Half the world seems to think the planet needs nuclear power more than ever. The other half seems just as sure that now’s the time to get rid of it forever.
It’s a collision between long-term concerns over global warming — which gives nuclear power appeal as a practical form of carbon-free energy — and anxieties heightened by three reactor meltdowns at the Fukushima plant in northern Japan in March 2011.
Proponents of nuclear energy say accidents like the Fukushima meltdown are rare, that reactors are getting safer, and that fossil fuels are responsible for more deaths, through mine accidents and pollution.
Opponents say Fukushima shows that reactors can’t be made to withstand catastrophes. They also cite the cost and environmental risks involved in disposing of nuclear waste.
Notwithstanding these arguments, the British government yesterday gave the green light to the controversial Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant after agreeing on measures to “enhance security” in the French-built, Chinese-invested project.
The government said it approved the project “following a comprehensive review,” a revised agreement with French energy giant EDF, and the imposing of new legal restrictions on future foreign investment in nuclear energy facilities and other “critical infrastructure.”
EDF and its Chinese partner, the state-owned China General Nuclear Power Corporation (CGN), both said they were “delighted” with the go-ahead, while the French government called the approval “a major step in Franco-British industrial and energy co-operation.”
The government’s business secretary, Greg Clark, said “Britain needs to upgrade its supplies of energy, and we have always been clear that nuclear is an important part of ensuring our future low-carbon energy security.”
Industry groups have welcomed the go-ahead for Hinkley Point, saying thousands of new jobs will now be created, giving a huge boost to the nuclear sector.
However, there is an array of significant problems and fears related to the £18bn project which is projected to one day supply 7% of the UK’s electricity. One is the technology itself.
The planned European Pressurised Reactor (EPR) for Hinkley is a relatively new and still unproven design. There have been serious technical problems at other EPR construction sites in Olkiluoto in Finland and Flamanville in northern France. 
There are also worries that the project’s funding is at risk. The construction will be paid for by EDF and Chinese state-backed CGN group, which will pay two thirds and one third respectively.
However, EDF’s market value has halved in the past two years, dropping to £18.7bn – not much more than the cost of Hinkley Point C.
From the British perspective, another issue is the indirect involvement of the Chinese state. Some argue it’s unwise to give Beijing control over such an important part of UK’s energy infrastructure.
Yet another major problem is the cost to UK consumers.
In 2013, the coalition government agreed a price of £92.5 per megawatt hour of electricity (rising in line with inflation) at which it would purchase power from the new plant for 35 years once it is operational. Without such guarantees EDF and the Chinese would not have agreed to invest.
Concerns have been raised that the energy landscape has changed in the last few years, since the deal was first backed and the contract negotiated. Renewables are much more mainstream and the costs of subsidising solar, onshore and offshore wind have fallen dramatically.
And the way the energy system is managed, with more balancing of supply and demand and growing use of storage, may mean a large chunk of base-load power running all the time – as nuclear would – is not needed.