Going nuclear - the answer to Britain's energy future?
8 min read
With soaring costs and delays, is nuclear energy really the answer to Britain’s energy future? Zoë Grünewald reports
As the UK accelerates towards its 2050 net-zero emissions target, nuclear energy has taken centre stage. Promoted as a solution for slashing carbon emissions while ensuring reliable power, it remains a cornerstone of successive governments’ net-zero ambitions.
“The truth is that the nuclear industry gives us a glimpse of what the clean energy economy can offer,” Energy Secretary Ed Miliband declared at the Nuclear Industry Association’s 2024 conference. “We should be enthusiastic about nuclear not just for what it offers our energy system, but for its potential to drive jobs, investment, industry and exports.”
The ambition is bold: nuclear power is set to provide 25 per cent of the UK’s electricity by mid-century, up from 15 per cent today. But increasingly the nuclear debate is about more than climate targets – it’s about affordability. UK energy bills remain volatile due to heavy reliance on imported gas, leaving the system vulnerable to external shocks, such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This has driven record-high energy costs, with 6.1 million households now in fuel poverty, up from 4.5 million in 2021.
While homegrown energy could offset some of these shocks, nuclear faces setbacks of its own. Large-scale nuclear projects like Sizewell C and Hinkley Point C illustrate the sector’s challenges. Both have faced delays and soaring costs. Sizewell C, now expected to be completed by the mid-2030s, has seen its projected cost rise to £40bn – double the original estimate. Hinkley Point C could be delayed until 2031, with costs escalating to £35bn, according to developer EDF. The government has also placed significant emphasis on developing small modular reactors (SMRs), advancing a competitive programme with their Great British Nuclear initiative to diversify the UK’s nuclear portfolio.
In early February, Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced plans for a major expansion of nuclear power across England and Wales, vowing to use Labour’s large majority to push through new sites, including SMRs to power artificial intelligence datacentres. The government will allow nuclear projects beyond existing designated sites, with Starmer warning his MPs he will “push past nimbyism” to drive through the reforms.
But industry experts remain sceptical as no commercial SMRs are yet operational in the rest of the world. The caution is matched by the cross-party Environmental Audit Committee, which warned in 2024 that the government’s vision on SMRs “lacks clarity”, which could knock industry confidence.
While EDF covers Hinkley’s costs, Sizewell relies on a regulated asset base (RAB) model, which requires billpayers to contribute during construction. With delays and rising costs – and former construction partner China General Nuclear pulling out over security concerns – the UK’s nuclear ambitions are increasingly pitted against the public purse.
Matt Copeland, head of policy at National Energy Action (NEA), highlights the toll of rising bills on families: “They’re not heating their homes to a standard where they’re warm, not cooking hot meals as they would prefer to save energy, and leaving their home to go and spend time elsewhere, whether it’s other people’s homes, leisure centres, libraries or whatever, just in order to stay warm.”
Unsurprisingly perhaps, last year saw a record number of UK newspaper editorials opposing net-zero initiatives. According to analysis by news organisation Carbon Brief: “By far the most common anti-climate action narrative in newspaper editorials last year was the economic impact of what The Sun on Sunday called ‘bonkers net-zero policies that will just push prices up’”.
Nuclear has faced particular scrutiny. Media outlets have linked rising household costs to nuclear energy, reporting that industry leaders are pressuring the Energy Secretary to allow costs for mini-nuclear reactors to be passed on to consumer bills.
“The research we’ve done suggests that middle-income households will disengage from the transition if they see their neighbours who are left struggling because of the transition,” Copeland warns, “So we need to make sure that everyone’s included, but also people are protected from the cost of it.”
While government analysis shows that 84 per cent of people support renewable energy sources like wind and solar, nuclear energy remains more divisive. According to the Nuclear Industry Association, public support for nuclear lags behind onshore wind and solar farms (66 to 67 per cent), as concerns over cost, waste and sustainability persist.
Dr Simon Evans, deputy editor and senior policy editor at Carbon Brief, notes a shift toward nuclear in light of global events: “That increased public awareness of the need for energy security, and people started thinking, perhaps it’s better to have an expensive nuclear plant at home and lots of renewables, rather than importing fossil fuels from overseas.”
