Latest news with #Nimbys'
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Ed Miliband's bet on mini nukes risks backfiring – unless he goes all in
Depending on who you ask, it's the breakthrough technology that will be key to net zero – or a risky, expensive folly. But now, Ed Miliband has placed his bet: Britain is backing mini nuclear power plants. On Tuesday, the Energy Secretary confirmed that the Government will provide billions of pounds towards the development of the country's first small modular reactors (SMRs) as part of a new 'golden age' for atomic energy. They will be designed by Derby-based Rolls-Royce, which emerged victorious from a two-year competition, and come online in the mid-2030s, providing crucial 'baseload' power to the grid. Each reactor will be able to power around 1m homes, one third of the output from a larger, Hinkley Point C-sized reactor. In effect, Mr Miliband is betting that smaller reactors will boost his net zero plans with smaller price tags and faster build times than big nuclear plants - with their size also meaning they can be built in locations much closer to people's homes. Yet with SMRs still to be proven, the key question is: can they actually deliver? Nuclear power has been staging something of a comeback in recent years, as countries including Britain and America endorse it as a way of significantly reducing the costs of the green energy transition. This is because having more 'firm' power on the grid from nuclear reduces the need for extra wind and solar farms, grid infrastructure and backup storage. But nuclear projects in the West have a patchy history, with schemes tending to bust through both their budgets and their construction schedules. Hinkley Point C, in Somerset, for example, was originally meant to cost £20bn – but the final figure may have ballooned to as much as £47bn by the time it is finished, including inflation. It will also have taken much longer to build than anyone had expected, with its original completion date in 2025 likely to be pushed back until the early 2030s. Mini nuclear plants are meant to solve both of these problems by reducing complexity and construction times. They would use the same proven light water reactor technology as large plants. But instead of building them on-site, large sections would be produced in factories and then transported to the site for final assembly – like a high-tech piece of Ikea furniture. Their smaller footprint should in theory bring other potential benefits too, such as more flexibility in where they can be built. In February, Sir Keir Starmer vowed to 'push past the Nimbys' and open up more sites to potential nuclear development, ripping up a previous policy that said only government-chosen sites were suitable. 'Because SMRs are a fraction of the size of a traditional nuclear power station, they can be built in many more locations, providing secure, home-grown energy for our traditional energy-intensive industries to state-of-the-art data centres,' says Sam Richards, of Britain Remade, a pro-growth campaign group. Under Boris Johnson, who was strongly supportive of SMRs, the government previously floated the idea that households could have money deducted from their energy bills if they lived near the football stadium-sized plants, in a bid to quell a backlash. Each Rolls-Royce SMR will generate about 470 megawatts (MW) of power, putting the plants at the larger end of the scale for mini reactors. By comparison, those proposed by rivals such as GE-Hitachi and Holtec International would generate about 300MW. This is far less than the much larger reactors used by under-construction plants such as Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C, which will both house two reactors with capacities of 1,600MW each. On a per-megawatt basis, the mini plants will also be more expensive. Because of their smaller size, the economic case for SMRs only stacks up if the Government ensures they are built at scale and the designs remain highly standardised, experts say. According to a 2024 report by the US Department of Energy, this means at least 50pc of the spending for each plant should be on the factory-made modules. 'The value proposition for SMRs centres around maximising design standardisation and factory production,' the report says. 'Without this, an SMR risks being a civil works construction project without the benefit of economies of scale.' Ministers will also have to be prepared to open up far more sites for SMR development. The first SMRs are likely to be built at either Wylfa, Anglesey, or Oldbury-on-Severn, Gloucestershire, both of which were acquired by the Government last year in a £160m deal, although that is yet to be confirmed. Other options that are already licenced include Bradwell in Essex, Moorside in Cumbria; and existing nuclear sites such as Heysham, Hartlepool and Torness. However, one industry insider suggests the Government should also consider former coal power plant sites and industrial estates that host factories. 'You need to have sites that are closer to population centres, places that cannot take larger plants, that is the sweet spot,' the insider adds. 'To get the efficiencies of scale, you also need to build a fleet. For 'Nth of a kind' costs you would eventually be aiming for, we are talking something like a minimum of six to eight reactors. 'If that happens, this could be a real breakthrough for the industry – but it has to happen at scale.' However, nuclear power still faces huge opposition from some quarters, with no guarantee that households across the country will welcome the prospect of a mini plant nearby. And many critics argue that there is no reason that SMRs should prove any different to larger plants. A project being developed by NuScale in the US, for example, saw multiple budget increases before it was eventually cancelled, while GE-Hitachi's proposed reactor in Ontario, Canada, was recently given an updated price tag of C$21bn. Rolls-Royce has previously said it expected its SMRs to cost between £2bn and £3bn each, but the first one is likely to be significantly more expensive. The Government has already budgeted £2.5bn of spending for the UK programme, up to 2029, before construction is expected to begin. 