You report (4 July) that the cost of Hinkley C power station has just bumped up £1.5bn, and its completion date slipped 15 months. Notwithstanding, pro-nuclear politicians will assure us that it still represents good value for the consumer, despite the National Audit Office judging it “risky and expensive” (Report, 23 June). Had we invested that £1.5bn in green generation, what might it have bought? At current median project prices of £1.3m per megawatt (MW), we could have had 1,150MW of extra onshore wind turbine capacity.
The Digest of UK Energy Statistics onshore wind load factor is 27.3%, therefore that extra hardware would on average generate 314MW of clean electricity, with no risk of reactor meltdowns, and without producing bomb material or the wherewithal for nuclear terrorism. Furthermore, wind turbine projects bring with them well-distributed inward UK investment, installation and maintenance jobs, wayleave revenue for landowners, rates revenue for local authorities, and local community income. They bring home-generated power – without the need for oil wars or fracking, and no damaging balance-of-payments issues.
History tells us that this Hinkley cost increase and start delay is only the first of many such announcements; meanwhile, the failure of Toshiba’s nuclear power business surely casts doubt on the viability of even the largest nuclear equipment manufacturers. As almost every other administration quits nuclear power as fast as possible in favour of clean electricity, smart demand response and storage technologies, why are we still backing megalithic, inflexible, economically toxic EDF Betamax?
Christopher Jessop
Haverfordwest, Pembrokeshire
• Why do people like Jenifer Baxter of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers automatically respond to the revelation that a nuclear power station is delayed again by arguing that other power stations will need to fill the gap? When Hinkley Point C was initially mooted in 2006, electricity consumption levels were being forecast to increase by over 15% in the ensuing decade, but demand has actually dropped by 15.2% in 10 years.
This consumption revolution has been prompted by vastly improved electricity efficiency in industry, in consumer white and brown goods, and in areas like lighting, where household consumption has dropped from 20.7 terrawatt hours (TWh) in 2007 to 14.2TWh this year. The real question is: is all this expenditure on energy supply really necessary?
Andrew Warren
Chair, British Energy Efficiency Federation
• Your report says the head of EDF thought in 2007 that this year’s Christmas turkeys would be cooked by Hinkley Point C electricity. Surely the only turkey in view is Hinkley Point C itself?
Brian Price
Weston-super-Mare, Somerset
• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com
• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters
