Sizewell C nuclear plant gets £14bn go-ahead from government
It will create 10,000 direct jobs, thousands more in firms supplying the plant and generate enough energy to power six million homes, the Treasury said.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves said it was a "landmark decision" that would kickstart "economic growth".
However, Alison Downes, director of pressure group Stop Sizewell C, condemned the announcement, adding it was a move the government would "come to regret".
Reeves said the project would be the "biggest nuclear building programme in a generation".
Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said nuclear energy would "deliver a golden age of clean energy abundance" and help boost the UK's energy security.
The government insists that nuclear power provides enormous amounts of low carbon, non-intermittent energy that forms a crucial part of the UK's energy future.
However, Sizewell C will take at least a decade to complete and the plant of which it is a copy, Hinkley Point C in Somerset, will switch on in the early 2030s - more than a decade late and costing billions more than originally planned.
The final investment decision on the funding model for the plant is due later this summer.
The Sizewell C project has faced opposition at local and national level from those who think it will prove to be a costly mistake.
Ms Downes said she believed the money could be spent on other priorities and feared the project would "add to consumer bills".
"There still appears to be no final investment decision for Sizewell C, but £14.2bn in taxpayers' funding, a decision we condemn and firmly believe the government will come to regret," she said.
"Ministers have still not come clean about Sizewell C's cost and, given negotiations with private investors are incomplete, they have signed away all leverage and will be forced to offer generous deals that undermine value for money."
On Saturday about 300 protesters demonstrated on Sizewell beach against the project.
The Sizewell C investment is the latest in a series of announcements in the run-up to the government's Spending Review, which will be unveiled on Wednesday.
The review will see the chancellor set out day-to-day spending and investment plans for each government department.
A number of policies have already been announced, including the U-turn on winter fuel payments, a commitment to increase defence spending, and investment in the science and technology sector.
Spending Review: When is it and what might Rachel Reeves announce?
Sizewell C has had other pots of funding confirmed over the years by government and in September 2023 a formal process to raise private investment was opened.
Ministers and EDF have previously said there were plenty of potential investors and they were close to finalising an agreement on it.
Once operational, Sizewell C is expected to employ 900 people.
As well as Sizewell C, the government said it was investing £2.5bn over five years into research and development for fusion energy and making investments into its defence nuclear sector.
This included development of HMNB Clyde and investment in Sheffield Forgemasters.
Follow Suffolk news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
Sizewell C boss 'optimistic' it will get go-ahead
Sizewell C announces plan to build post-16 college
'Nothing prepared us for Sizewell C devastation'
EDF reject claims Sizewell C will cost £40bn
Sizewell C
Stop Sizewell C
Department for Energy Security and Net Zero
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
UK approves £38bn Sizewell C nuclear power plant in Suffolk
The UK government has finalised its investment decision for the £38bn ($51.4bn) Sizewell C nuclear power plant in Suffolk, England. The project is expected to generate clean energy for six million homes and create 10,000 jobs once operational. The approval of Sizewell C marks a strategic move to secure Britain's nuclear energy supply beyond 2030, aligning with the government's objective to reduce dependency on fossil fuels. Sizewell C is projected to provide affordable clean electricity for at least 60 years. Analysis indicates potential savings of £2bn annually in the future low-carbon electricity system, benefiting consumers with reduced energy costs. The project is also set to stimulate economic growth, with 10,000 direct jobs generated at peak construction and thousands more in the supply chain. Additionally, 1,500 apprenticeships will be created, and 70% of the construction value is expected to be awarded to British businesses, with Sizewell C planning to engage 3,500 UK companies nationwide. UK Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero Ed Miliband said: 'It is time to do big things and build big projects in this country again - and today we announce an investment that will provide clean, homegrown power to millions of homes for generations to come. 