New Times,
New Thinking.

The Debate: Nuclear is already well past its sell-by date

As construction costs and delays ramp up, it is clear that renewables will do the heavy lifting of our energy transition.

By Paul Dorfman

Nuclear energy continues to be a contentious option in the shift away from fossil fuels. Some argue that it provides a secure, safe, longstanding electricity supply while others say that the cost of building and maintaining new plants and issues around waste disposal outweigh the benefits. The UK government has ramped up its investment, with more than £2bn going towards reactors and aims for a quarter of the UK’s electricity generation to come from nuclear by 2050. We asked two academics from opposite sides of the debate to share their views. Read the other side of the argument here.

Boris Johnson hopes his dream of “a new nuclear plant every year” will be aided and abetted by the recent publication of the government’s Energy Security Strategy. But with little interest from the investment market, and the fact that utility-scale solar and onshore wind cost less than a quarter of new nuclear, perhaps the Treasury’s concerns should be taken more seriously.

Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month
Content from our partners
Towards an NHS fit for the future
How drones can revolutionise UK public services
Chelsea Valentine Q&A: “Embrace the learning process and develop your skills”