'Nuclear power is a white elephant and a terrible legacy to leave behind – for countless generations to clean up,' says Dale Vince, the tycoon behind Ecotricity and a Labour donor. 'With nuclear, it's always the same story; decades late, massively over budget and never meets the hype. 'We need more affordable energy – the wind and the sun are our fastest, cheapest, cleanest sources. We don't need new nuclear power stations. It makes no sense to spend vast sums of time and money on them.' Rolls-Royce argues that SMRs can provide 'a British solution to a global energy crisis'. The company is hoping to grab a slice of an expected £500bn market for mini reactors for Britain, generating thousands of skilled jobs and a stable source of work for domestic suppliers. The company has already secured a deal to build SMRs for the Czech government and is vying for business elsewhere in Europe, with the British Government's endorsement of the technology likely to be viewed as an important vote of confidence. At home, however, the biggest obstacle to the rollout of SMRs may ultimately be political, depending on how willing ministers are to reform the planning system and overhaul the approach to building nuclear plants. Currently, nuclear meets around 14pc of the UK's electricity needs. Under the Government's plans, this could rise – although the scale of the SMR programme has already been trimmed back from an expected two to three developers to just one. 'Now that Rolls-Royce has been selected, we need to rekindle the nuclear ambition of the 1950s and 60s, when Britain led the world in nuclear innovation,' says Richards, at Britain Remade. 'That means moving at pace and identifying sites immediately, cutting red tape, and ensuring SMRs don't face the same planning delays that have held back their gigawatt-scale cousins. 'If we get this right, SMRs can help power a new era of energy security, reindustrialisation, and net zero – delivered faster, cheaper and more widely than ever before.' It is a bet that Mr Miliband might just win – but only if he and his Cabinet colleagues are willing to go all in. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Metro
3 days ago
- Politics
- Metro
Locals against a solar farm being built say calling them Nimbys is 'hate speech'
People opposing the building of one of Europe's largest solar farms have said the term 'Nimby' is hate speech. Botley West Solar Farm could cover about 2,470 acres of countryside in west Oxfordshire and power 330,000 homes if approved. But Save Botley West says this would affect 15 villages as well as water meadows and heritage sites across Botley, Woodstock and Kidlington. The anti-solar farm campaign group's chairman, Professor Alex Rogers, has said calling them Nimbys 'alienates' them. Nimbys – 'not in my backyard' – are people who oppose new, sometimes badly needed housing or infrastructure being built near their homes. Sir Keir Starmer wrote in the Metro in January that his government is 'taking on the Nimbys' who 'clog up our system so things can't get built'. Prof Rogers said: 'We've heard the term Nimby bandied about by the Labour government in particular, effectively that is pejorative language deliberately used to alienate and isolate ordinary people who are legitimately concerned about the really serious impacts of what is, in effect, a non-sustainable project. 'I would view a sustainable project as one which obviously benefits the climate, which this does, but also benefits people who live in the region and benefits wider aspects of the environment – and this scheme certainly does not do that.' A website appearing to poke fun at Rogers' group, 'Botley West NIMBYS', was made in 2023, according to internet archives seen by Metro. It says: 'Look, our place is much more special than yours, so you should have all the stuff we don't like near YOU.' Rogers added: 'I do have a message, particularly for the Labour Party, in respect of the use of 'Nimbys' or 'Nimbyism'. 'If you look at the UN definition of hate speech, the use of that term falls within that UN definition, and I think Labour would be appalled if people were using these sorts of terms to alienate other sections of society.' The UN defines hate speech as discriminatory and offensive forms of expression, often targeting people's race, gender, sexuality or class. Save Botley West joined a nationwide walk to protest the farm on Sunday, walking from Blenheim gates to Churchill's grave in Bladon. They wrote to King Charles last month, asking him to intervene on the grounds of an 18th-century law that says the Crown must be consulted to use the land. The King has yet to reply. Developers Photovolt Development Partners say the two million solar panels are vital to meet the government's climate goals amid ever-worsening climate change. The past 10 years have been the 10 hottest in nearly 200 years, with 2024 the hottest on record, fuelling climate-related disasters worldwide. Burning fossil fuels is the main driver of climate change, which is intensifying storms, flooding, heatwaves, wildfires and droughts in the UK. Rogers, a marine biologist at the National Oceanography Centre in Southampton, says he sees the impact of this in the ocean 'every day'. But he said the solar farm, roughly the size of Heathrow Airport, would impact the area's view. He said: 'Because of the nature of the landscape that this has been put into, which essentially comprises river valleys and hills, it's very, very difficult to conceal this solar farm in the landscape.' Council officials said in an impact report last week that the solar farm would likely have a 'negative' impact on local tourism. The plans are at the examination stage, where representations are being submitted, with Energy Secretary Ed Miliband to make the final decision. Three-quarters of Britons would support a solar farm being built in their local area, a YouGov poll found. There are around 1,3000 operational solar farms in the UK, with solar providing 6% of Britain's energy in the past year, according to the National Grid. Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page.
