Afternoon:
9°c
The collapse of the sale of British Energy is a major setback for the Government's nuclear plans.
Even if French generator EDF had taken over the company, ministers would have struggled to replace Britain's ageing nuclear plants on schedule: EDF said it could complete the first new plant by 2017 but by 2025 all existing nuclear plants except Sizewell B will have been decommissioned.
Without EDF, the world's biggest and most experienced nuclear operator, it is hard to see how new plants will go ahead. But Gordon Brown insists they are essential to replace existing capacity - around 20 per cent of our electricity - and to increase that proportion and cut CO2 emissions. The wider problem is the Government's lack of a coherent energy strategy. The nuclear plans have been cobbled together, leaving big questions unanswered - above all on waste disposal.
This year's nuclear White Paper suggested nuclear operators would be able to cap their liabilities for decommissioning, even if those huge costs rise - as they are certain to. Taxpayers, who already face a £70billion clean-up bill from existing plants, will pick up the rest.
This is the central weakness in the economic case for nuclear: nobody has figured out how to make money from it unless the state pays the clean-up costs. Meanwhile, ministers look set to allow German generator E.On to build the UK's first new coalfired power station in decades at Kingsnorth, Kent, which flies in the face of all commitments to cut carbon emissions. At least seven more coal-fired plants are planned.
Finally, we have no chance of meeting the EU-wide target of 20 per cent of energy from renewable sources by 2020, which we signed up to last year, without a huge push.
Without a serious strategy and a much greater commitment to renewables, the Government's energy headaches will get worse.
