nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Sorry, Donald Trump and Keir Starmer – Scotland doesn’t need nuclear

 Craig Dalzell: I’M going to preface this article by saying that unlike
many of my comrades across the green and environmental movement, I’m not
ideologically against nuclear power per se.

In this decade of the 21st
century, we’re seeing the true energy transition start to change the
world around us faster than we realise. When I was in school, renewables
were taught as a thing that existed but were likely to only supply a small
fraction of the energy future. Today, wind and increasingly solar power are
dominating the globe in terms of new installed capacity.

Just after I left
high school in 2002, the total combined new energy generation installed
between both renewables and nuclear was about 20% of the global total that
year. Now, it’s more like 80%. And that’s massively overemphasising the
impact of nuclear.

The International Energy Agency’s 2025 Global Energy
Review found that more than 7GW of new nuclear power capacity was brought
online in the previous year compared to 700GW of new wind turbines and
solar photovoltaic panels (with solar providing around three-quarters of
that capacity). The age not just of renewables but of solar power
specifically, appears to be crashing over us.

It makes sense. The panels
are now cheap and easy to produce as once you have a production line going
it can just keep fabricating them. They’re easy to install just about
anywhere (to the point where in places like Germany it’s increasingly
common to see folk hanging them from their balconies). And every single new
panel installed anywhere starts producing power immediately with no fuel,
almost no maintenance and will keep producing power for decades.

The efficiencies of production have been stark. A solar PV panel in my school
days cost about £4.87 per watt in today’s prices. That panel now costs
about 20p per watt. A 96% price reduction in real terms.

Conventional nuclear power, on the other hand, requires years to decades of planning and
construction, truly massive upfront capital costs and the plants don’t
produce any power until they are switched on.

One way that the nuclear
sector is adapting is through the development of “small modular
reactors” (SMRs). Last week, Keir Starmer used Donald Trump’s state
visit to sign a deal for the US to produce such reactors for the UK. Costs
are expected to remain high though. Right now, a watt of conventional
nuclear energy costs about three to five times as much as solar and even
the best estimates for SMR cost reductions aren’t expected to make up
that gap.

The UK Government accepts that SMRs will only reduce the cost of
electricity by about 20% compared to conventional nuclear, which will mean
they will remain the most expensive way to generate electricity for the
foreseeable future. The future of energy, especially in Scotland, isn’t
going to be expensive conventional nuclear or expensive and untested SMRs.
It’s going to be by capturing the wind, waves and sun all around us and
bottling it for later use.

 The National 25th Sept 2025, https://www.thenational.scot/politics/25496145.sorry-donald-trump-keir-starmer—scotland-doesnt-need-nuclear/

September 27, 2025 - Posted by | renewable, UK

No comments yet.

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.