Nothing new really as this risk was identified 20 years ago when there was time to do something about it. However, as is always the case, politicians took too long to make the unpopular decisions that were required as there was a risk of losing votes.
The idea to keep Hinckley running is interesting, but it would need a new, non-trivial safety case to be developed and accepted by the ONR, and would obviously be contingent on ensuring further operation can be achieved safely. I wonder if the expectation is for EDF to cover these costs, when they have already decided that commercial operation of an expensive asset is no longer financially viable?
Nothing new really as this risk was identified 20 years ago when there was time to do something about it. However, as is always the case, politicians took too long to make the unpopular decisions that were required as there was a risk of losing votes.
The idea to keep Hinckley running is interesting, but it would need a new, non-trivial safety case to be developed and accepted by the ONR, and would obviously be contingent on ensuring further operation can be achieved safely. I wonder if the expectation is for EDF to cover these costs, when they have already decided that commercial operation of an expensive asset is no longer financially viable?
