Why Nuclear in the UK Makes No Sense

The UK's obsession with nuclear — mega-projects like Hinkley Point C, Sizewell C, and now the dream of Small Modular Reactors — looks increasingly bonkers when you examine the actual data.

Nuclear is an inflexible technology in a system that increasingly demands flexibility. But more fundamentally, it's a solution to a capacity shortage that doesn't exist, financed in the most expensive way possible.

The Overcapacity Reality They Won't Tell You

Here's what the nuclear lobby doesn't want you to know: the UK already has massive overcapacity built into every level of the electricity system.

Generation level: 72 GW installed capacity vs 47 GW peak demand = 1.5:1 overcapacity. We're using two-thirds of our generation capacity even at winter peak.

Household level: Typical homes have 100A connections (23 kW capacity) but average 8-10 kW peak usage = 2.3:1 overcapacity. Your house is wired for more than double what you actually use.

Distribution networks: Deliberately designed for 30% optimal utilization = 3.3:1 overcapacity to minimize losses. The local grid is built to be mostly empty.

The kicker: We're wasting 6.6 TWh annually through curtailment — paying wind farms £400 million in 2024 NOT to produce clean electricity we've already built capacity for. That's enough wasted power for 2 million homes.

The Myth of Cheap Baseload (Now With Numbers)

We still hear people say coal and nuclear provided "cheap, reliable baseload." But that's not just a myth — it's mathematically backwards.

Grids were built around the 1-to-10 structural swing — the natural difference between minimum and peak demand. To cover the peaks, you built up to ten times more capacity than you needed at night.

What looked like cheap baseload was really the hidden cost of massive overbuilding. Households were cross-subsidizing industrial overconsumption while paying for infrastructure designed for impossible "everyone-using-everything-simultaneously" scenarios.

The End of the Capacity Crisis Myth

For the first time, this model is being exposed as fiction.

In Australia, 40% of homes have rooftop solar generating 11.3% of electricity behind-the-meter — invisible to national statistics. In Germany, 17% of solar is self-consumed and never touches the public grid. In the UK, solar applications jumped 162% in 2022 alone.

Households aren't just becoming demand centers. They're becoming flexible generation and storage nodes that make the old "peak-everything" assumptions obsolete.

Nuclear Can't Flex (And the Economics Lock It In)

Nuclear plants have to run flat-out. Modern EPR reactors like Hinkley Point C aren't just technically inflexible — they're economically compelled to run 24/7.

With Hinkley's strike price around £135/MWh, any reduction in output directly hits profitability. You're paying massive capital costs whether the reactor runs or not.

But today's grid is dominated by renewables, decentralization, and 1.5x overcapacity. It doesn't need more inflexible baseload that can't economically turn off. It needs intelligent demand timing and storage that can ramp quickly.

The competition isn't about cheap electrons anymore. It's about system value.

Why Gas Backup Actually Makes Sense

Germany is building hydrogen-ready gas plants. At first glance, it looks flawed — hydrogen is expensive fuel.

But these plants won't run 24/7. They'll only switch on during the rare hours when renewables can't meet demand — maybe 5-10% of the year in a system with proper storage and demand flexibility.

Their value isn't cheap energy, it's flexibility. And with 1.5:1 generation overcapacity, we need occasional fast response, not constant baseload.

The reality is this: we'll be burning some gas for decades anyway. The question isn't whether to use gas, but how to minimize it while maximizing renewable deployment speed. Gas backup plus maximum renewables delivers deeper emissions cuts faster than slow nuclear deployment.

The Financing Scandal That Changes Everything

Here's the part that should make people furious: we're choosing the most expensive possible financing for a problem households could solve themselves.

Corporate/Nuclear financing: 8-12% cost of capital (project finance, regulatory uncertainty) Household financing: 4-5% mortgage rates (secured against property)

That's a 2:1 to 3:1 cost of capital advantage for distributed investment. The same solar system that costs utilities £2 million to finance costs households £1.3 million using mortgage rates.

Community-owned renewable projects funded at mortgage rates deliver the same capacity for half the cost — with profits staying local. Nuclear doesn't scale that way. Household renewables do.

