tenancies under the guise of tackling knife-crime.
It’s crucial for baseload and we’re already pouring concrete for Hinkley C, believe Sizewell C is nearing sign off and the govt are funding Rolls Royce to develop SMRs, so there’s no way Labour are going to halt those developments , these are decades long plans, longer than any government is in power.
Finally something comes out of Kier’s mouth that I can agree with.
Vague statements aren’t really helpful. We are building 2 and need at least another 6 pretty quickly as 5 are going to shut down by 2028. At a cost of £30 billion each that is going to be a big bill.
Literally the cleanest, best energy source we can use.
Or we can do what Germany did and elect green, anti nuclear idiots and now be creating more Co2 than France and the UK combined.
Kier Starmer next year ‘nuclear power has no part to play in UK’s energy mix.
Combination of Nuclear, wind, existing hydro, some tidal and some solar; all at the right scale, would be enough to make the UK fully energy dependent and support transition to electric cars.
Though we need to work out how to build any nuclear power station ourselves.. UK has degraded from a pioneer to a has-been on this front
Boomer talk. Nuclear is an expensive boondoggle. Renewables or bust.
It should be a critical part of every developed and developing country’s energy.
The stigma behind nuclear energy is holding us all back. Especially us that pay for energy at home.
An extremely reasonable and pragmatic take from Starmer, I’m impressed.
I hope he doesn’t do a 180 in a few months.
Starmer is a fucking bell end. Scotland will never vote for him.
Unfortunately the time to increase Nuclear power was about 20+ years ago and at the moment is not a good use of resources. And I going to say from a point of actual knowledge considering that I spent a fair amount of time in the U.K doing my Masters of Engineering on power generation. Thr fact is that the capital and upfront carbon use to create a Nuclear Plant is easily covered in the U.Ks two major renewables Solar and Wind generation and they make up there cost much faster. The problem of base load is kind of a solved for the cost it would take to research new Nuclear plants. That combined with the solution of power storage for fluctuations in renewables. (Such as pumping water at peak generation and letting it flow during valleys in gneration) makes Nuclear not a smart investment for the crisis at hand. Are some Nuclear plants worth while absolutely but is it a critical part of the energy mix going foward is questionable.
India has more nuclear reactors than UK while China is building 30 per year. UK wokerati wants to put windmill and solar instead.
One of the few smart things the dude’s said. It’s a shame labor can’t find a true, liberal leader.
Nuclear Power is really simple and cost effective. Hinkley Point C might be finished by 2028. 8 years late and 50% over the original budget at 37B. It will add 3.2GW to the grid and each megawatt hour will cost around £95. Between now and around the same time 2028/29 the UK will add an additional 28GW of wind generation to the grid. Offshore wind has an average price of £48 per megawatt hour. Wind and solar already account for just over 30% of our required power each day this year.
I grew up near a nuclear power station that has now reached the end of its life/lives. There are 4 very large buildings, 2 of them now wrapped in concrete that we’ll have to pay someone to monitor for the next 2 or 3 hundred years and we won’t see a single KW of generation. A giant expensive eyesore that does nothing.
The infrastructure is being repurposed for undersea cables and battery storage which is some consolation.
We should be devoting the majority of our time and resources to moving to nuclear, it’s ridiculous that we haven’t so far.
21 comments
As much as nuclear isn’t ideal, it still seems the most pragmatic way to build baseload for the grid for the UK. Its good to see a party taking a holistic approach to this alongside the proposed wind and solar investment. The next thing is the improvements to the grid but that doesn’t grab headlines
Keir Starmer banned from r/energy
However, I don’t see where Labour policy sets out how they will encourage new nuclear or remove the barriers on the current projects… the previous Labour government ™ did little either.
Just as long as he moves us away from this fucking stupid experiment to try and have private funders from around the world take care of our domestic nuclear energy program. It is clearly not working and even if/when it does produce results will lock us into pretty high energy costs for the forseeable future.
It’s the only way we can support the energy needs of the country. We also have potential to bring investment to different areas of the country.
Of course it should be.
Ah, good old Labour…
Now Mr Starmer, just clamp the mouth of Darren Rodwell, the leader of Barking and Dagenham council and tell this *rising star* to stop threatening families and their tenancies under the guise of tackling knife-crime.
It’s crucial for baseload and we’re already pouring concrete for Hinkley C, believe Sizewell C is nearing sign off and the govt are funding Rolls Royce to develop SMRs, so there’s no way Labour are going to halt those developments , these are decades long plans, longer than any government is in power.
Finally something comes out of Kier’s mouth that I can agree with.
Vague statements aren’t really helpful. We are building 2 and need at least another 6 pretty quickly as 5 are going to shut down by 2028. At a cost of £30 billion each that is going to be a big bill.
Literally the cleanest, best energy source we can use.
Or we can do what Germany did and elect green, anti nuclear idiots and now be creating more Co2 than France and the UK combined.
Kier Starmer next year ‘nuclear power has no part to play in UK’s energy mix.
Combination of Nuclear, wind, existing hydro, some tidal and some solar; all at the right scale, would be enough to make the UK fully energy dependent and support transition to electric cars.
Though we need to work out how to build any nuclear power station ourselves.. UK has degraded from a pioneer to a has-been on this front
Boomer talk. Nuclear is an expensive boondoggle. Renewables or bust.
It should be a critical part of every developed and developing country’s energy.
The stigma behind nuclear energy is holding us all back. Especially us that pay for energy at home.
An extremely reasonable and pragmatic take from Starmer, I’m impressed.
I hope he doesn’t do a 180 in a few months.
Starmer is a fucking bell end. Scotland will never vote for him.
Unfortunately the time to increase Nuclear power was about 20+ years ago and at the moment is not a good use of resources. And I going to say from a point of actual knowledge considering that I spent a fair amount of time in the U.K doing my Masters of Engineering on power generation. Thr fact is that the capital and upfront carbon use to create a Nuclear Plant is easily covered in the U.Ks two major renewables Solar and Wind generation and they make up there cost much faster. The problem of base load is kind of a solved for the cost it would take to research new Nuclear plants. That combined with the solution of power storage for fluctuations in renewables. (Such as pumping water at peak generation and letting it flow during valleys in gneration) makes Nuclear not a smart investment for the crisis at hand. Are some Nuclear plants worth while absolutely but is it a critical part of the energy mix going foward is questionable.
India has more nuclear reactors than UK while China is building 30 per year. UK wokerati wants to put windmill and solar instead.
One of the few smart things the dude’s said. It’s a shame labor can’t find a true, liberal leader.
Nuclear Power is really simple and cost effective. Hinkley Point C might be finished by 2028. 8 years late and 50% over the original budget at 37B. It will add 3.2GW to the grid and each megawatt hour will cost around £95. Between now and around the same time 2028/29 the UK will add an additional 28GW of wind generation to the grid. Offshore wind has an average price of £48 per megawatt hour. Wind and solar already account for just over 30% of our required power each day this year.
Check the stats https://grid.iamkate.com
I grew up near a nuclear power station that has now reached the end of its life/lives. There are 4 very large buildings, 2 of them now wrapped in concrete that we’ll have to pay someone to monitor for the next 2 or 3 hundred years and we won’t see a single KW of generation. A giant expensive eyesore that does nothing.
The infrastructure is being repurposed for undersea cables and battery storage which is some consolation.
We should be devoting the majority of our time and resources to moving to nuclear, it’s ridiculous that we haven’t so far.