Latest news with #EnergySecretary
Bloomberg
16 hours ago
- Politics
- Bloomberg
Energy Secretary Wright on Iran, Oil, Nuclear Power
US Energy Secretary Chris Wright talks about the impact of airstrikes against Iran's nuclear facilities, oil sanctions that are still in place and the need for more nuclear power in the US. He is on "Bloomberg Surveillance." (Source: Bloomberg)
Bloomberg
16 hours ago
- Politics
- Bloomberg
Iran Still 'Shell-Shocked' After US Strike, Says Wright
US Energy Secretary Chris Wright says Iran is still "shell-shocked" after US airstrikes targeted their nuclear facilities and sanctions are still in place. He speaks on "Bloomberg Surveillance." (Source: Bloomberg)
Telegraph
10-06-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Six years late and £28bn over budget, this project signals disaster for Ed Miliband's nuclear plans
'Build and repeat.' That is the plan for Sizewell C, the nuclear plant on the Suffolk coast which Ed Miliband has announced plans to pump billions of pounds into. Writing in The Telegraph, he hailed a new 'golden age' for the British nuclear industry, pledging £14.2 billion for two reactors at Sizewell which will, eventually, provide six million homes with electricity. Eventually being the operative word. News that the Government is throwing its weight behind nuclear in the midst of the Energy Secretary's pursuit of net zero was met with relief by some campaigners – and, indeed, by anyone who doesn't want to find themselves plunged into darkness if the grid is forced to grapple with unreliable renewables. But concerns have been raised about the modelling. Sizewell is to be a rinse and repeat of Hinkley Point C, the two-reactor power station in Somerset which has been beset with problems from the moment EDF first broke ground there in early 2017. The Government says it's to be almost an exact replica. Meanwhile on its website, Sizewell C points to 'the benefits of replication'. 'Sizewell C will use the same design as Hinkley Point C,' it adds. It says Hinkley has already 'created a huge workforce and supply chain' and that replication 'means Sizewell C will benefit from all the efficiencies and expertise learnt by our sister project'. Efficiency and expertise. It's one way of summing up Hinkley, though it does rather overlook the £28 billion it has gone over budget to date, the endless delays and challenges from environmentalists, not to mention the international political tensions. China's General Nuclear is a significant shareholder in the project, but in 2023 halted funding for it as relations between London and Beijing worsened; the same year the UK government took over the country's stake in Sizewell C. Meanwhile, work at the site crawls on, its deadline shifting and bill expanding. Still, EDF says Hinkley's second reactor is being built 25 per cent faster than the first unit, and suggests this should be taken as good news for Sizewell's envisaged two reactors, which are, effectively, planned to be the third and fourth in Britain's nuclear quartet. Meanwhile, experts agree it makes sense in principle to transfer the lessons learnt and systems already established at the Somerset site to Suffolk. Iolo James, head of communications at the Nuclear Industry Association, stresses the importance of 'building in fleet rather than building one at a time'. 'The more you build, the cheaper and quicker that is,' he says. That may be true, though there has been nothing cheap or quick about Britain's nuclear renaissance so far. Where we were once pioneers in the push for nuclear power (the world's first commercial-scale nuclear power station came online in Calder Hall, Cumbria, in 1956), decades of sparse investment have meant the UK has now fallen far behind other countries. At Sizewell, many question how possible it will be in practice to shift operations from one side of England to the other. Alison Downes, of the campaign group Stop Sizewell C, suspects the idea that you can simply move teams and processes without a hitch is unrealistic. 'The company want people involved in Hinkley Point C to come over and do what they've done there again at Sizewell C, but unless there's a seamless transition and the roles that they're just finishing at Hinkley start at Sizewell, then the likelihood is those people will go off and find other jobs and then are lost to the supply chain,' she says. 'Hinkley has been delayed, yes, but Sizewell has also been delayed. It's very difficult to get two projects of this size to perfectly dovetail.' Even if they do manage to bring some of that infrastructure across, it's hard to make the case that Hinkley has been a poster project for Britain's nuclear prowess. Last February, EDF said it had taken a near £11 billion hit amid delays and overrunning costs on the project. The month before, it said the plant was expected to be completed by 2031 and cost up to £35 billion. Factoring in inflation, the real figure could be more like £46 billion. It was, let's not forget, initially supposed to have started generating electricity in 2017 and cost £18 billion. When construction finally began the same year, it was expected that the plant would be completed by 2025. It will now come online six years later than that and at more than double the cost of the initial estimate. So not, it would be fair to say, an unmitigated success as major infrastructure projects go. Then again, some would argue successful infrastructure is an oxymoron in Britain today. The latest estimated spend for HS2 is £102 billion – almost double the projected cost. Crossrail cost £4 billion more than expected and weathered significant delays. And across the country, countless projects – bridges, tramlines and motorways – remain unfinished or unbuilt altogether. 