Scotsman
06-06-2025
- Politics
- Scotsman
Readers' Letters: Why ruin land for power we don't need?
Readers says it's too easy to call people protesting about wind farms 'Nimbys' Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Reporter Katharine Hay is wrong to describe rural wind farm opponents as Nimbys (4 June). The question is more fundamental, involving the wholesale transformation of rural communities into industrial wastelands. By and large rural communities care and are involved in all the things that visitors to the countryside enjoy, all the things that are said to be good for mental health and general wellbeing. If we wanted to live in the town, we would do so. Most importantly, the data clearly shows – beyond doubt – that enough renewable developments have already been built or consented to cover both Scotland's peak electricity demand in 2050 and the full export capacity to England, so why do we need more developments, especially in areas which require long distance transmission to areas of demand? Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Madness is said to be doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome. We have been building wind farms for 30 years now and I defy anyone to identify any impact upon climate change which, if anything, is accelerating. Enough rural windfarms to supply Scotland's energy needs have been built or consented to, says reader Christopher H Shaw, Glentrool Forest, South Ayrshire Unworthy of name Sir Keir Starmer's first name was given to him in memory and honour of the great Keir Hardie, one of the major founders of the Labour Party. Its main objective was to get better pay for working people and alleviate poverty. Why, then, does the UK Government still employ Ed Miliband as Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change whose policies are costing this nation, with a negligible greenhouse gases output, trillions? Poverty, hunger and inadequate funding of education, infrastructure and defence still abound. Charles Wardrop, Perth Poll dancing Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Alan Hinnrichs is uncharacteristically coy in avoiding providing evidence for his claim that support for Scottish secession stands at 59 per cent (Letters, 4 June). Would this be from a poll whose panel enthuses about the 'rewards' its members receive for participation? Would it be from a poll that discounts 'don't knows'? Or would it be from an internet poll run by a separatist party or newspaper? Perhaps it is simply as fanciful as the rest of his material. As they used to say in Private Eye, I think we should be told. Jill Stephenson, Edinburgh Gaza despair What appalling, deeply distressing scenes were screened on Channel 4 News on Tuesday, with people in Gaza desperate for food being mown down by Israeli Defence Force bullets. Former UK Supreme Court senior judge Lord Sumption, interviewed on the programme, said he believed Israel was committing gross breaches of international humanitarian law in Gaza by killing on an indiscriminate scale. He also opined that genocide was the most plausible explanation for what was taking place. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Gaza is now in ruins, with most of its infrastructure, hospitals, schools and other public buildings shattered beyond repair. People are starving, hundreds are being slaughtered every week and children are suffering unimaginable horrors. Why are our Labour MPs not up in arms? How can they watch this deteriorating catastrophe every night on TV news and do nothing? Why is Scottish Secretary Ian Murray not leading a delegation to Westminster to demand we stop supplying Israel with arms as of now? I truly despair! Alan Woodcock, Dundee Missed opportunity Peter Stevenson makes no reference to the Abraham Accords between Israel and some Arab states following the former's peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan in his article on Israel (Perspective, 5 June). By early October 2023 the Israeli/Saudi Arabia Accord negotiations had progressed well and reportedly were close to agreement. Had they been finalised, the whole situation in the Middle East would have been transformed, and Iran's malign influence significantly weakened. On 7 October it was immediately obvious the Hamas invasion (almost certainly supported by Iran) was to sabotage any Saudi/Israeli rapprochement. The Saudis hate Hamas too, but fell into that trap by suspending the negotiations. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Hamas also assumed, rightly, Israel would react with massive military action, and that any sympathy and support for Israel in the West would diminish, the longer such action continued. The inevitable deaths of its own Gaza population and destruction of infrastructure were of little consequence to the Hamas leadership, so it had to ensure Israel's reaction was not quickly successful; and Israel fell into that trap too. It struck me then that Israel could have announced to the UN that the 1,450 brutal murders and kidnappings proved how necessary the talks with the Saudis were for long-term peace in the region; and called on the Saudis and friendly Arab neighbours to help finalise the talks without delay, to condemn unequivocally the Hamas actions and murders, and to join Israel's efforts in isolating Hamas (and by extension Hezbollah and Houthis) and supporting the moderate Palestine leadership. Preferably with such wider agreement, Israel could also have cut the water, power and other supplies to Gaza, but promised immediate reinstatement if all 252 kidnapped hostages were freed, alive and well, within, say, 14 days – failing which, robust military action as permitted by the UN and international law would follow. Was that feasible, or merely naive? At least Israel would have retained the moral high ground and support of its traditional allies for longer than it has done in the last 20 months. John Birkett, St Andrews, Fife Iran ignored Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad I refer to the article by Stephen Gethins MP, 'Why West can't let Israel continue to flout international law as Gaza suffers' (Perspective, 31 May). He gives views and comments on the hideous situation in Gaza, but nowhere in his full page article is Iran mentioned. A lot of us struggle to fully understand the full context of what has and continues to happen. This is not helped by omitting to even mention Iran's role in all of this. I suggest Mr Gethins revisits the issue and opine on what Israel should do given the reality of what they are facing. Roy McCluskey, Liberton, Edinburgh Tired teachers The Scotsman highlights the pressure teachers are under regarding workload. Following an EIS teachers union survey at least 10 per cent of teachers reported working the equivalent of two days extra per week unpaid and 40 per cent reported working an extra 7 hours per week, again unpaid. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Teachers are expected to work a 35-hour week with a maximum of 22.5 hours devoted to class contact, and that equates to an average of approximately two thirds teaching and one third set aside for preparation and other essential tasks, such as marking course work. On the surface, class contact versus preparation balance appears reasonable and 50 per cent of teachers appear able to work within those parameters. However, it would appear a substantial number of teachers require more time and it would be worth further investigation to understand why. As an aside, we are aware the SNP, in their previous election manifesto, suggested a 1.5 hours reduction in class contact per week to allow extra time for preparation etc. Of course, this hasn't been implemented due to other priorities; however, this did suggest there were pressures on teachers that needed to be recognised and the EIS survey result indicates that more research should be done to prior to implementing such a change. A Lewis, Coylton, Ayrshire Spot on, Billy When Billy Connolly called Holyrood a 'wee pretendy parliament' many years ago, this was generally taken as a barbed reference to the place where the less well gifted intellectually could make a pretence of being serious politicians. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The recent stramash with presiding officer Alison Johnstone appearing to lose her equilibrium over remarks made by MSP Douglas Ross tends to prove the comedian's point. People with the mindset of the PO that was displayed to all should not be doing that job. It is as simple as that. I am not sure she understands what being neutral means. Many Scots are showing signs of having had enough. Rather than the incessant SNP calls for a referendum on breaking up the UK, perhaps the continuing existence of Holyrood would be infinitely more relevant to the people of this country. Alexander McKay, Edinburgh Not missing lynx The proposed introduction of the lynx to our countryside, reminds me of advice given when I suggested taking a walk in Californian woodland. 'Sure,' said my host… remember to take your gun.' Those walking here should be similarly equipped if the introduction of wild species proceeds. Wolves have also been suggested. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad These creatures are not jolly Disney characters. They are dangerous wild animals. Malcolm Parkin, Kinnesswood, Kinross Write to The Scotsman
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Nimbyism on the rise in blow to Rayner's building blitz
Nimbyism is on the rise across Britain, new figures suggest, in a blow to Angela Rayner's hopes of kickstarting 'the biggest building boom in a generation'. The number of people identifying as Nimbys is estimated to have grown by almost a third since the Government stepped up its anti-Nimby rhetoric in late 2024, according to the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) and Demos, a cross-party think tank. Polling shows that 23pc of people now class themselves as Nimbys, up from the 17.5pc recorded in a survey by Labour Together in September last year. The report warned that the rise in local resistance to developments risked hindering Ms Rayner's ambitions to build 1.5m homes by the end of this Parliament. The Housing Secretary has repeatedly vowed not to tolerate Nimbyism, pledging to end their 'chokehold' on housebuilding. Writing in The Telegraph in December, Ms Rayner, who is also the Deputy Prime Minister, said Nimbys would 'no longer have the upper hand'. Under proposed reforms, builders will be allowed to sidestep council planning committees, while campaigners will be blocked from making repeated legal challenges against major infrastructure projects. Sir Keir Starmer has echoed promises to stop developments being held up, saying in January that he would override the 'whims of Nimbys' against major building projects and back the builders, rather than the 'blockers'. However, researchers from RTPI and Demos said: 'Far from driving support, the Government's current combative tone could be dangerously backfiring. 