'This government is making the investment needed to deliver a new golden age of nuclear, so we can end delays and free us from the ravages of the global fossil-fuel markets to bring bills down for good.' The government will initially hold a 44.9% stake, becoming the largest equity shareholder, ensuring public benefit from the investment. Other shareholders will include La Caisse with 20%, Centrica with 15%, and Amber Infrastructure with 7.6%. EDF, a French energy company, has a 12.5% stake, supported by a proposed £5bn debt guarantee from France's Bpifrance Assurance Export. The National Wealth Fund, the UK government's main investor, is making its first investment in nuclear energy, providing most of the project's debt finance alongside Bpifrance. The investment strategy for Sizewell C draws on lessons from Hinkley Point C, offering a funding model that distributes the £38bn construction cost among consumers, taxpayers, and private investors. This approach reportedly results in a 20% cost saving compared to Hinkley Point C. British citizens will co-own the plant with private partners, ensuring minimal impact on consumer bills, averaging around £1 per month during construction, with the plant seemingly delivering cheaper clean energy once operational. Sizewell C joint managing directors Julia Pyke and Nigel Cann said: 'We're delighted to welcome new investors alongside government and EDF who, like our suppliers, have strong incentives to keep costs under control and ensure we deliver Sizewell C successfully for consumers and taxpayers. 'By investing in Sizewell C, they are laying the foundations for a more secure, cleaner and more affordable energy system. 'Because 70% of our construction spend will be in the UK, with a £4.4bn commitment to the east of England, they will also help to create thousands of great jobs and new opportunities for people and businesses up and down the country.' "UK approves £38bn Sizewell C nuclear power plant in Suffolk" was originally created and published by World Construction Network, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Caisse's $3.2-billion investment in a nuclear project is the kind of deal Canada wants — too bad it's in the U.K.
The Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec's $3.2-billion investment in a new nuclear energy facility this week is the kind of deal Canada is hoping the country's largest pensions and institutional investors will step up to fund — but it's happening overseas, in England, alongside the U.K. government. The Quebec's pension giant's 20 per cent stake in the Sizewell C nuclear power station in Suffolk was part of a final funding push to greenlight the project, of which the U.K. government owns 44.9 per cent. Once completed, the country's first new nuclear plant since 1995 is expected to reduce carbon emissions and provide more than 60 years of 'clean, reliable power to the U.K. grid, helping to boost the U.K.'s economy (and) strengthen energy security.' The deal is noteworthy for a couple of reasons: first, it capitalizes on a renewed push for nuclear power as countries search for less carbon-intensive options alongside a more recent desire to rely less on imported energy amid geopolitical tensions and trade upheaval driven by United States president Donald Trump. It also comes in a country where the government's push for more institutional investment in infrastructure is being met with some success, both domestically and abroad. In May, ahead of publication of a final review that could impose investment quotas on large pension providers in the United Kingdom, 17 of them — responsible for managing about 90 per cent of defined contribution pensions — signed an accord pledging to invest 10 per cent of their portfolios in assets to boost the economy by 2030. This will include investments in infrastructure, property and private equity, and half will be 'ringfenced' for the United Kingdom, an allotment projected to inject about £25 billion into the economy. The consortium backing the nuclear project, which is the first direct investment in nuclear by the Caisse, includes French energy operator EDF, British multinational energy and services company Centrica and investment partner Amber Infrastructure. This structure is not unusual for the Caisse, a seasoned global infrastructure investor. But a key draw is undoubtedly the project's financing structure. The U.K. government will foot the majority of that bill — an important consideration for institutional investors because of the potential for cost overruns common in infrastructure projects. Officials told the Canadian Press that the Caisse would begin receiving compensation right away, and that there are agreements with the British government that protect the pension fund's return in the event of overruns or significant delays. The project financing is coming through the U.K.'s National Wealth Fund, which was created by Keir Starmer's Labour government. It replaced the U.K. Infrastructure Bank and is intended to be the government's principal investment vehicle, with the express aim of creating conditions to draw in private investors. 