Josh MacAlister
MP for Whitehaven and Workington and the Chair of the Nuclear Energy APPGIn an exclusive article for Chamber UK, Josh MacAlister, MP for Whitehaven and Workington and Chair of the Nuclear Energy APPG, highlights nuclear’s critical role in Net Zero. He calls for urgent investment, planning reforms, and government action to rebuild Britain’s leadership and secure clean, reliable energy.
Nuclear energy has not always received the credit it deserves as a low-carbon energy source. According to the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), nuclear has the lowest land use, lowest ecosystem impact, and lowest lifecycle carbon of all energy-generating technologies. Britain has historically played a world-leading role in nuclear energy, but dither and delay over recent decades has put our industry under threat, just when we need it most.
The Slow Recognition of Nuclear Energy as Critical to Net Zero
The world has belatedly realised there is no Net Zero without nuclear. COP28 saw the global community formally recognise the crucial role nuclear will play in tackling climate change, and twenty countries – including the UK – committed to tripling nuclear energy by 2050.
Nuclear’s ability to provide consistent, reliable baseload power at scale allows it to complement more intermittent renewable sources of energy, like wind and solar. This means nuclear is the key to decarbonising many hard-to-abate sectors – like the steel sector and the ever-expanding, and energy-consuming, AI and data sector. Nuclear can also help produce hydrogen and power carbon capture.
Britain has Fallen Off Track
Britain built the world’s first civil nuclear power station in 1956 at Calder Hall, which was proudly homed in West Cumbria, the area I now represent in Parliament. This initial innovation led to a thriving industry and by the 1990s, 24.5 per cent of Britain’s electricity supply was coming from nuclear energy.
We have gone from world leaders to laggards. Last year, only 13.9 per cent of our energy came from nuclear. Next year will mark thirty years since we successfully completed a new nuclear plant. Since then, eight of our nuclear plants have closed, and by 2028, Sizewell B is scheduled to be Britain’s last remaining operational plant.
As our nuclear energy declines, so do the skills and expertise embedded in the supply chain. The longer we wait, the harder it will be to rebuild.
The Road Ahead
Britain is at a fork in the road – with two very different routes ahead of it. Take Germany and France, two large European economies, the former shut down its last nuclear power plant in 2023 while in the same year, the latter produced 65 per cent of its energy from nuclear. Today, Germany has the third most carbon-intensive energy grid in Europe, and to produce one unit of electricity it emits 4.5 times more carbon than its French neighbours.
This is a cautionary tale. If Britain wants to take its Net Zero target seriously, it must commit to nuclear and dramatically deviate from the path it has been following for the last thirty years.
There has been some movement in the right direction. Hinkley Point C is scheduled to come online around 2030, and it will hopefully be followed by Sizewell C, which is looking to reach a final investment decision this year. Combined, they will be able to supply around 12 million homes with electricity for over 60 years.
A competition to select small modular reactor technology is currently underway. The process holds the potential to deliver new nuclear to communities like West Cumbria, Hartlepool, Anglesey, Derbyshire, Shropshire, and Heysham.
However, there are critical reforms that need to happen if Britain is to avoid repeating the last decade of failure and delay.
Firstly, Britain’s nuclear sector must be more attractive to private finance. The 2022 Nuclear Energy (Financing) Act was a good start, permitting nuclear energy projects to be funded via a Regulated Asset Base model that allows investors to begin recuperating their investment cost through revenue from users while the project is still under development. However, projects are still struggling to attract the finance they need, and this is because investors have not been given confidence that the UK Government is backing UK nuclear.
Britain should reflect the move from the EU to include nuclear within a green taxonomy. GB Energy must also consider its role here, strategically investing in and derisking nuclear projects to crowd in private investment.
Secondly, Britain must reform its planning system. Despite designs being exactly the same, Sizewell C’s environmental impact assessment was 30 per cent longer than Hinkley Point C’s, reaching over 40,000 pages. Standards must be kept high but anti-nuclear, anti-infrastructure lobbyists’ ability to delay projects and withhold jobs, investment, and clean energy from communities must be kept within reason.
Thirdly, we need clear direction and commitment from government. Reactors take a while to build, and they can last for 100 years. Therefore, nuclear requires strategic vision, determination, and commitment. The Conservatives failed to provide any of these, but a new government means a new opportunity. We know we need nuclear, we know communities like mine want nuclear, and we know we have the skills we need to build nuclear. We need a strategy from government that lays out where we will build, what we will build, who will build, in what order we will build, and how we will pay for it.
The Prize of Getting it Right
Maintaining a skilled nuclear supply chain and developed regulatory landscape will put Britain front of the queue as sectors from steel to tech wake up to the sheer amount of clean, reliable power they will need over the coming decades. Britain is in a position to not only bring investment and skills to communities here but also to export our skills and technology around the world. The opportunity is huge, but time is running out.
This article appears in the new edition of the Chamber UK Journal, click below to sign up to our newsletter to read the full edition online!
