One of the points I made in my Spectator speech was the effect of wind power on the rest of the electricity system - a familiar subject to readers here. Assuming we have no coal-fired generation in the future, the baseload power generation market will have to be divided between wind and nuclear. However, with ministers declaring that there will be an expansion of the subsidised wind sector, that marketplace does not look ripe for investment in new nuclear. Generators in that sector are therefore holding out for generous incentives of their own.
Last month, EDF told the Telegraph that they wanted a guaranteed price of £140/MWh roughly double what gas might cost us. The chief executive of Scottish and Southern today argues that a line should be drawn in the sand at £65/MWh and that nuclear generators should get their costs down.
You can see where this is heading: each generator will demand more and more support to keep them in the marketplace. A guaranteed price for nukes will have to be met by an increase in support for wind. We will end up with a disastrous spiral: subsidy after bung after price floor after graft after corruption. All paid for by you.
So here's a novel idea. How about we do away with the rules and regulations and see who is really the cheapest?