There are reports in today’s Times of a deal between
Government and EDF involving a strike price of £93 per MWh over 40 years for the Hinkley C project. This
obviously involves an enormous public commitment, but how enormous is this? The
terms matter very much, including,
1. What
agreement is there about ‘underwriting’ the construction risk of the Hinkley C
project
2. What
are the terms of the £10 billion guaranteed loan
3. Is
this strike price to be 'inflation' uprated in line with CPI or RPI? (the renewable
incentives are being uprated in line with the inferior CPI)
4. Are
there any provisions for altering the ‘strike’ price in future in an upwards
direction?
5. Is it
not the case that the ‘deal’ will allow EDF to part-complete Hinkley C having
overrun costs and exhaust the £10 billion Treasury loan and then demand more
money from the taxpayer/electricity consumer to complete the project?
The prospect of a public underwriting of £10 billion loan
guarantee could potentially mean that the nuclear power station could be
part-built, that the project costs could overrun, and that the taxpayer would then
have to come up with even more funds to complete the project under a further funding regime, much as what happened with Sizewell B.
That is what could happen if EDF gets what could well be (depending on the detail) a blank cheque for the project. The question is will we get to know about the extent of our commitments, or will we, as usual with nuclear power, only find out some of the extent much later on? Remember, just before the 2010 election the Conservatives said that they would not agree to the costs of nuclear power being underwritten by the Government.
What is certain is that when all added together, the costs of getting energy by paying for electricity from Hinkley C are more than what it would cost people to get the same amount of electricity from renewable energy sources such as wind power and solar power, not to mention various energy efficiency possibilities.
as Gerry Wollf of Energy Fair says: "it would be cheaper to buy electricity on the open market and give it away than it would be to subsidise new nuclear...
ReplyDelete