'It's an ambitious project in terms of size and complexity,' said Sebastien Betermier, a finance professor at McGill University, adding that the Caisse is arguably one of the world's most advanced investors when it comes to new infrastructure builds referred to as 'greenfield' projects. He credited the U.K. government's success in forging partnerships with private investors to a strong track record of designing regulatory frameworks for privately-operated businesses and 'de-risking' investments for institutional investors. 'In this particular project, I believe the U.K. government was able to reduce the level of construction risk for investors and provide a dividend yield early on,' said Betermier, who has done extensive research on pensions. 'This project shows it is possible to generate win-win opportunities for governments and pension funds in infrastructure (projects), and hopefully we can learn from it here in Canada.' Past efforts by the Canadian government to include the country's pension funds in major infrastructure projects have largely fizzled, with complaints that the government isn't offering up projects with enough size and scale. Furthermore, potential projects haven't come with sufficient policy assurances or guarantees that the private investors will be adequately compensated for the risks they're taking, particularly if they're being asked to participate in building them. An exception has been the Caisse, which has a dual mandate to support economic development in Quebec alongside meeting investment objectives to pay pension beneficiaries. For example, the Caisse was a major investor in the province's The Réseau express métropolitain (REM) mass transit project, which was beset by cost overruns. The $6.3-billion cost of the Montreal light-rail system presented in 2018 had risen by 26 per cent by 2023. It rose further last year, reaching $8.34 billion. While the project was also backed by Quebec and the federal government, the Caisse was responsible for overruns. However, the pension manager structured the deal to derive revenue from ridership, advertising and real estate development, with a forecasted annual return of eight per cent over 30 years. The Caisse is also unique among Canadian pensions when it comes to energy transition. In 2021, the Quebec pension management organization pledged to divest completely from oil producers, which could have given the Caisse an edge with the U.K. nuclear deal. Plus, in May, CEO Charles Emond told the Financial Times that the Caisse plans to deploy more than £8 billion in the U.K. 'in the coming years,' increasing its exposure in the largest investment destination outside North America by 50 per cent. In the article, Emond praised the 'clarity' of its business environment, the 'ability to execute deals' and its 'welcoming approach' to investors. Perhaps it was not a coincidence that Starmer dispatched Rachel Reeves, the U.K.'s chancellor of the exchequer, to Canada to talk up the investment destination last summer. This was followed by a cross-country tour by U.K. trade officials looking to partner with Canada's pension funds to address, among other things, Britain's decades of underinvestment in infrastructure, with the lowest levels among G7 countries. When it comes to enticing Canada's pension giants to invest more at home, Prime Minister Mark Carney appears to be trying to change the conversation: his focus is on the need to create infrastructure and energy corridors to unify and strengthen Canada's economy and reduce dependence on the United States. During his spring campaign, Carney pledged to use $150 billion of government funds to kickstart private sector investment in projects ranging from housing, defence production and transportation infrastructure to digital innovation and patents, critical minerals and energy. 'Our plan is expected to catalyze $500 billion in new investment over the next five years,' the costed platform said, a similar if slightly less ambitious target than the UK's plan to draw in £3 of private investment for every £1 of government money. But there are a few things the Canadian government has to get right with its 'Maple 8' pensions, including the Caisse, as well as other large institutional investors such as Brookfield Asset Management (which had been a rumoured front-runner to invest in the Sizewell C nuclear power station), if it hopes to replicate what the U.K. government has done. For starters, Canada's infrastructure efforts lack both coordination and a comprehensive evaluation framework, crowding out private investors rather than drawing them in, Betermier said in a research paper on infrastructure banks around the world, published by the C.D. Howe Institute in May. Government efforts since 2016 have led to sprawling commitments of more than $180 billion for infrastructure projects spread over 20 federal departments and agencies, primarily in the form of grants and subsidies, he pointed out, adding that provincial governments, too, have tried to get in the game over the past decade. 