'This poses a risk to the Government's ambitious housebuilding target and potentially their electoral strategy too if they face increasing local opposition.' They added that only 12pc of people felt they had a say over the outcome of planning decisions, pointing to risks that the Government's 'enthusiasm to drive forward building could fuel further mistrust'. The report shows that 67pc of the British public identify as Mimbys – 'Maybe in my backyard' – representing those who are open to new developments in their areas under the right circumstances. Just 10pc identify as Yimbys, or 'Yes in my backyard'. Victoria Hills, chief executive of the RTPI, said that trust could be rebuilt between local communities and the Government if they were involved in the planning process at an earlier stage. Ms Hills said: 'Through effective community engagement, the majority of people would accept housing near them. 'If our members, and the authorities they work with, are given the time, space and expertise to engage early enough in the process, then we would find that housing across the country is delivered with the support of the local communities, not despite them.' Polly Curtis, chief executive of Demos, said: 'Cutting the public out of the conversation like they are red tape will lead to more legal challenges and friction down the line. 'Instead, early and representative public participation will properly engage the Mimby majority, giving that silent majority a voice and helping to unlock housebuilding. 'This is a risk-reducing and time-saving strategy, and one that will help build trust in Government.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Nimbyism on the rise in blow to Rayner's building blitz
Nimbyism is on the rise across Britain, new figures suggest, in a blow to Angela Rayner's hopes of kickstarting 'the biggest building boom in a generation'. The number of people identifying as Nimbys is estimated to have grown by almost a third since the Government stepped up its anti-Nimby rhetoric in late 2024, according to the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) and Demos, a cross-party think tank. Polling shows that 23pc of people now class themselves as Nimbys, up from the 17.5pc recorded in a survey by Labour Together in September last year. The report warned that the rise in local resistance to developments risked hindering Ms Rayner's ambitions to build 1.5m homes by the end of this Parliament. The Housing Secretary has repeatedly vowed not to tolerate Nimbyism, pledging to end their 'chokehold' on housebuilding. Writing in The Telegraph in December, Ms Rayner, who is also the Deputy Prime Minister, said Nimbys would 'no longer have the upper hand'. Under proposed reforms, builders will be allowed to sidestep council planning committees, while campaigners will be blocked from making repeated legal challenges against major infrastructure projects. Sir Keir Starmer has echoed promises to stop developments being held up, saying in January that he would override the 'whims of Nimbys' against major building projects and back the builders, rather than the 'blockers'. However, researchers from RTPI and Demos said: 'Far from driving support, the Government's current combative tone could be dangerously backfiring. 'This poses a risk to the Government's ambitious housebuilding target and potentially their electoral strategy too if they face increasing local opposition.' They added that only 12pc of people felt they had a say over the outcome of planning decisions, pointing to risks that the Government's 'enthusiasm to drive forward building could fuel further mistrust'. The report shows that 67pc of the British public identify as Mimbys – 'Maybe in my backyard' – representing those who are open to new developments in their areas under the right circumstances. Just 10pc identify as Yimbys, or 'Yes in my backyard'. Victoria Hills, chief executive of the RTPI, said that trust could be rebuilt between local communities and the Government if they were involved in the planning process at an earlier stage. Ms Hills said: 'Through effective community engagement, the majority of people would accept housing near them. 'If our members, and the authorities they work with, are given the time, space and expertise to engage early enough in the process, then we would find that housing across the country is delivered with the support of the local communities, not despite them.' Polly Curtis, chief executive of Demos, said: 'Cutting the public out of the conversation like they are red tape will lead to more legal challenges and friction down the line. 'Instead, early and representative public participation will properly engage the Mimby majority, giving that silent majority a voice and helping to unlock housebuilding. 'This is a risk-reducing and time-saving strategy, and one that will help build trust in Government.' Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
