11 months ago
67
Campaigners opposed to Sizewell C will be pleased to see that Chancellor Jeremy Hunt did not pledge more money to the ‘Suffolk White Elephant’ in his Autumn Statement, but the Nuclear Free Local Authorities are still perturbed that a further £960 million will be made available for nuclear and other ‘faux Green’ energy technologies in the future.
In the run-up to the budget, the Chancellor and Prime Minister were bombarded with around 2,000 emails from opponents of Sizewell C, and on the day of the statement an advertising van toured central London on the initiative of Stop Sizewell C comparing further wasteful public expenditure on the unwanted nuclear power project to the financial and ecological disaster that was the recently scrapped HS2 high-speed rail link. It paid off, as there was no mention of the Suffolk boondoggle in the Chancellor’s speech.
However, whilst the Chancellor’s commitment to ‘build domestic sustainable energy’ is to be welcomed, elsewhere in his statement, he made a disturbing commitment to introducing a ‘new Green Industries Growth Accelerator’ with £960 million of public money to back new nuclear and other ‘faux Green’ energy technologies.
The Accelerator had in fact been previously announced by HM The Treasury on 17 November. It pledges public funding for developing new technologies in eight sectors, of which five relate to energy:
‘The Green Industries Growth Accelerator investment will support the expansion of strong, home-grown, clean energy supply chains across the UK, including carbon capture, utilisation and storage, electricity networks, hydrogen, nuclear and offshore wind. This will enable the UK to seize growth opportunities through the transition to net zero, building on our world-leading decarbonisation track record and strong deployment offer.’[1]
The inclusion of nuclear is all part of the ongoing narrative promoted by government and the industry that fission is a ‘green energy’ technology and essential to the ‘transition to net zero’. It is neither.
The NFLA’s historic and ongoing opposition to nuclear is our raison d’etre. It is not a green technology when one looks at the whole lifecycle carbon emissions associated with fission energy, from digging the uranium ore from the ground and processing it into fuel elements, building, operating, and decommissioning power plants, and undertaking the long-term storage and disposal of radioactive waste. Nor is it either essential, certain, or deliverable in the time scale necessary to arrest climate change and achieve net zero; there have been many recent studies which demonstrate that a Britain powered solely by renewables, backed by smart grids and storage solutions, is entirely possible and would be far cheaper and quicker to deliver. Nuclear is simply too slow and costly, taking far too long to come to fruition and taking away finance that could otherwise power the growth of renewables.
To the NFLAs, it is disappointing that the Accelerator does not incorporate other cutting edge energy technologies which are in fact ‘Green’, such as tidal, wave and geothermal, which all have potential in an island nation with a history of underground mining, and the development of innovative storage solutions which could all actually contribute meaningfully to achieving domestic energy security and net zero. And it is also frustrating that no government funding has been found for an accelerated programme of retrofitting insulation and energy efficiency measures to Britain’s cold and draught houses to bring down fuel bills, reduce carbon footprints, and improve public health.
Elsewhere in the statement, Chancellor Hunt referenced his commitment to implementing the recommendations of the Wisner Review, concluded recently by the Electricity Network Commissioner Nick Wisner.[2] This came forward with several recommendations to enable renewable power generators to access an overburdened electricity transmission network more quickly. This has led to the ludicrous situation where wind generators are paid a public retainer to turn off their turbines because the power lines are incapable of accepting the electricity that is produced. The Renewable Energy Foundation, described charitably by the Guardian as an ‘anti wind farm organisation’, reported in 2020 that these ‘constraint payments’ had amounted to £650 million in the preceding decade.[3]
Implementation of the review’s recommendations, alongside National Grid’s recent belated commitment to invest in the network to massively accelerate access for power projects totalling up to 20 GW [4], is to be welcomed. The NFLAs have for many months been calling on government ministers and industry for more investment in the network to enable speedier and assured grid access for renewable projects which have previously faced delays of up to fourteen years to get online.
Mr Hunt also said those living near to new ‘transmission infrastructure’, such as pylons, will receive up to £10,000 off their electricity bills over ten years, and government ministers have also previously pledged payments to members of local communities living alongside new onshore wind developments in England, with the mechanics of how these payments will work yet to be announced. To the NFLAs it appears rank hypocrisy that residents who are neighbours to new nuclear power plants, such as Hinkley Point C in Somerset, have received no similar promises of rebates despite such developments being significantly more intrusive on the environment and community, and detrimental to any individual’s quality of life, than any wind turbine.
For more information, please contact the NFLA Secretary Richard Outram by email to richard.outram@manchester.gov.uk
Notes to Editors
