Articles
Watching an edition of Question Time on BBC1 last month was a tremendously frustrating experience – even more so than usual. The panel of experts, comprising the usual hotchpotch of politicians and media pundits, got around to discussing energy matters. And quite frankly the lack of insight and knowledge expressed was profoundly disturbing.
The debate was framed by a worrying level of over-simplification from people who should have been better informed. Windfarms were either absolutely useless or they were saviours of the modern world. Nuclear power was either an abhorrence or it was the only true provider of reliable low-carbon energy. It was all so black and white: there was no sign of any reasoned in between.
The subject of energy provision is now likely to become even more polarised following the extraordinary events in Japan. Predictably there have been calls from some quarters for Britain’s nuclear new-build programme to be postponed or even cancelled outright. Even if that doesn’t happen, the incident at Fukushima means there is bound to be a knock-on effect in terms of delay as the ramifications of what has occurred are fully analysed and understood.
The first of our new nuclear power stations, according to the energy secretary Chris Huhne, is due to become operational in 2018. That timeline was already tight. Now I’d say it is impossible. Indeed, if I was a betting man, I’d wager a year’s salary that 2018 will not be achieved.
So where does that leave us in terms of a looming energy gap? As ageing plant is brought offline, just how can we ensure that the lights don’t go out? Renewables are nowhere near ready to step in and fill the breach as existing technologies such as wind and solar cannot provide us with a guaranteed baseload. One day the fledgling wave and tidal sector might be a contender. But there is still a million miles to go before that is the case.
Meanwhile clean coal, in terms of carbon capture and sequestration, remains an unproven technology on any meaningful scale. Demonstration plants are being built, but the idea of burying carbon dioxide in places like spent oilfields under the North Sea provokes in many people a sense of unease.
It would, arguably, be feasible to build several new gas-fired power stations over the next six or seven years. But to go down that route would be to perpetuate concerns over energy security as we would be dependent on less than reliable nations at a time when the world is competing for diminishing supplies.
The stone cold truth, and someone has to say it, is that Britain needs new nuclear power to provide for our future energy needs. What occurred at Fukushima was an exceptional set of circumstances that is highly unlikely ever to be replicated over here. Yes, the causes have to be thoroughly investigated and lessons have to be learned, and the relevant safety authorities are already acting to ensure that is the case. But if we allow nuclear new-build to slip back again, then there’s a real fear that dark days lie ahead.