'The public expectations on this sort of stuff is so low nowadays,' says Ed Shackle, a researcher at Public First. 'With all of these big promises – and that goes for things like HS2 as well – they are not expecting the Government to do anything. They're very sceptical that the Government could deliver anything big.' The plan to launch us into a nuclear-powered future might sound promising, but can Labour get it done? While the public is supportive of the idea of projects like Sizewell in principle (Public First's polling shows there is a 41 per cent net support for the building of new nuclear power stations) and wants the Government to make big swings, time and again they have seen these things fail or fall by the wayside. 'They think the country is in a very bad way and we need major overhaul, but major projects have been poorly managed and delivered, and in their local areas, people see decline everywhere,' says Shackle. 'They want to see actual delivery behind these big promises.' Downes points out the last update on Hinkley came in January last year, 'when there were still five or six years to go, so there was plenty of time for things to get even worse'. That same month, EDF said further delays were in the offing because of a row about fish. The energy company was struggling to agree protection measures for fish in the River Severn. Fears thousands could be killed in water cooling intakes had 'the potential to delay the operation of the power station'. This was after months of tussling with environmentalists over the plant's seawater cooling system. At the time, Sir Keir Starmer, then in opposition, said delays to Hinkley were evidence of a system that was 'holding us back and stifling growth', citing 'countless examples of Nimbys and zealots gumming up the legal system often for their own ideological blind spots to stop the Government building the infrastructure the country needs'. Now, dovetailing the construction of Sizewell with Hinkley is one of the main things bolstering confidence in the Suffolk project. Stuart Crooks, managing director of Hinkley Point C, said the 'innovation and experience' developed at Hinkley 'will benefit our twin project at Sizewell C from the start'. 'We have trained a new workforce and built the nuclear supply chain,' Crooks says. 'Now those skilled workers and businesses can give Britain the energy security and economic growth it needs at Sizewell C, together with small modular reactors and future large nuclear plants.' Supporters also argue things will be different the second time around. The first nuclear build since the 1990s, Hinkley, they say, was always destined to take longer and cost more than initially predicted. 'It's been well documented that Hinkley has had issues in terms of going over budget, and the timescale,' says James. 'That's predominantly due to the fact that we haven't built a nuclear power station in a generation... We've had to relearn how to build them. 'The way Sizewell will benefit from that is all the learnings from Hinkley will be there for Sizewell and its team when it starts construction in earnest... If you view Sizewell C as unit three and four [after Hinkley's one and two], then you'll see the efficiencies become even greater for that project.' Julia Pyke, joint managing director of Sizewell C, tells The Telegraph the site would be an 'exact copy, above ground, of Hinkley Point C'. 'When the design for Hinkley was brought into the UK, they had to make 7,000 design changes – because we're a copy, the equivalent for us is just 60,' she says. 'What that means in practical terms is that we know, in a way that Hinkley didn't know, how much concrete we need to pour, how much steel we need, how much cable we need to buy; we know how many hours it took to undertake a task for the first unit at Hinkley and the savings they were able to make for the second unit, and we can learn from that. We have a greater cost certainty because of that fixed design.' It sounds promising, but campaigners are less optimistic, pointing out the significant geographical differences between the sites. 'I get the principals behind replication – but the thing you can't do is replicate the site,' says Downes, who understands Sizewell is set to be a more expensive site to develop than Hinkley. 'There are very specific complexities around the Sizewell C site... It's quite likely that any savings they might expect to make through replication will be absorbed in the more complex groundworks.' While Hinkley is 'a dry site', Sizewell C is by the sea. 'It's going to need huge sea defences. They've got to build a crossing over a Site of Special Scientific Interest. They've got to build a deep cut-off wall. There's a lot of associated development that's needed because there's less infrastructure than there is down at Hinkley Point C. These are the sorts of things that concern us.' The Energy Secretary, for his part, is still adamant this is to be the start of a 'golden age'. 'We will not accept the status quo of failing to invest in the future and energy insecurity for our country,' he said. 'We need new nuclear to deliver a golden age of clean energy abundance, because that is the only way to protect family finances, take back control of our energy, and tackle the climate crisis.'
