True to form, Starmer is backing nuclear power because it’s the worst and most expensive option available https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2023/06/05/true-to-form-starmer-is-backing-nuclear-power-because-its-the-worst-and-most-expensive-option-available/. Is there no bad policy that Starmer will not now endorse?
The stock market is failing according to the CBI. So why don’t we just let it go?

I posted this on Twitter this morning: https://twitter.com/RichardJMurphy/status/1942861045426516103 My point is serious. The CBI is saying that the situation with regard to the UK stock exchange is getting desperate, because it is losing out to overseas markets and not attracting sufficient business. The question that needs to be asked is, why is that?...

Funding the Future
@RichardJMurphy Nuclear power is still the best alternative to fossil fuels, until we get enough capacity in terms of renewables and especially storage to manage without it.

@JulieMontoya20

I just can't get my head around that. Each new power station takes decades and billions to build, then lasts less than 50 years. The same finance and planning effort put into (say) wave or tidal power would surely be far more efficient?

@sarahemmm Nuclear (which is always-on) has to be as well as renewables (which are intermittent by nature), not instead of.

We also need a massive amount of storage; which probably is going to mean a few more hollowed-out mountains.

@JulieMontoya20

That was why I mentioned wave and tidal power, which are not intermittent if you place several installations carefully.

I am also amazed that one of the other solutions to intermittent power, gravity storage* is not more widely considered.

*Ffestiniog Pumped Storage has been solving the 'advert-break kettle power surge' for 40 years...

@sarahemmm Yes, gravity storage is what I was referring to by "hollowed-out mountains".