The Staggering Opportunity Cost

The real madness is what we're giving up. Take Hinkley Point C at £45+ billion for 3.2 GW.

That same money deployed at household level using cheap mortgage financing could deliver:

• Massive rooftop solar at 4% instead of 10%+ project finance rates
• Home battery storage to capture the 6.6 TWh we're throwing away
• Heat pumps and EVs that displace fossil molecules directly
• Smart charging to shift demand into renewable-rich hours

Three to five times more capacity — and the right kind of capacity: distributed, flexible, and owned by the people using it.

The Grow2Zero Strategy: Speed Over Perfection

Instead of perfecting the electricity system first (expensive, slow), rapidly electrify household demand using the cheapest possible financing.

This works because electrification is incredibly efficient compared to burning fossil molecules directly:

• Heat pumps deliver 3-4 units of heat per unit of electricity vs gas boilers that waste 30% up the flue
• EVs convert 90%+ of electricity to motion vs petrol cars that waste 70% as heat
• Electric appliances eliminate combustion losses entirely

Even if that electricity comes from 50% gas generation, the net fossil fuel reduction is massive. We're not replacing molecules with electrons 1:1—we're replacing a wasteful system with an efficient one.

Same services. Half the energy input. Speed of capital deployment becomes key, not perfection of generation mix.

The Bonkers UK Strategy

So why pour billions into Hinkley, Sizewell, and SMRs when we're already wasting 6.6 TWh annually?

Nuclear only makes sense if it runs flat-out in a capacity-constrained system. But our grid already has 1.5:1 overcapacity and is moving toward one dominated by flexible households using cheap mortgage financing.

We're choosing the Ferrari financing when we need twenty Toyotas with car loans. Nuclear gives us the marvel at premium prices. Household-financed renewables give us the solution at mortgage rates.

The Economic Punchline: Britain's Balance of Payments Revolution

Here's the number that should make every Treasury economist salivate: the UK's projected 10 million EVs by 2030 represent a fundamental shift in Britain's economic strength.

Each electric vehicle displaces about 1,500 litres of petrol annually. Ten million EVs eliminate 15 billion litres of oil imports per year—worth £12-15 billion at current prices, flowing straight out of the UK economy to oil exporters.

Electric vehicles in 2023 already saved the UK the equivalent of 14 million barrels of oil, and globally, EVs displaced over 1.3 million barrels per day of oil demand in 2024.

But here's the real posisbility : that £4-5 billion annually stays in the UK economy instead. Households spend it on British goods and services. The multiplier effect ripples through every sector. The trade deficit shrinks. The pound strengthens.

To maximize this benefit, the UK needs domestic EV production—which explains why the ZEV mandate matters so much. Without UK manufacturing, we're just swapping oil imports for car imports. But with domestic production, we capture both the fuel savings AND the manufacturing value-add.

This is economic sovereignty in action—powered by cheap household financing rather than expensive nuclear megaprojects that import French engineering and Chinese steel while delivering benefits decades too late.

The Takeaway

The numbers don't lie: The UK has overcapacity at every level, we're wasting billions on curtailment, and households can finance solutions at half the cost.

Nuclear doesn't solve cost, speed, or flexibility. It makes them worse by adding the most expensive possible financing to an already over-supplied system.

Households, not reactors, are reshaping the grid. Solar, batteries, EVs, and electrified heating use existing overcapacity intelligently instead of demanding more expensive steel and concrete.

Large, small, or micro — nuclear doesn't solve today's problems. It ignores them while choosing the worst possible financing to do so.

If the data shows we already have overcapacity and household financing beats corporate financing by 2:1, why is the UK still betting on nuclear? Is this really about energy — or is it politics dressed up as strategy while the financing scandal hides in plain sight?

We don't have a capacity crisis — we have a capital allocation crisis. The nuclear lobby is selling expensive solutions to problems that don't exist while households could solve them for half the price.

#grow2zero #inthedark #NuclearEnergy #EnergyTransition #RenewableEnergy #Decentralisation #Hydrogen #Storage #Flexibility #UKEnergyPolicy #NetZero