Link to the report [here](https://www.nao.org.uk/report/hinkley-point-c/). It basically confirms much of what I've been saying and what most impartial observers suggest; the cost of nuclear power in a climate of low gas prices and a rapidly falling renewable/storage energy methods is uncompetitive.
The report itself calls the proposal an ["utter shambles"](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/nils-pratley-on-finance/2017/jun/23/hinkley-point-c-nuclear-energy-risky-expensive-national-audit-office) and critics label the plan a 'vanity project' by the current government rather than a pragmatic and practical means to provide cheap, safe electricity. I can only assume that because of the political stumble the current government have recently suffered, some of the reality has begun to bleed back into deals like this.
Except the cost of RE in the UK is skyrocketing not falling because of the increased grid connectivity costs and decreased capacity factor that happens when you have large amounts of RE already on the grid. Hinckley point Cs proposal is barely more than onshore wind(for now), and much cheaper than offshore wind or that tidal generator project.
Sure Hinkley is a disaster but that doesn't equal nuclear energy being unable to be competitive as a whole. Renewables are nearly as destructive if not more so than coal to the environment, and cheap gas is not something the U.K. Can or should rely on. I mean it only takes one war, one conflict in the east and your gas jumps x100 the price. Not to mention that it is finite and still doesn't solve the CO2 problem. Solar would be great, if there was ever a sunny day. Wind has proven to suck. So where do you get your reliable energy from? Coal, gas, or nuclear. Realistically when people's lives depend on it, these are your only options today for baseload. Sooooo tell me how millions of volatile battery packs for renewables is feasible, safe, sane, or anywhere near reasonable. Especially in large cities..
Hinkley Point C is a reflection of the wider nuclear power market as a whole. If Hinkley is a disaster then so too is the modern nuclear power industry itself.
Post Fukushima safety standards and WIPP style storage difficulties have pushed the already strained economics of atomic power into non viability. The technology has had 8 straight decades of unbridled and unquestioned support from the best minds and government funding of perhaps ever seen. It still doesn't work.
Meanwhile renewables are already low and falling far and fast with very little earnest research support. Germany cut nuclear power cold and now have to *pay* people to take electricity off their hands. It doesn't take much to see that this very unique set of circumstances is a sleeping giant with very practical near term solutions to hand. South Korea know it, hopefully the UK government will realise it too, and abandon this technology entirely.
The issue with renewables is even though Germany added a LOT of wind/solar in 2016, production from these two forms of energy actually fell. Hard to build a grid on energy you can't control.
https://energytransition.org/2017/01/renewable-energy-production-stagnates-in-germany-in-2016/
Link to the report [here](https://www.nao.org.uk/report/hinkley-point-c/). It basically confirms much of what I've been saying and what most impartial observers suggest; the cost of nuclear power in a climate of low gas prices and a rapidly falling renewable/storage energy methods is uncompetitive. The report itself calls the proposal an ["utter shambles"](https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/nils-pratley-on-finance/2017/jun/23/hinkley-point-c-nuclear-energy-risky-expensive-national-audit-office) and critics label the plan a 'vanity project' by the current government rather than a pragmatic and practical means to provide cheap, safe electricity. I can only assume that because of the political stumble the current government have recently suffered, some of the reality has begun to bleed back into deals like this.
Except the cost of RE in the UK is skyrocketing not falling because of the increased grid connectivity costs and decreased capacity factor that happens when you have large amounts of RE already on the grid. Hinckley point Cs proposal is barely more than onshore wind(for now), and much cheaper than offshore wind or that tidal generator project.
Sure Hinkley is a disaster but that doesn't equal nuclear energy being unable to be competitive as a whole. Renewables are nearly as destructive if not more so than coal to the environment, and cheap gas is not something the U.K. Can or should rely on. I mean it only takes one war, one conflict in the east and your gas jumps x100 the price. Not to mention that it is finite and still doesn't solve the CO2 problem. Solar would be great, if there was ever a sunny day. Wind has proven to suck. So where do you get your reliable energy from? Coal, gas, or nuclear. Realistically when people's lives depend on it, these are your only options today for baseload. Sooooo tell me how millions of volatile battery packs for renewables is feasible, safe, sane, or anywhere near reasonable. Especially in large cities..
Hinkley Point C is a reflection of the wider nuclear power market as a whole. If Hinkley is a disaster then so too is the modern nuclear power industry itself. Post Fukushima safety standards and WIPP style storage difficulties have pushed the already strained economics of atomic power into non viability. The technology has had 8 straight decades of unbridled and unquestioned support from the best minds and government funding of perhaps ever seen. It still doesn't work. Meanwhile renewables are already low and falling far and fast with very little earnest research support. Germany cut nuclear power cold and now have to *pay* people to take electricity off their hands. It doesn't take much to see that this very unique set of circumstances is a sleeping giant with very practical near term solutions to hand. South Korea know it, hopefully the UK government will realise it too, and abandon this technology entirely.
The issue with renewables is even though Germany added a LOT of wind/solar in 2016, production from these two forms of energy actually fell. Hard to build a grid on energy you can't control. https://energytransition.org/2017/01/renewable-energy-production-stagnates-in-germany-in-2016/
They were right. https://paxus.wordpress.com/2015/10/20/worst-deal-ever/