Whats the problem with nuclear power?

DPinBucks

So your considered solution is ... ?

pragmatic

We'll we'd have to make cuts elsewhere or make the environment a very good investment for private companies.

To make a dreaded car analogy, you need a car to get to work but the one you have is due for the scrap heap, cycling won't really get you there so you'd have to make sacrifices else where in your home finances to make sure you'll have income generation in the future.

This government has very many difficult decisions in its remit, I just hope they don't fluff this one.  This is the one very few things that PFI could actually come in very handy for (it would literally be paying for itself), although I fear the last government has spanked that option too hard already.

Remember we also have the banks to sell on, so we have some assets available be they illiquid right now.

deckingman

There isn't one - we are stuffed.

I'm fast approaching the age when I'll be too old to work. I need to invest in my future, otherwise I'll be stuffed. I have no money to invest in a pension or anything else - never have had. So I'm stuffed.

Maybe when I'm old I'll either freeze to death one winter because I can't afford any heating, or maybe I'll starve because I can't afford to eat. Not a happy outlook but there is bugger all I can do about it.
  
Need to invest for the future. Have no money. Can't invest. Therefore stuffed. Simple really.

andy1249

With a long term outlook , a safe approach to nuclear power is probably the best way to go.
However this is not going to be a popular decision with the electorate.

Governments in general dont think long term , they think in terms of elections dates and five year plans, and unpopular decisions dont win elections, so dont expect any great forward thinking decisions that are unpopular in the short term.

deckingman

What savings do you want to make? Scrap the health service? Scrap all spending on education? Scarp defense? We are currently borrowing £1 for ever £4 we spend. We need to cut spending by 25% just to keep the level of debt the same. Then we need to start paying off the (almost) £1 trillion we owe. The UK has NO money to invest in anything.

pragmatic

We have to cut a lot, and there is a topic on it in the parent politics forum ...

We are spending too much, and we need priorities, unfortunately the perfect storm is now on us were we have a necessary large investment and not the money available.

I don't suggest whole sale cuts in any one area, but lets make it clear if the lights go out so do tax receipts and we have a downward spiral from then on in.

We are going to face a period of service cuts and real efficiency drives to get the country moving again fiscally, we need more business and less government.  Around about  1/3 of the workforce is working for the government and that is far too much, its just too much for the country to bear unless we pay the whole lot a pittance, and I wouldn't suggest/want that.

deckingman

So, getting back to your OP, the answer to the question "What is the problem with nuclear power?" is that, in the UK, we have no money to fund any sort of power generation programme - nuclear or other wise.

DPinBucks

Of course we’ve got money!! What you’re saying is that nuclear power is so low on our priorities that it does not justify reducing expenditure on other programmes by a single penny in order to fund it.

I disagree. I have said, and I say again, we have no choice. Every government programme assumes a ready supply of enough energy to support it. The most obvious is Health, including care of the elderly. Without a secure, reliable electricity supply, people will die in hospitals and in their homes. Education requires that schools be lit and heated in the winter. Transport is obvious. Shops and supermarkets require lighting and electricity for coolers and freezers. Homes require lighting and heating.

We are not talking about a little bit of patching and making-do here. We are talking about anticipating the inevitable severe reductions in burning fossil fuels for heat and power, whether through supply shortages or environmental considerations.

We have to find the money. In good times or bad, the supply of funds is always finite, and no initiative is ever allowed to spend 100% of what it would like to. In bad times that simply means that the effect is rather worse.

GasDad

We have extensive coal reserves perfectly capable of generating all the electricity we need.

We have extensive sources of renewables we haven't even begun to tap. (tidal, wave, solar and wind)

Both have the advantage of being cheaper, and not dependent on external sources of supply.

deckingman

UK debt is fast approaching £1 trillion and for every 4 pounds spent we continue to borrow £1. We are paying £30 billion a year in interest alone.

You say "We have to find the money" (ultimately to fund a massive nuclear and renewables energy programme which will negate our need for fossil fuels) .

Go on then - how are you going to fund it?