BBC News
10-06-2025
- Business
- BBC News
Sizewell C: Starmer says 'no blank cheque' for nuclear project
The prime minister has said he is "not writing a blank cheque" to pay for a new UK nuclear power plant, after the government announced it would commit £14.2bn to the Keir Starmer told the BBC the development of Sizewell C on the Suffolk coastline would create 10,000 jobs over the next decade, and provide energy security and independence for the government has announced the cash injection in a bid to kickstart investment in a new nuclear plant, but the Sizewell C project has faced opposition over its potential cost and environmental PM said the plant would "bring down bills for millions of people across the country". However, it will take at least 10 years to complete the project with power beginning to be generated in the mid-2030s, according to Energy Secretary Ed Miliband, who identified Sizewell as a potential site for a new nuclear reactor in 2009 when Labour was last in household bills have increased substantially in recent years, sparked by Russia's invasion of Ukraine sending global gas and oil prices up over supply fears, especially across Keir said the government investment in Sizewell was "setting out a course for the future which means that we have control over our own energy" and would ensure that Russian President Vladimir Putin "cannot put his boot on our throat" with energy prices. Building a nuclear power station is a huge engineering and financial project. The UK currently has nine nuclear reactors in operation, but the plants are ageing and eight of them are due to close by the end of this decade. The newest nuclear reaction - Sizewell B - came into service some 30 years year, nuclear power provided about 14% of the UK's electricity, which is significantly less than what was generated by wind (30%) and gas (26%).But the government has insisted that generating more power from nuclear can cut household energy bills, create jobs, boost energy security so that the UK is less reliant on other countries, and also tackle climate will hope the backing of Sizewell C will lead to an influx of private investment, which is required for building work to get under way, and is part a wider effort to attract investment into the UK to boost economic funding announced on Wednesday, which includes £2.7bn already pledged in the Autumn Budget, only covers five years of a decade-long project. When this was put to Sir Keir, he said the government had been "absolutely clear" about what it wants to achieve."I want to invest in our future. China [and] France are doing this, and I want to be right up there with them." 'Private investment not complete' The government has said Sizewell C will generate enough power for some six million construction will see 10,000 jobs created, and once operational, it is expected to employ 900 people and be in service for 60 Alison Downes, director of pressure group Stop Sizewell C, said ministers had not "come clean" about Sizewell C's cost, because "negotiations with private investors are incomplete".There have been several different funding announcements made about Sizewell C over many years by different Department of Energy Security confirmed to the BBC that with Wednesday's £14.2bn investment announcement, a total of £17.8bn of taxpayers' money had been put towards the project to date.A final decision on the funding model will be taken by the government later in the C has previously said the project was expected to cost £20bn in total, but industry sources have estimated it could cost double the state-owned French company which is building the new power plant, rejected the claims saying a £40bn figure was "not accurate".EDF is also building a new nuclear plant at Hinkley Point in Somerset, which it did accept would cost more than £40bn, compared to a 2022 estimate of £ Point is expected to switch on in the early 2030s, which will be over a decade late and having cost billions more than originally planned. Trade unions welcomed the government's investment, with GMB general secretary Warren Kenny saying Sizewell C would provide "thousands of good, skilled, unionised jobs".Mike Clancy, general secretary of the Prospect union, added: "New nuclear is essential to achieving net zero, providing a baseload of clean and secure energy."Sizewell C is to sit immediately north of Sizewell B, which began generating electricity in A opened in 1967 but it stopped generating power in December 2006 and a lengthy decommissioning process is ongoing.
