nuclear-news

Hinkley Point C nuclear station-£16.7bn overbudget: Estimated to be 5 years late

From

From HS2 to Wembley, why can’t Britain build on budget? Our
infrastructure projects are invariably late and over-budget compared with
European neighbours. Our planning system, political wrangling and a lack of
civil service expertise is to blame. Hinkley Point C: Final Cost £32.7bn:
£16.7bn overbudget: Estimated to be 5 years late. #nuclear #antinuclear #NoNukes

 Times 29th Oct 2023 https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/from-hs2-to-wembley-why-cant-britain-build-on-budget-9k6xgs8c6

October 30, 2023 Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment

Amid rising cost worries, UK government promises “practical nuclear roadmap”

Government promises ‘practical’ UK nuclear roadmap this year amid rising cost concerns.

Stuart Stone, 26 October 2023

 Government agrees to map out route to 24GW nuclear target by 2050 and
allow Parliament to consider major investment value for money amid fears of
‘another HS2’.

The government has promised set out a “practical roadmap”
before the end of the year towards its goal of securing 24GW of nuclear
power capacity 2050, but MPs have raised concerns as to whether new nuclear
generation will offer value for money in light of the controversial
decision to cancel the northern leg of the HS2 high speed rail project.

In a letter to MPs on the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee (SITC)
yesterday, the government confirmed that a new Nuclear Strategic Plan is on
its way, and that it would spell out how the current reactor fleet will
contribute to UK targets and allow Parliament to weigh up value for money
of major new nuclear projects.

It follows a report from the SITC in July
which had called for greater detail on how the government plans to meet its
ambitious nuclear targets, as it cited the UK’s “intermittent history” with
regards to ramping up nuclear power capacity, with no new reactors having
been built in several decades. The report warned that UK nuclear capacity –
which currently contributes 15 per cent of the electricity needs – is set
to fall substantially by 2028 when all plants bar Sizewell B are scheduled
to reach the end of their operational lives.

 Business Green 26th Oct 2023

https://www.businessgreen.com/news/4138819/government-promises-practical-uk-nuclear-roadmap-amid-rising-cost-concerns #nuclear #antinuclear #NoNukes

October 28, 2023 Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment

Why consumers are very likely to pay a lot more for power from Sizewell C than from Hinkley C

under the RAB mechanism, it seems that EDF will be paid for what they actually spend. This time it will be British, not French taxpayers and consumers, that will be paying for the cost overruns.

The Government are deceiving us about the cost effectivemess of their new funding mechanism for nuclear power

Dave Toke’s Green Energy Blog, DAVID TOKE, OCT 25, 2023

Consumers face a double whammy of bills to pay for the planned nuclear power plant, Sizewell C, due to be given a go-ahead soon. According to a ‘worst case scenario,’ consumers are likely to (collectively) pay around £34 billion in today’s prices before any electricity is generated from Sizewell C at all. But, in addition, according to my calculations, under this (quite likely) worst-case scenario consumers will then also pay around £160 per MWh in today’s prices for electricity produced by Sizewell C. This works out as £117 per MWh in 2012 prices (ie the base year for setting the cost of Hinkley C). The Government appears to be doing little or nothing to prevent this scenario from occurring.

Hence consumers could not only be paying much more per MWh than the controversially high Hinkley C deal (£92.5 per MWh in 2012 prices) but will also be paying large sums upfront before a kWh is even generated. In fact, despite being labeled as a ‘worst case scenario’, the estimate for Sizewell C costs that have been calculated is essentially based on the type of cost overrun experienced by attempts to build nuclear power plants in the West since 1990. That is nuclear construction costs end up being around double the amount initially budgeted.

I have taken the size of the upfront costs payable by consumers from an analysis done by Professor Stephen Thomas of Greenwich University. See also here. I have then taken his worst-case scenario figure for these upfront costs and converted them into a figure for costs per MWh by applying conventional economic tools. This involves using discounted cash flow analysis using a (real) 6 percent discount rate and assuming Sizewell C will be generating at an average of 90 percent of full capacity. This assumes using a contract type paying premium prices for energy generated similar to that used for Hinkley C (ie lasting for 35 years). I have based cost estimates of operating nuclear power plants on US experience, although operating costs form only a small element of the costs. The large bulk of the costs are concerned with repaying money loaned and invested in the power station.

My analysis runs contrary to the narrative spread by the Government. They claim that the so-called Regulated Asset Base (RAB) mechanism for funding new nuclear power plants will make nuclear power cheaper for the consumer. On the contrary, it is likely to allow more to be paid to EDF for Sizewell C compared to Hinkley C. This is because consumers will be responsible for paying cost overruns for Sizewell C whilst in the case of Hinkley C it is EDF that takes responsibility for cost overruns. The total amounts that consumers will have to pay will remain unknown until it is far too late to do anything to stop consumers from having their electricity bills dramatically increased………………..

The RAB mechanism has been lauded as a cost-saver because it allows EDF to pay lower interest rates on money borrowed to finance construction compared to the borrowing costs applicable to building Hinkley C. Money needed to finance interest payments and investors during the construction period is charged to consumers whilst the plant is being built.

There’s one giant flaw in this argument. The Government seems to be heading towards giving the go-ahead to EDF to start construction without agreeing a price to be paid for electricity. This means that consumers will pay for whatever it costs to build the plant. The costs of nuclear power stations seem always to be a lot more than what was estimated at the time of the ‘final investment decision’ (FID).

This is different from what happened with Hinkley C. In the case of Hinkley C EDF was committed to paying for any cost overruns themselves without being paid any extra money. ………… EDF bears responsibility for these cost overruns – in effect the French taxpayers will pay since EDF is owned by the French Government.

Yet under the RAB mechanism, it seems that EDF will be paid for what they actually spend. This time it will be British, not French taxpayers and consumers, that will be paying for the cost overruns. OFGEM is being given responsibility for organising payments to EDF.

Ultimately, it seems, OFGEM will be the ‘fall guy’ when, many years down the line, there is public controversy over the costs of the power from Sizewell C. In an obscure piece of wording in an obscure document entitled ‘Revenue Stream for the nuclear RAB model’, the government says (page 12) ‘The amount a relevant licensee nuclear company is allowed to receive (‘allowed revenue’) in respect of its activities relating to the design, construction, commissioning, and operation of the relevant nuclear project would be determined by Ofgem’.

In other words, EDF will have virtually a blank cheque to pay all their costs. The only control OFGEM will have is to check that the costs have actually been spent or will be spent on the power plant.

People were surprised at the cost of the Hinkley C contract, but the surprise was based on the public being kept in ignorance of nuclear construction costs in the past. Now the Government has learned its lesson, and we shall see a return to the past practice of the public being kept in the dark about the costs of building nuclear power plants……………………………………………  https://davidtoke.substack.com/p/why-consumers-are-very-likely-to

October 28, 2023 Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment