Greenpeace Challenge Hinkley Point Deal
By Paul Homewood
Now Greenpeace have lodged a formal challenge to Hinkley Point.
From PEI:
Greenpeace Energy and nine German and Austrian utilities have made a formal challenge to the European Commission’s decision to approve a British plan to use state aid to facilitate the development of a nuclear power plant at Hinkley Point C in England.
The group have charged that the European Commission has made "legal and procedural errors" when it approved the nuclear plant.
Soenke Tangermann, managing director of Greenpeace Energy, said the "comprehensive subsidy package" could "massively distort the European energy market".
"We want the European Court of Justice to annul the commission’s decision because these exorbitant nuclear subsidies are an unlawful operational aid from our point of view," he said. "They should never have been approved."
The move comes in the wake of an official Austrian government challenge to the decision last week. Luxembourg also confirmed to Power Engineering International this week that they are preparing their challenge on the matter.
Meanwhile, the UK Govt’s official response has been to stick its collective fingers in its collective ears and shout “LALALALA”!
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Can I challenge it as well?
The Moorside plan appears much better.
“The Moorside plan appears much better.” Unless, like me, you live in Cumbria….
Having said that, whilst I remain concerned at the safety of nuclear power, I recognise that there are probably no realistic alternatives, if we are to keep the lights on. Certainly if Greenpeace had their way, winters would be extremely unpleasant indeed.
Why are you concerned at the safety of nuclear5 power? It is the safest of all methods of generating electricity.
The lowest common denominator here is Europe, everyone is claiming that the proposal is against EU laws. The solution to this problem (and many others) should be obvious to everyone, get the hell out of the EU.
Absolutely. I hope these idiots win their little vanity game because it will simply ramp up anti-EU frustration in government and outright antipathy in the general population. The ‘Out’ campaign actually needs stuff like this to shake enough people into voting OUT.
I hope that means that the UK start to drift back to coal and gas.
The world needs more atmospheric CO2, and if by some weird non-science that extra atmospheric CO2 also causes a bit of extra warming… its a WIN-WIN situation. !!!
You could say that about every renewables project. Tax on consumers is no different to state aid. Why not object to them all on this basis?
Ok. Build a coal plant. Nuclear has been attacked for decades so there is no economy of scale. Each plant is a bespoke project. A relaible and affordable grid can only be powered by nukes or fossil fuel. If you don’t like that, you can freeze in the dark.
Soenke Tangermann, managing director of Greenpeace Energy, said the “comprehensive subsidy package” could “massively distort the European energy market”.
“We want the European Court of Justice to annul the commission’s decision because these exorbitant nuclear subsidies are an unlawful operational aid from our point of view,” he said. “They should never have been approved.”
Hinkley Point was IIRC £96/MWh at 2014 prices.
Talking of things that should never have been approved compare with offshore bird bludgeoners at the ‘bargain’ price of £117/MWh for something that doesn’t work properly and is extremely unlikely to last the warranty period. It’s like buying an expensive box of chocolates and finding heart shaped poodle poo inside.
http://energydesk.greenpeace.org/2015/02/26/government-renewables-subsidies-show-costs-declining/
Where was their outrage at this public fleecing Greencr*p? Has not their entire folly and fanatacism of ‘forcing solutions’ distorted the market and with far greater socio-economic costs? How many pensioners have they lobbied to kill – not directly of course (tyrants rarely bloody their own hands) – for every turbine built how many winter ‘excess deaths’ could we have saved? So they keep busy depriving others of cheap energy so they can travel to exotic locations (or to work) and destroy the heritage (#NAZCA) and people. So good to know we can rely on them to stand
onup for the people@craigm350:
Agreed that it is time for expensive options to be examined closely. Why is off-shore wind given more money for less reduction in CO2 emissions? The whole idea of forcing intermittent supplies onto a continuous system is mere stupidity. They should be judged on the overall effect, in other words wind would be one of the last options chosen by engineers.
Unfortunately we have politicians making the decisions, so the Greenpeace strategy is to delay the nuclear build until it is abandoned. They may have trouble getting their way, as the EU wants more (non CO2 emitting) nuclear but the delay only increases the chance of blackouts.
Should they occur then the Government will be panicked into a quick response, which means gas, and frakking to ensure supplies.
The No to the EU campaign needs to campaign on many more issues than nuclear energy.
The Indian government could teach our shower how to best handle Greenpeace.
http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/greenpeace-global-warriors-against-development/17080#.Va6Q-XhUO20
The design of the reactor is seriously flawed according to inspectors. Britain should stay well away from this unproven system.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-nuclear-strategy-faces-meltdown-as-faults-are-found-in-identical-french-project-10186163.html
“It is a serious fault, even a very serious fault, because it involves a crucial part of the nuclear reactor,” said Pierre-Franck Chevet, head of France’s nuclear safety inspectorate.
Philip Bratby
In response to “Why are you concerned at the safety of nuclear power?” I would simply say that Sellafield (aka Windscale, aka Calder Bridge) had a poor track record for safety, and there have been unusual clusters of ill health and premature deaths here. Much work was done to disprove any connection, but anecdotally there would seem to be an issue. And up here we’re still fighting the Government’s determination to force through (bribes didn’t work) an underground dump for nuclear waste in what is arguably at least a geologically inappropriate area.
Sorry, my reference to “aka Calder bridge” should have been to “aka Calder Hall”. It’s too early in the morning for me!
Why do you still live there?
Because it’s a beautiful part of the world, and I don’t see why I should be driven out by the activities of politicians.
“Soenke Tangermann, managing director of Greenpeace Energy, said the “comprehensive subsidy package” could “massively distort the European energy market”. ”
Odd that they haven’t made the same complaint about renewables … oh, wait a minute.