Sellafield and Heysham named on new nuclear plants list

First published in Heysham news

Next generation of reactors will be built at Sellafield and Heysham, the Government announced today as it pushes ahead with plans for new nuclear power plants.

In the first major announcement on the future of nuclear in the UK since the Fukushima disaster in Japan, the Government outlined the locations deemed suitable for new power stations by 2025, all of which are adjacent to existing nuclear sites.

The eight sites are: Bradwell, Essex; Hartlepool; Heysham, Lancashire; Hinkley Point, Somerset; Oldbury, South Gloucestershire; Sellafield, Cumbria; Sizewell, Suffolk; and Wylfa, Anglesey.

The plans for new nuclear power plants are part of a series of national policy statements on energy which were published today, following a public consultation.

They will be debated and voted on in Parliament, but ministers are hopeful that, with a pro-nuclear majority in the Commons, they will win the argument.

Nuclear power is one of the issues that divided Conservatives and Liberal Democrats when they entered Government together, with the coalition deal allowing a Lib Dem spokesman to speak out against any new nuclear plants, while Lib Dem MPs could abstain on the issue.

Lib Dem Energy Secretary Chris Huhne has since given his backing to new reactors, insisting they would not be subsidised by the taxpayer - although MPs have warned that reform of the electricity market could favour nuclear power and amount to a hidden subsidy.

The Government is planning the new suite of reactors to maintain electricity supplies and cut greenhouse gas emissions as an old generation of power stations is shut down.

The future of nuclear as a power source for countries around the world was called into question earlier this year after the Japanese earthquake and tsunami rocked the reactors at Fukushima, leaving radioactivity leaking from the plant.

Mr Huhne signalled last month that plans for new reactors in the UK were on track after an initial report on Fukushima from nuclear chief inspector Mike Weightman ruled out the need to curtail the operation of nuclear power stations in the UK in light of the situation in Japan.

The energy policy statements aim to provide a framework for making planning decisions so projects do not face "unnecessary hold-ups".

They set out the need for billions of pounds of investment in new energy sources, including 33 gigawatts of renewable power - the equivalent of thousands of offshore wind turbines - to meet the UK's future needs.

Energy minister Charles Hendry said: "Around a quarter of the UK's generating capacity is due to close by the end of this decade. We need to replace this with secure, low carbon, affordable energy.

"This will require over £100 billion worth of investment in electricity generation alone.

"This means twice as much investment in energy infrastructure in this decade as was achieved in the last decade.

"Industry needs as much certainty as possible to make such big investments.

"These plans set out our energy need to help guide the planning process, so that if acceptable proposals come forward in appropriate places, they will not face unnecessary hold-ups."

He said the coalition Government was determined to make the UK attractive to investors to ensure that the country had secure, affordable, low-carbon energy.

Comments (2)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

3:33pm Fri 24 Jun 11

Roysyboy says...

Government spin doctors and the nuclear industry have been working overtime to repackage nuclear power as a green solution to climate change. They want to build new nuclear power stations, but they know we won’t want them if we know the reality – nuclear power is dirty and dangerous and not the answer to climate change.
Government spin doctors and the nuclear industry have been working overtime to repackage nuclear power as a green solution to climate change. They want to build new nuclear power stations, but they know we won’t want them if we know the reality – nuclear power is dirty and dangerous and not the answer to climate change. Roysyboy
  • Score: 0

5:06pm Fri 24 Jun 11

Kendmoor says...

I'm not nessicarily against nuclear power, but I do find it interesting to ponder on where they choose to put the sites..surely if nuclear is so safe, why not pop one in London?.. ;)

when you look at the human race's energy requirements then the pro's and cons of our options it really does get tricky..the whole thing is such a tricky issue, especially when you have strong voices and opinions on both sides of the argument. I think one of the biggest shames is that money is brought into it so heavily, surely we have enough intelligent people on the planet that we could sit down and work out something new..
I'm not nessicarily against nuclear power, but I do find it interesting to ponder on where they choose to put the sites..surely if nuclear is so safe, why not pop one in London?.. ;) when you look at the human race's energy requirements then the pro's and cons of our options it really does get tricky..the whole thing is such a tricky issue, especially when you have strong voices and opinions on both sides of the argument. I think one of the biggest shames is that money is brought into it so heavily, surely we have enough intelligent people on the planet that we could sit down and work out something new.. Kendmoor
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree