Ed Miliband's nuclear golden era could soon become a new dark age
But Mr Miliband is getting well ahead of himself. History shows that few public policies of modern times have been more mishandled. Britain once led the world in nuclear energy and it was very much a cross-party venture. The post-war Attlee government established the Atomic Energy Research Establishment and the first ever commercial nuclear reactor was built at Calder Hall under the Tories in 1956 just as the Suez crisis increased concerns over the supply of oil. British nuclear expertise was second to none and sought around the world.
Under both Conservative and Labour administrations, the UK became a leader in nuclear power development, commencing operations on 26 Magnox reactors between 1956 and 1971. The technology chopped and changed, moving from advanced gas-cooled reactors (AGRs) in the 1970s to pressurised water reactors (PWRs) and even a fast-breeder reactor experiment at Dounreay in Scotland, opened amid great fanfare by Margaret Thatcher but which has now closed.
Her government set in train a plan for eight new PWRs, only one of which – Sizewell B – was ever built. What happened? One answer is North Sea oil and gas. Fears about fuel scarcity and sky high prices abated as more came ashore. Cheap gas made the cost of nuclear look prohibitive to politicians fixated only on the short term.
Meanwhile, across the Channel, the French, with no oil and depleted coal reserves, invested instead in nuclear power. By 1979 they had installed 56 reactors, satisfying their power needs and even exporting electricity to other European countries, including us. The French are even going to be building Sizewell C.
They produce 70 per cent of their electricity by nuclear fission, which does not emit CO2, and are not dependent on energy from volatile regions like the Gulf or despotic regimes like Russia. This serendipity was as much a function of force majeure as foresight. As the French said 'no oil, no gas, no coal, no choice'. As a result they have found themselves in a better position than Britain in the switch to low carbon renewables.
Because of the apparent bonanza provided by North Sea oil, we neglected the one source of power that would help create self-sufficiency and meet climate change objectives. Only when it was too late and much of the industry's expertise had been lost did the last Labour government try to reactivate the nuclear programme. Ironically, it was Mr Miliband as Environment Secretary who revived the programme 15 years ago in the teeth of objections from Labour 'greens'.
Yet only one new reactor at Hinkley Point – using French technology and, to begin with, Chinese finance – has been given the go ahead. It is way behind schedule by at least six years and massively over budget.
For all the trumpet-blowing is the new Sizewell announcement just another milestone along a road paved with good intentions and wretched decision-making? We know it will be hugely expensive and the idea of it coming on stream within 10 years is for the birds.
Since it is a copy of Hinkley it should benefit by learning from the mistakes made there. But few can have confidence in the project meeting any of its financial targets or the timetable for construction because nothing in this country ever does.
Around the world there is a boom in nuclear power building as countries see it as an essential complement to wind and solar, not least because it provides a baseload and is not dependent on the weather. Sixty reactors are being built globally – 30 of them in China, which has also opened a thorium plant, something we could have done years ago since we have plentiful supplies and the process reduces waste.
Is there any area in which the UK can press ahead? Tucked away in his Telegraph article this week, Miliband says the Government is ramping up spending on nuclear fusion research, though this seems more a token mention than an enthusiastic embrace. Yet fusion is one area where the British do have a great deal of expertise, with start-up companies well ahead of any European competitors in raising investment.
It is always said that fusion is the future that never arrives because it involves replicating the same processes seen on the Sun. About 35 years ago two chemists shocked the world by claiming they had come up with 'cold fusion' obviating the need to produce the excessive temperatures needed. But the science was flawed, even though some adherents still think cold fusion is possible.
Fusion technology is advancing rapidly and is likely to accelerate with the help of AI, high temperature superconducting magnets and supercomputers. But those in the business fear the Government is making the same mistakes as its predecessors in failing to measure the long-term in decades, not parliamentary sessions. China, Japan and America are now in the vanguard of a technology in which the UK once led, as it did with nuclear fission.