Telegraph
09-06-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Britain will lead the world in new nuclear golden age
Whatever your political stripe, it is clear that energy security is a crucial responsibility for any government. Today's announcements by this Government – that we are embarking on the biggest expansion of new nuclear power in over half a century – speak to that central imperative. Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the cost of living crisis that followed for both families and businesses, showed how vulnerable we are as a country because of our dependence on fossil fuels. This challenge of energy security and the demands of the climate crisis mean that it is in our interests to shift as fast as possible to clean, homegrown power. The demand for that power is expected to at least double by 2050. That's why we need all the clean, homegrown sources that we can get to meet the demands we face. New nuclear is a crucial source of firm, baseload power. Sixteen years ago, when I was the Energy Secretary, I identified eight potential sites for new nuclear, one of which was Sizewell. When we left government in 2010, I assumed that one of my coalition or Conservative successors would get the project over the line – but they didn't. It has taken until 2025 for a government to allocate the funding required to make the project happen. Today, we are setting aside £14.2bn to fund Sizewell C – so we can power the equivalent of around 6m homes with clean, homegrown energy that we control. Sizewell C will support around 10,000 jobs at peak construction and support thousands more nationwide, as well as creating 1,500 apprenticeships. The company has already signed £330m in contracts with local companies and will boost supply chains across the UK with 70pc of contracts predicted to go to 3,500 British suppliers. Good industrial jobs from Sheffield to Derby, Scotland to South East England, paid at high wages. To progress the plant, we are securing a funding model that fairly spreads upfront costs between industry, government, and consumers. We are also backing a new form of nuclear technology in the UK – small modular reactors (SMR). These offer a huge industrial and jobs opportunity for our country and could help fuel heavy industry and data centres across Britain. We will announce the outcome of the small modular reactor competition imminently – helping us to get ahead in the global race to lead in this new technology, with an ambition to deploy one of the first SMR fleets in Europe. The Government is also looking to provide a pathway for advanced nuclear technologies to be deployed in the UK. Taken together this represents a new golden age for nuclear – the biggest building programme in a generation. Once SMRs and Sizewell C come online this, along with Hinkley Point C, will deliver more new nuclear to grid than over the previous half century combined. As we drive forward on nuclear, we are determined to lead the world in the technologies of the future. We are ramping up spending on nuclear fusion research – with over £2.5bn of funding this parliament, including helping progress a fusion power station on the site of a former coal-fired power plant at West Burton. We are choosing to go big on nuclear, as part of our Plan for Change to invest in Britain's future, rather than accept the decline of recent times. This is what the Chancellor's Spending Review is all about: renewing the country with investments and projects that will produce jobs, prosperity and put more money in working people's pockets. For too long, Britain has not made the investments we need in energy and other critical national infrastructure. That is where this Government, led by the decisions of the Prime Minister and Chancellor, is different. We are choosing to double down on Britain's strengths and invest in the future – boosting our energy security, creating good jobs, unlocking new export opportunities and driving growth. There is another crucial thing this drive for new nuclear does – it supports our energy security and protects our home for the future by shifting away from reliance on fossil fuels. I believe it is a cherished value of many Telegraph readers to protect the things we treasure from generation to generation. Our countryside and way of life face a grave threat from the climate crisis. Clean power is about investing in future generations, with jobs and opportunities. It also gives us the chance to leave a safer, more prosperous legacy for future generations. That's why our drive to new nuclear is the right thing for today and for the future of our country.