'Having multiple grants and investment agencies operating in the same market means there is a high risk of competition between the agencies,' Betermier wrote. 'Coordination between these organizations, along with regular engagement with the private sector, will be critical in order to generate maximum engagement from the private sector.' Canada could also take lessons from other governments, such as using loan guarantees to underwrite the risk of projects, as is done in the European Union's under the InvestEU model. Other infrastructure banks allow projects to move forward with the expectation that private investors will come aboard in the future, while Canada's flagship infrastructure bank needs to secure private investment partnerships for a deal to move forward. Large-scale public-private projects are also hobbled by the lack of a comprehensive evaluation framework for short- and long-run performance, said Betermier, whose paper compared public infrastructure banks in Australia, California, Canada, the Nordic-Baltic region, Scotland and the U.K. The Canada Infrastructure Bank, launched with much fanfare in 2017 and a goal of every government dollar being matched by private sector investment of $3 to $4 — a target later reduced to $1 to $2 — failed to live up to that promise. By 2022, a House of Commons standing committee on transportation, infrastructure and communities recommended abolishing it. A couple of weeks ago, the Parliamentary Budget Officer estimated that the infrastructure bank would disburse $14.9 billion in 2027-28, well short of its $35-billion target. However, the PBO noted that the $1-billion target for Indigenous investments has already been met. Among the many reasons for the struggle in Canada, Betermier said, is that most of the country's infrastructure assets – including airports, seaports, railways, and utilities – remain publicly owned by federal, provincial or municipal governments. This stands in sharp contrast to countries like Australia and the U.K., where Canadian pensions have been, and continue to be, big investors in infrastructure assets that provide diversification, hedges against liability risks, and offer opportunities for high risk-adjusted returns and direct value creation. Canada's big pensions are ready for airport privatization. Are Canadians? 'Not theirs for the taking': Can the Canadian pension model survive a new era of politicization? Another Canadian pension giant puts brakes on China investment 'The lack of infrastructure assets available for sale to (pension and other institutional investors in Canada) has become a hot topic recently because it is one of the reasons why Canadian pension funds have decreased their domestic investments over the past decade,' he wrote. 'For infrastructure banks to successfully catalyze investment in infrastructure from private banks and large institutional investors, Canadian governments must actively support and commit to a private-sector role in the infrastructure market.' • Email: bshecter@ Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Axios
3 hours ago
- Axios
Social Security recipients set to face an $18,000 benefit cut in just seven years
Retirees are facing the prospect of substantial Social Security cuts in just seven years, sooner than projected, due to the "big, beautiful bill," per an analysis out Thursday from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. Why it matters: If policymakers don't stop this from happening, it would at least double the poverty rate of America's seniors, per several estimates. By the numbers: The new analysis projects a 24% cut to benefits by late 2032. That's equal to an $18,000 annual benefit cut for a dual-earning couple who both retire in 2033. They also might experience reduced healthcare access, per the analysis, due to an 11% cut in Medicare hospital payments. The percentages would grow over time, as the population ages and fewer young Americans are paying into the system. How it works: The trust fund is effectively the money the federal government takes in from Social Security taxes. For decades, the system took in more in taxes than it paid out, the Treasury department then invested the surplus. In 2021, it started tapping reserves to keep paying benefits. Once the reserves are depleted, benefits would be "pay-as-you-go," paying out money as taxes come in. That the trust fund would be depleted in the 2030s has long been known. Zoom in: The tax cuts in the big bill and the increase in the deduction for seniors, specifically, would reduce Social Security's incoming tax revenue — and speed up depletion by about a year, per the CRFB. The big picture: Social Security is arguably the most popular government benefit — most Americans either receive benefits or know someone who does — the vast majority of Americans believe in its importance, according to recent polling. The bottom line: Most policy wonks and Social Security advocates believe that it's highly unlikely that Congress would sit back and watch benefits get cut like this.
