Out with the old, in with the nuclear

There has been widespread coverage today of the Prime Minister’s announcement that he would ‘push past Nimby-ism’ to expand nuclear power in England and Wales. The four key planks of this new push for nuclear are: including mini-nuclear power stations  (such as Small Modular Reactors or SMRs) in planning rules for the first time; scrapping the set list of 8-sites; removing the expiry date on nuclear planning rules and setting up a Nuclear Regulatory Taskforce. 

Politically, this renewed push for nuclear makes sense. The new Labour government has the parliamentary majority to get these reforms through even if there are dissenters in its own ranks. It also reaches across two of the Prime Minister’s ‘missions for government,’ namely those to do with growth and making the UK a clean energy powerhouse. The government’s hope will be that by making it easier for SMRs to be built across England and Wales, large companies will invest in the UK and use these to power data centres. 

The first stumbling block is that nuclear has something of an image problem in some parts; with incidents like Chernobyl or Fukushima never too far from the conversation. Or maybe it’s outdated plants ready for decommissioning. A Nuclear Industry Association study in 2024 found that nuclear had a net support of +14% in the UK, which lags well behind onshore wind (+67%) and solar (+66%). 

Then there’s the good old British infrastructure problem of projects not being delivered on time nor on budget. And then there’s the regulatory forest, between the Planning Inspectorate, the Office for Nuclear Regulation and the Environment Agency (to name but three). But they exist surely to ensure safety and therefore increase public confidence in nuclear – so squaring that circle will be hard. 

What I found surprising was the continued use of ‘pushing past Nimby-ism’ or ‘swatting Nimbys aside.’ On housing or roads or other infrastructure I might understand, but given nuclear’s aforementioned image problem I believe the message should be more nuanced – and the government could look to existing examples of the benefits, and these go way beyond just energy.

Hinkley Point C – one of Europe’s largest construction sites – has undoubtedly transformed that area of Somerset. With in excess of 10,000 people working on site, and the creation of over 1,300 apprenticeships (many of whom are from the local area or wider South West), the Project has brought economic benefits and growth to Bridgwater and its surrounding area. A project of this scale will always create problems, be they pressures on accommodation, or transport, or noise. Yet by consistent and effective engagement with local communities built up over many years, it has shown that it can and does address issues that people and communities raise. 

The acid test will ultimately be whether this new Nuclear Regulatory Taskforce can ensure that there is enough regulation for SMRs to be safe, but that they can be built quickly and in the right places – though many sites for SMRs have already been identified. My advice to the government would be to be positive about the future of nuclear, its potential for jobs and investment in skills and with both clean energy and economic growth as the prize. Engage with local communities, take them with you and paint the picture of how their area can benefit. This might be the first steps on the road to being out with the old, and in with the nuclear.