Skip to content

EU F**K Dopey Davey’s Plan

February 2, 2014

By Paul Homewood



Nuclear industry at risk over ministers' dithering, experts warn

EDF Energy’s Hinkley Point power station in Somerset

Just a couple of further thoughts about the EU decision to challenge the agreement to build the new nuclear plant at Hinkley Point.


1) According to the Telegraph:

It [the EU report] adds it “could hardly be argued to contribute to affordability – at least at current prices, when it will instead and most likely contribute to an increase in retail prices”.


It does not take a genius to work that one out, but it rather puts a hole in Ed Davey’s argument that “Once built, it will provide a clean source of home-grown energy, helping to keep the lights on, cut emissions and reduce consumer bills over the long-term.”

What he really means, as his press release clarifies, is that “Building a new fleet of nuclear power stations could reduce bills by more than £75 a year in 2030, compared to a future where nuclear is not part of the energy mix.”

So, I am afraid, our bills won’t come down. They maybe just won’t go up as much as they would, if we relied totally on renewables.


2) The EU report also states that the, the combination of the UK’s rising carbon tax, and the loan guarantee from the Treasury, may together have been sufficient to bring forward the investment without the guaranteed power price.

This, of course, reinforces point 1. Once carbon taxes, and all the other government and EU initiatives, have taken effect, energy prices will have risen so much that a strike price of £89.50/MWh will seem cheap at the price.

The bottom line is that the poor old consumer will be far worse off in any event.



Do we need nuclear? In my view, yes. It is an important part of the energy mix, and avoids over reliance on natural gas.

Are we paying too much? Almost certainly.

Why? Because we have unnecessarily backed ourselves into a corner. We have sold off Westinghouse and British Energy, and now have to go cap in hand to EDF. At the same time, we are needlessly shutting our proper power stations, setting ourselves ridiculous CO2 targets, and leaving ourselves a choice between overpriced nuclear and even dearer and utterly unreliable renewable energy.

EDF must be laughing all the way to the bank.

  1. M E Wood permalink
    February 3, 2014 12:06 am

    You give an impression of having a poor vocabulary when you use expletives and so an impression of low itelligence is falsely created. THIMK 🙂

  2. Brian H permalink
    February 3, 2014 9:33 am

    Stupidity is the main capital crime in nature.

  3. Derek Buxton permalink
    February 3, 2014 2:50 pm

    With the lunatics we have supposedly running the Country in its best interests, it is difficult at times to find adequate words. “Totally corrupt” and “treacherous” does not come near what these people are doing to the Country and People whom they are supposed to serve. The next time they serve Country and People will be a first..

  4. cornwallwindwatch permalink
    February 3, 2014 6:48 pm

    Reblogged this on Cornwall Wind Watch.

  5. February 4, 2014 11:49 am

    Hangon so renewables can be subsidised on the grounds it reduces CO2 emmissions *
    , but “a subsidy can’t be given to nuclear on the same grounds that it also reduces CO2 emmissions” is that what the EU is saying
    * the only reason that we got into subsidies is that they although they allege fossil fuels cause damage through CO2 they don’t have any evidence that will stack up in court for this, so they can’t fine them for the “damage” they do, so essentially they subsidise renwables for not damaging. The fossil fuel biz love the new higher prices and higher profits this causes so are not about to go to court and sue on the grounds there is no evidence that renewables are less damaging or even actually less CO2 by the time you factor everything in

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: