THREAD: What's going on with UK new nuclear plans?

This week has seen one project finally cancelled – plus heavy briefing from No 10 on new support for nuclear.

Let's recap where things stand today and look at what might happen next…

1/

TL;DR

UK govt still vv keen on new nuclear but options dwindling due to Wylfa cancellation & aversion to Chinese $$ in Sizewell

Briefing suggests No 10 looking for ways to get Sizewell over line, but I doubt final decision imminent

Energy white paper likely to have more…

2/

So…some background

Nuclear supplies a little less than 20% of UK electricity generation, which it has been doing for decades

But output has slipped a bit in recent years due to retirements and lengthy closures for maintenance.

3/

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-uk-low-carbon-electricity-generation-stalls-in-2019

Soon, however, all but one of the UK's existing nuclear plants are due to reach the end of their lives – by 2030 – cutting capacity from 8GW to just 1GW

4/

https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-can-the-uk-meet-its-climate-goals-without-the-wylfa-nuclear-plant

One argument for new nuclear used to be that the UK had a "capacity crunch", as a result of those old nuclear closures and the coal phaseout.

But the UK's now using much less electricity than expected – equiv of 2x Hinkley Cs since 2010!

5/

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-uk-low-carbon-electricity-generation-stalls-in-2019

Another argument for new nuclear is UK climate goals.

There's certainly a growing gap between the amount of low-carbon electricity that is in the pipeline vs what will be needed to meet UK targets (red wedge in chart):

6/

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-uk-low-carbon-electricity-generation-stalls-in-2019

This is where new nuclear plants were supposed to come in…replacing old nuclear capacity as it retired with new reactors at 6 sites.

So far, only Hinkley C (dark blue) is being built.
Another 3 have been cancelled (red wedges).

7/

https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-can-the-uk-meet-its-climate-goals-without-the-wylfa-nuclear-plant

This week's big news was official confirmation from Hitachi that it was cancelling Wylfa.

It had shelved the plans last year, despite what then-secretary of state Greg Clark called a "significant & generous" package of support inc a 1/3 equity stake.

8/

https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-can-the-uk-meet-its-climate-goals-without-the-wylfa-nuclear-plant

So now No 10 is briefing journalists about a "nuclear summit" between the PM, chancellor and energy secretary, where they will discuss "new subsidies" for new nuclear:

9/

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/no-10-may-take-direct-stakes-in-nuclear-projects-to-save-sites-vg7gxr6fm

According to that Times story, and BBC News, govt support could even extend to taking a direct stake in the Sizewell C new nuclear project…

…but let's not forget govt already offered to take a 1/3 equity stake in Wylfa – yet Hitachi still said no.

10/

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54181748

If govt does want to give financial support to new nuclear, one of the key questions for the chancellor would be how to justify spending taxpayer cash on new nuclear, relative to alternative uses of the money:

11/ https://twitter.com/jbuckland13/status/1306504691036180480

The falling cost of low-carbon alternatives to new nuclear is a major challenge for the industry (chart)

Nuclear industry says it can build way cheaper than this with right govt support (tho govt had offered Hitachi £75/MWh and it still said no)

12/

https://www.carbonbrief.org/wind-and-solar-are-30-50-cheaper-than-thought-admits-uk-government

The govt is consulting on a "regulated asset base" funding model, which would lower nuclear costs by transferring construction risk to the taxpayer.

This could form part of the upcoming white paper (it'd need legislation)

13/

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/825119/rab-model-for-nuclear-consultation.pdf

<speculation>

Getting Sizewell over line might need a RAB contract *and* a govt stake, if UK is no longer willing to allow Chinese involvement

(Hard to see private sector filling that gap)

</speculation>

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/no-10-may-take-direct-stakes-in-nuclear-projects-to-save-sites-vg7gxr6fm

14/

<speculation>

For same reasons, the idea Wylfa can be resurrected seems…well, the language in this Times article is telling:

"ministers hopeful"
"Rolls Royce offered a partnership with a buyer"

[who??][you pay, we build??]

</speculation>

15/

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/no-10-may-take-direct-stakes-in-nuclear-projects-to-save-sites-vg7gxr6fm

Briefed media reports also mention No 10's enthusiasm for small nuclear (SMRs/AMRs)…

I'll just leave this BBC News quote here for you to judge

Question I'd be asking is "when" – because UK needs new low-carbon generation this decade

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54181748

16/

Longer-term, the UK is already funding "advanced nuclear" R&D and it announced £40m for "next-gen" nuclear tech in July…

17/

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/advanced-nuclear-technologies/advanced-nuclear-technologies

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/40-million-to-kick-start-next-gen-nuclear-technology

…though worth adding that a £250m competition for SMRs, launched in 2015, never really lived up to its billing

18/

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/479749/52229_Blue_Book_PU1865_Web_Accessible.pdf

<speculation>

If I was going to guess I'd say govt might announce more money for SMRs / "advanced nuclear"

For where, I'd start by looking at this doc on "AMR market opportunities & actions that cld be taken by govt"…

</speculation>

19/

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/advanced-nuclear-technologies/advanced-nuclear-technologies

<speculation>

…but this looks like a long play to me

That's fine – it just doesn't exactly scream "lots of low-carbon electricity within the next 10 years"

Nor does it lend itself to "bet your climate goals on This One great Tech"

</speculation>

20/

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-rd-and-supply-chain-capability-for-advanced-modular-reactors

I didn't talk about apparent controversy over Chinese involvement in UK nuclear…

Others will know better than me – but there's something a bit odd about the way that debate is being carried out, via newspaper op-eds from a certain clique of Tories

21/

https://www.ft.com/content/9d0d3a75-d3f4-4cab-9176-be582140987c

I also didn't get into Q of whether new nuclear is "vital" (Times editorial this week) or "required" (UK govt last year) to reach net-zero…

The shortest answer is we need *something* to go with cheap wind+solar – & govt says nuclear fits the bill

22/

https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-does-the-uk-require-new-nuclear-to-reach-net-zero-emissions

Clearly plenty more that could be said about all this. But it's nursery pickup time so that's it from me for now…

ends/