Nuclear Stand-off Hotting Up

(c) N Drew 2013

The business pages of the Telegraph are a favourite platform for commercial vested interests. De Rivaz of EDF has used them before to 'frame' the context of the farcical bluffing contest being conducted over what outrageous guaranteed price (and other ultra-valuable concessions) he can screw out of HMG for getting started on just the first of his 4 'promised' new UK nukes. And here he is again, the little Gallic tease - 'framing' for all he is worth. We must assume the 'negotiations' are at a critical juncture.

 "Almost all of the necessary pieces are in place. Our new build project at Hinkley Point is 'shovel ready' and only a few crucial milestones remain to be passed. ... Yet I am still asked – should the UK do it? And if so, do we have the industrial capacity and expertise to pull [it] off?" 

Careful with the 'we', monsieur.

"Just two more pieces need to be put in place. First, we await a final planning decision." 

I think you'll find that's a given, matey: this lot have long since bent over for the shafting. Or do you perhaps want some sort of new environmental indemnity thrown in for good measure ...?

"Secondly, and, most crucially, there must be a balanced, stable and durable agreement on the price of the electricity generated. To be durable, this price needs to be fair and balanced for both our company and the Government." 

'The Government': how sweet. What about the people ?! 

"I believe we can reach an agreement with the Government which will transparently display the economic viability of new nuclear, and which can underpin a robust business case for investors. EDF is now closer than ever to being able to make a decision." 

Ah yes, economic viability. And while we are at it, tell us again will you, about the security of supply for all that uranium you get from, errrr, Niger. Surely, a great age of eco-satire is upon us.


This piece first appeared on Capitalists@Work 


Nothing here should be taken as personal advice, financial or otherwise. No liability is accepted for third-party content, whether incorporated in or linked to this blog; or for unintentional error and inaccuracy. The blog author may have, or intend to change, a personal position in any stock or other kind of investment mentioned.