Slow economic growth with inflation – stagflation – could result from the surging price of oil. Markets are mesmerised by the thought that as we go into winter in the Northern hemisphere oil is heading towards $100-a-barrel. The chart above shows Brent crude is in the mid-nineties as the Saudis are determined to push prices higher. The US is now insulated by domestic fracked shale oil supplies and the dollar has become a petro-currency as a result. Campaigners today again won permission for yet another hearing to challenge and delay the go-ahead to build the Sizewell C Nuclear Power Station. Thanks to anti-frackers, anti-nuclear campaigners, and Net Zero zombies, Britain’s energy insecurity has increased.
Oil prices will add to the political miseries facing Sunak as he decides whether to go for a May election before things get worse, or play it long in the hope that things get better. He’s caught between an unfracked rock and a hard place…
Good news for Christian Wakeford – he is not the only MP who can’t do maths. Now ex-Green Party leader Caroline Lucas has waded in to attack the government for promising green energy, on the grounds that “Nuclear is hugely costly & simply can’t help meet 2035 target”. Do the maths, she says…
Bone-headed & senseless decision. Govt says #SizewellC is vital to meet 2035 electricity decarbonisation target, but *its own impact statement* found we won't get supply for at least another 13-17 years - do the maths! Nuclear is hugely costly & simply can't help meet 2035 target pic.twitter.com/2XXlGibI5k
— Caroline Lucas (@CarolineLucas) November 29, 2022
Well, 2022 + 13 is 2035…
Of course, Lucas has form for this. In 2008, when offering her wisdom to Gordon Brown on rising fuel prices, she claimed:
“It simply isn’t true that nuclear power is the answer to rising fuel prices, since the earliest that a new nuclear power station could come on stream is around 2017.”
Wouldn’t an abundance of nuclear energy for the last five years have been useful right about now? This Clegg-style opposition to any sensible energy policy, just because it won’t solve the problem by lunchtime, is precisely why we are where we are…
Guido is giving the government the benefit of the doubt over its planned “review” of Sizewell C. According to the BBC, a spokesperson said they are “reviewing every major project”, including the new nuclear power plant, as Jeremy hunts for £25 billion in spending cuts. Scrapping a route to energy independence shouldn’t be on the menu…
BEIS, however, suggest this is overblown, and “one large-scale” plant is still likely to go ahead:
“HS2 is under way, within budget, and supporting 28,000 jobs, we are also seeking to approve at least one large-scale nuclear project in the next few years and aim to speed up the delivery of around 100 major infrastructure projects across the UK.”
As Jim Pickard points out, this is obviously a reference to Sizewell, although it’s not clear on the timings. The government also indicate that Sizewell is likely safe because scrapping it would undermine decarbonisation plans. Either way, pulling the plug because it will “take years to build” would be straight out of the Nick Clegg playbook. Go nuclear, go large…
UPDATE: Government spokesperson confirms Sizewell C is NOT being scrapped.
