Avoiding power blackouts in the coming decades is an issue that is involving several manufacturing giants jostling for position. But as a humble UK taxpayer I wonder how much I will have to pay in taxes and electricity bills in the future to give this massive investment in new nuclear power stations a financial helping hand.

In the UK both Labour and Tory Government leaders have given clear signals of support for a new round of construction of a fleet of new nuclear power plants. But even in London with Whitehall backing there are still immense hurdles to be jumped if either of the two main bidders are to get a start on deals to build the new nuclear power stations.

The two competing designs are the AP1000 by Toshiba-Westinghouse and the EPR, a French design from Areva. These contenders recently entered the fourth and final step of the tough technological and safety case "beauty contest" - which is scheduled to conclude in June 2011. But this selection process is not the only challenge. Another is the planning process. The lengthy planning process is one hurdle where the bar has already been lowered by recent legislation setting up the Infrastructure Planning Commission for major projects such as controversial airport expansions or new nuclear reactors. Subject to consultation and Parliamentary scrutiny, the Government intends to finalise and formally approve an energy National Policy Statements later this year. These statements would then be used to unlock planning consent for the series of new reactors. To keep the local communities on side most of these new power plants are expected to be located near existing stations which are approaching the end of their working lives. Already land deals have been struck at Sellafield and other potential power station sites in the UK.

However there are other hurdles that the bidders have to devise ways of side-stepping. One is that the government White Paper that gave the green light for new nukes included a proviso that the projects should not get state funding. Quite rightly in a liberalised energy market each power source should be able to stand on its own merits, was the claim by the politicians. But as those in the industry are well aware, the huge cost of new reactors means they will not happen without open or covert financial support. At present the state provides the insurance cover in the event of a nuclear accident and at the latest count the costs to the state of disposing of nuclear waste generated so far was estimated at £72 billion.

But I think we can safely assume that Whitehall in London, will find ways and means of financial support for the new build programme. Already government officials have hinted that a carbon price floor will need to be set to encourage bidders to commit funds to the the project. In effect this will mean the consumer or state will have to stump up the cash to underpin this artificially higher price paid for the electricity generated. Recently the team of nuclear engineers employed by the government safety body the NII has raised questions over the strength of a new method of construction proposed for the AP1000. But Kevin Allars, the NII director responsible for the detailed safety review said this issue was not necessarily a 'show stopper.' At the same time the Areva design has its own headaches and is the subject of massive cost hikes, already 50% over budget, and delays at its first construction site Olkiluoto 3 in Finland. Whichever design wins the UK nuclear 'beauty contest' it will be a huge boost to UK manufacturing as subsidiaries to each parent company gear up for the huge construction programme.

Rolls Royce are involved in both bids and said of the Areva design bid, in a report to the industry association (NIA) last year: "We plan to build four new European Pressurised Reactors (EPR) nuclear reactors in the UK. Subject to the right investment framework being in place we intend to develop 4 EPRs in the UK by 2025 with the first operational by the end of 2017." Areva has Rolls-Royce and Balfour-Beatty as industrial partners in the UK, and told suppliers that contracts for 70 percent of the work on its EPR reactor were open to UK suppliers. In the opposing corner, Toshiba-Westinghouse has construction well advanced on one of its AP1000s in China and is contracted for four in the USA.They also have Rolls Royce alongside BAE Systems, Sheffield Forgemasters and Doosan Babcock on their team.

Oh and talking of hurdles facing both these industrial beasts, we must not forget the environmental campaigners casting doubts on the entire new build plan. Just last year Greenpeace warned that: "Our lawyers will be examining this announcement very closely. You can't justify building more nuclear power stations when there is no solution to radioactive waste and when international regulators are saying there are huge uncertainties surrounding the basic safety of new reactor designs." Having reported on events within the nuclear industry for 20 years I have always found the true costs of the nuclear power generation , and subsequent clean-up of the waste, hidden away behind a smoke screen.

But I suppose if we can just 'look away now' when the final bill arrives, at least we may be sure that wintry power outages are less of a strategic risk for future generations. That same future generation that will also inherit the unfortunate task of looking after nuclear waste for a few centuries!

David Siddall
david@manufacturingworldnews.com