And while media hostility toward net-zero has increased in recent years, Copeland argues the public hasn’t yet made this link. “No one talks about that gas distribution network costing an extra £5 more, or wind farms costing an extra £3 more, nor the savings they’re going to get from onshore wind,” he says. “It’s often not perceived to be the fault of government. It’s often perceived to be the fault of energy suppliers.”
In fact, renewables are often touted as a long-term solution for lower bills, despite the initial costs of both renewable and nuclear infrastructure being high. Labour’s 2024 manifesto stated its intention to “harness clean power” to “boost our energy security, and invest in home insulation upgrades”, adding that this “will save families hundreds of pounds on their bills, not just in the short term, but for good”.
The priority has to be to protect households from increasing prices in the next couple of years, and that’s how they’ll convince people
A 2025 study by E3G and Baringa showed that a clean power system could save households over £200 annually by 2030 if sweeping market reforms are implemented. The report concludes: “Reaching clean power by 2030 can be achieved with electricity bills at a similar level to today and reduced exposure to gas prices under existing pricing policies.”
But not everyone is in agreement. Sir Dieter Helm, professor of economic policy at the University of Oxford, cautions against over-optimism, arguing the idea that renewables are “cheaper than fossil fuels” would be “wonderful if it was true, but sadly it isn’t anytime soon”. He warns that the UK’s uncompetitive energy sector and high initial investment on nuclear and renewable infrastructure could lead to higher costs for taxpayers and businesses.
Helm does not argue against decarbonisation, but emphasises the need for honesty about the economic trade-offs and systemic challenges. “This does not mean that the UK should not unilaterally push forward, but it does mean being honest with its voters and consumers [...] Unilateral net-zero targets based on carbon consumption (not territorial emissions) would stop the UK causing more climate change, but this will not promote economic growth.”
Advocates argue that while nuclear power may be costly, its value lies in its consistency. In their view, nuclear power’s reliability serves as a vital counterbalance to the variability of renewables such as wind and solar, creating a stable and resilient energy eco-system.
This argument for nuclear’s value lies in its “portfolio effect”, explains Evans: “It’s more a question of the insurance policy [...] The question is, should we consider nuclear despite the fact that it is often late and over budget? Does it bring something to the mix that is valuable even if the individual units of electricity generated by nuclear plants are expensive? Is there value in having that electricity generation that is steady throughout the year and doesn’t vary with the weather? That’s really the debate about nuclear.”
Proponents also highlight nuclear’s potential to boost jobs and economic growth. Tom Greatrex, chief executive of the Nuclear Industry Association, says the sector supports “well over 90,000 jobs” nationwide: “We can have lots more of these opportunities for the next generation if we get on with committing to new projects by supporting Sizewell C to a final investment decision, progressing the development of small modular reactors and a new project at Wylfa, for more secure, reliable and homegrown power.”
A DESNZ spokesperson echoed this, stating that nuclear will play “an important role in helping the UK achieve energy security and net-zero, while securing thousands of good, skilled jobs and supporting our energy independence beyond 2030”.
They add: “We are supporting the completion of Hinkley Point C, confirmed £2.7bn in the Budget to support Sizewell C’s development in the next fiscal year, and Great British Nuclear is moving ahead with contract negotiations as part of its small modular reactor competition. Sizewell C alone is expected to reduce the cost of the electricity system, boost our supply of secure homegrown power and generate major investment nationwide.”
While nuclear and renewables come with costly trade-offs, proponents argue that the green benefits make them worth pursuing. But fuel poverty advocates say public support hinges on providing relief for vulnerable households. Copeland suggests that measures like a social tariff could help ensure affordable energy for low-income families during the transition to a cleaner energy system, alongside upgrading homes to improve energy efficiency and security.
“I don’t think the public will accept it if government decisions effectively increase prices from this already unaffordable level, up to something that’s much less affordable in the next couple of years,” he explains. “The priority has to be to protect households from increasing prices in the next couple of years, and that’s how they’ll convince people.”
PoliticsHome Newsletters
Get the inside track on what MPs and Peers are talking about. Sign up to The House's morning email for the latest insight and reaction from Parliamentarians, policy-makers and organisations.
