UK’s nuclear power push will add to energy bills, ministers say | Hacker News Reader

UK’s nuclear power push will add to energy bills, ministers say

bbc.co.uk

7 pointsdane-pgp8 comments

> A new law means new nuclear reactors can be funded by adding a small levy to people's bills during their construction.

Does that mean that by deliberately slowing down the construction, a company can claim more money through the levy?

The government has abandoned its policy not to fund nuclear plants (they previously wanted 100% private funding) but now they say that they will effectively add a new tax on people's energy bills to partly fund them at a time when bills are already going through the roof.

Basically, the successive governments lack any ling term plan and refuse to fund strategic long term investments, which arguably are exactly where one would expect the government to intervene. For perspective on how nonsensical this all is: Hinkley C costs about 10 billion pounds less than the amount he government was happy to pour into the Covid track and trace program...

I take your point, but just about anything would be cheaper than the track and trace program:

> The NHS Test and Trace programme has been criticised as an "eye-watering" waste of taxpayers' money which did not achieve its objective ... This is despite the programme being pumped with the equivalent of 20% of the NHS's entire annual budget - £37 billion over two years.

https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/nhs-coronavirus-test-and-trace-fa...

Well, that's the point. 37 billion over two years for something is widely described as a failure, but 20 billion for a strategic investment that will deliver for decades? Nope, the market will do it... not. And worse, energy policy (or lack thereof) is changing every 6 months.

It is my impression that Rolls Royce are now committed to production of SMRs.

They announced that they got government funding to develop SMRs.

When they have a working and certified SMR we can discuss again...

> less than £1 a month extra on average over the whole construction period.

If you're implying that it's such a small amount, then why doesn't the government fund it from general taxation instead of this stealth tax?

Also, taxing basic necessities like energy is a regressive type of tax. It will be even worse if the levy is a fixed fee added to all energy bills (as opposed to a small increase in the per unit price to make it proportional to the energy used).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com