Arguably, the most important aspect of Miliband's plan is the green light for a fleet of small modular reactors (SMRs), though getting planning agreements past local communities will be hard. Even this has been fraught with bureaucracy and delay.
A competition to find a developer for SMRs has taken two years before alighting on Rolls Royce. Why has it taken so long? The potential offered by SMRs was identified years ago; yet once again, government dithering has led to everything being done when it is too late to fill the energy gap that will threaten black-outs in a few years' time.
This is because the switch to renewables, the ban on new North Sea extraction licences and the demise of coal will make the decommissioning of existing nuclear power stations even more problematic before new ones come on stream.
How long before Mr Miliband's golden era turns into a dark age?
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CNBC
27 minutes ago
- CNBC
Big Tech split? Google to sign EU's AI guidelines despite Meta snub
Google on Wednesday said it will sign the European Union's guidelines on artificial intelligence, which Meta previously rebuffed due to concerns they could stifle innovation. In a blog post, Google said it planned to sign the code in the hope that it would promote European citizens' access to advanced new AI tools, as they become available. Google's endorsement comes after Meta recently said it would refuse to sign the code over concerns that it could constrain European AI innovation. "Prompt and widespread deployment is important," Kent Walker, president of global affairs of Google, said in the post, adding that embracing AI could boost Europe's economy by 1.4 trillion euros ($1.62 trillion) annually by 2034. The European Commission, which is the executive body of the EU, published a final iteration of its code of practice for general-purpose AI models, leaving it up to companies to decide if they want to sign. The guidelines lay out how to meet the requirements of the EU AI Act, a landmark law overseeing the technology, when it comes to transparency, safety, and security. However, Google also flagged fears over the potential for the guidelines to slow technological advances around AI. "We remain concerned that the AI Act and Code risk slowing Europe's development and deployment of AI," Kent Walker, president of global affairs of Google, said in the post Wednesday. "In particular, departures from EU copyright law, steps that slow approvals, or requirements that expose trade secrets could chill European model development and deployment, harming Europe's competitiveness." Earlier this month, Meta declined to sign the EU AI code of practice, calling it an overreach that would "stunt" the industry. "Europe is heading down the wrong path on AI," Joel Kaplan, Meta's global affairs chief, wrote in a LinkedIn post at the time. "This code introduces a number of legal uncertainties for model developers, as well as measures which go far beyond the scope of the AI Act."


CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
German economy contracts by 0.1% in second quarter
The German economy shrank slightly by 0.1% in the second quarter of 2025 from the previous three months, flash data showed Wednesday. The figure aligned with the expectations of analysts polled by Reuters. U.S. tariffs and their impact have been a top concern for European economies. U.S. president Donald Trump's so-called reciprocal tariffs initially came into effect in April as the second quarter kicked off. The duties were then however temporarily reduced, with the last few months plagued by much uncertainty as negotiations for trade agreement were underway. Some higher sectoral tariffs, including on autos and steel and aluminum, have also been in effect. The European Union over the weekend agreed to a trade framework with the U.S., which includes 15% tariffs being imposed on the bloc. Some goods are set to be exempt, and levies on autos have been reduced to the baseline level. Later on Wednesday, a preliminary reading of the euro zone's gross domestic product is expected. According to a Reuters poll, economists are expecting growth to have flatlined. In the first three months of 2025, the euro zone economy had grown 0.6%.


Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
EU, US Trade Deal Is ‘Lesser Evil,' a Top Spanish Banker Says
The trade deal between the European Union and the US is 'the lesser evil' as it helps avoid a wide conflict, according to the chief executive of Spain's largest domestic bank. The deal 'is what it is,' CaixaBank SA CEO Gonzalo Gortazar said Wednesday in a Bloomberg TV interview with Guy Johnson, Anna Edwards and Kriti Gupta. 'The lesson here is strategic autonomy: we need to be in a position where in three, five, 10 years down the road we're in a position to strike better deals with the US than the current one.'