nuclear-news

Chris Huhne’s hollow, wobbly, words on “no subsidy” for UK nuclear industry

In other words, nuclear will be eligible for any form of subsidy that applies to renewables or other low-carbon generation through tools such as carbon pricing or emissions trading….We will not rule out the Government providing support to industry… through the activities of the Office for Nuclear Development in taking forward the actions to facilitate the deployment of new nuclear power

“No subsidy for nuclear” 24dash.com, by Jonathon Porritt , December 10th, 2010 That’s the wording that permitted the Lib Dems to go along with the Tories’ pro-nuclear stance. That’s the wording that turned Chris Huhne from “serious sceptic” to compliant enthusiast.It sounds so simple, doesn’t it – “no subsidy”. Which bit of that do you not understand? But if the Trades’ Description Act applied to political pronouncements, Chris Huhne would find himself subject to prosecution for outright deception.
To justify that assertion, let me just spell out what Chris Huhne himself has said to explain what he means by ‘no subsidy’.1. “This means that there will be no levy, direct payments or market support for electricity, supplies or capacity provided by a private sector new nuclear operator, unless similar support is also made available more widely to other types of generation”.

In other words, nuclear will be eligible for any form of subsidy that applies to renewables or other low-carbon generation through tools such as carbon pricing or emissions trading. Viz:“New nuclear power, for example, benefit from any general measures that are in place or maybe introduced as part of wider reform of the electricity market to encourage investments in low-carbon generation”.2. “I would also like to make it clear that we are not ruling out action by the government to take on financial risk or liabilities for which it is appropriately compensated or for which there are corresponding benefits.

”Not ruling something out almost certainly means ruling it in, with particular regard both to the ‘full costs of decommissioning” and “the industry’s full share of waste management costs”.I hope you are all laughing out loud at that one! Let me put that into honest English: “we will be perfectly content, yet again, to let the nuclear industry absolve itself of its proper responsibilities for waste management and decommissioning, and will ensure that either tax payers or energy consumers pick up their ‘full share of waste management costs’ through the nuclear levy on their energy bills or any support mechanism”
Our full exposure as tax payers for the existing suite of nuclear reactors is around £67billion. The above statement all but guarantees we will continue in exactly the same vein.3. “The Government is committed to the Paris Convention on nuclear third party liability and the Brussels Supplementary Convention. These Conventions establish an internationally agreed framework for compensating victims in the unlikely event of a nuclear accident”.In other words, unlike every other industry, our Government will continue to underwrite the insurance costs of the nuclear industry. That’s some subsidy
4. “We will not rule out the Government providing support to industry in the normal course of the business of government, for example, through the activities of the Office for Nuclear Development in taking forward the actions to facilitate the deployment of new nuclear power in a similar manner to the facilitation of other energy types”.Which means quite simply that the cheque book is open. Come on in! Research: you’ve got it! Skills development: Of course
5. And as if all that wasn’t enough (in terms of ensuring that “no subsidy” actually means almost limitless subsidy if that’s what it takes to get the damn things built, just listen to the brilliantly manipulative words that DECC’s senior civil servants have succeeded in getting Chris Huhne to utter: “Arguably, few economic activities can be absolutely free of subsidy in some respect, given the wide range of state activity and the need to abide by international treaty obligations. Our ‘no subsidy policy’ will therefore need to be applied having regard to proportionality and materiality”.Ho Bloody Ho!
Proportionately speaking, of course.You’ve got to hand it to the nuclear lobby – both in DECC and in the energy companies. Far from the ‘no subsidy’ claim being a barrier to new nuclear, it simply provides a brilliant screen for devising all sorts of clever tricks to guarantee massive, continuing subsidy of the kind that the industry has always depended on. And always will depend on in the future.

So the test for Chris Huhne here is a test of his own probity: stop using the phrase ‘no subsidy’ unless you are prepared to spell out in the same breath the full extent of the direct and indirect subsidies that the nuclear industry will receive.For those interested in this issue, check out the No Money 4 Nuclear (NM4N) website which has got lots of further details:http://www.nomoney4nuclear.org.uk/

24dash.com » Blogs » Jonathon Porritt

December 11, 2010 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | spinbuster, UK