日志
UK's Hinkley nuclear plant project to overrun by £1.5-bn cost and may go even h
|
power station hits £20bn...and may go even higher after warning project may be delayed by 15 months
- The controversial project in Somerset has risen by £1.5 billion to £19.6billion
- French state controlled firm warned it could be delayed for up to 15 months
- This would result in an another £700million in costs, meaning the bill would smash through the £20billion barrier
The projected bill for building the new nuclear power station at Hinkley Point has soared to almost £20billion and could rise further.
Following a review by its senior executives, energy giant EDF said the cost of the controversial project in Somerset has risen by £1.5 billion to £19.6billion.
The French state controlled firm also warned the project could be delayed for up to 15 months.
This would result in an another £700million in costs, meaning the bill would smash through the £20billion barrier.
Following a review by its senior executives, energy giant EDF said the cost of the controversial project in Somerset has risen by £1.5 billion to £19.6billion
It would also mean Hinkley Point C would not start delivering power to the national grid until 2027 – a decade after the first start date proposed by EDF.
EDF stressed it hoped to avoid delays and was still aiming to finish the first nuclear reactor by the end of 2025.
In a statement, it explained the extra costs partly resulted from adapting the project's design to meet the demands of UK regulators.
The firm is funding two-thirds of the plant, which is expected to create more than 25,000 jobs, with China investing the rest.
It insisted there will be no financial impact on UK consumers of the increased costs, while the UK government said households 'won't pay a penny' until the power station is built.
Hinkley Point C would be the UK's first new nuclear plant for decades, but has been beset with budget problems
But the latest twist in this long-running saga is likely to fuel concerns about the Hinkley Point project.
In a report published last month the government spending watchdog said the prime minister's decision last September to press ahead with Hinkley has locked the nation into a 'risky and expensive' project.
The National Audit Office warned that the cost to families of guaranteeing that EDF and the Chinese receive a high price for the electricity produced by the power station has spiralled from £6bn to £30bn.
This is expected to add up to £15 to annual electricity bills up to 2030.
The NAO said the nuclear reactor chosen for the site in Somerset is 'unproven', raising questions over its safety.
Hinkley Point C would be the UK's first new nuclear plant for decades, but has been beset with budget problems
John Sauven, executive director at Greenpeace UK, said: 'Hinkley is already over time and over budget after just a few months of building work.
'Today's news is yet another damning indictment of the Government's agreement to go ahead with this project.
'This year's school leavers will still be paying for Hinkley when they approach their pension age.
'And now it looks like they will be paying for the most expensive object on earth for even longer.'
Hinkley Point C would be the UK's first new nuclear plant for decades, but has been beset with budget problems.
Theresa May postponed final approval for the scheme when she became prime minister last year amid concerns the power plant, to be built in partnership by the French company EDF and China General Nuclear Power, was not good value for money.
However, she then decided to go ahead with the scheme despite serious concerns that it will saddle consumers with high bills for decades.
Many countries, including Germany, have turned their backs on nuclear power because of safety concerns in the wake of the 2011 Fukushima disaster in Japan.
A spokeswoman for the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy said: 'The UK Government negotiated a competitive deal which protects consumers and ensures that all of the cost of construction, including any overruns, sits with the contractor.
'Hinkley Point C will be the first new nuclear plant in a generation. This was an important strategic decision to ensure that nuclear is part of a diverse energy mix in the UK.
'Consumers won't pay a penny until Hinkley is built; it will provide clean, reliable electricity powering six million homes.'
Comments 106
Tony, Lancashire, United Kingdom, 9 minutes ago
Has anyone in our governments heard of fixed priced contracts. Wait until we see the final bill for HS2
ReplyNew01Click to rate
sittingbu11, Hereford, United Kingdom, 18 minutes ago
kick it and EDF into touch now, before this white elephant becomes a mammoth.
ReplyNew00Click to rate
Juanhunglo, worcester, United Kingdom, 22 minutes ago
By the time it enters service - it will be obsolete.
ReplyNew00Click to rate
U Watt, Bexley, United Kingdom, 30 minutes ago
Quelle Surprise !!!. Why don't our governnbent ever state that the contract price is the full and final price and refuse to budge, plus fine the contractor for over-runs ??. Far too used to living off public money themselves !!.
ReplyNew01Click to rate
ten33, London, United Kingdom, 1 hour ago
It's inevitable that this project will end up with vast cost overruns - unfortunately the government and civil service are obsessed with mega-projects that pampers to the egos of ministers and requires huge numbers of civil servants to provide oversight at vast taxpayer expense - more efficient small or medium scale projects often get killed off, since they offer none of these opportunities.
ReplyNew05Click to rate
stuart39, london, United Kingdom, 1 hour ago
HS2 and this, both old technology before the dirt was first broken. Complete waste of time and money. just vanity projects for the MPs of all parties
ReplyNew07Click to rate
Captain Calamity, Whitehaven, United Kingdom, 1 hour ago
Solar, wind, tidal and dams.... nuclear power is old hat.
ReplyNew23Click to rate
Tazzmania12, london, 1 hour ago
But 1000x more efficient and reliable
22Click to rate
barnsley tyke, barnsley, United Kingdom, 1 hour ago
If I'm delayed completing my part of a contract this has a knock-on effect for the next trade and i have to pay a penalty.And what's wrong with a fixed cost approach
ReplyNew05Click to rate
andy63, PORT TALBOT, United Kingdom, 1 hour ago
The sad thing is,this country pioneered energy from nuclear fusion,Calder hall being the first commercial nuclear plant.Now,we have to go cap in hand to the French to build us one.It's not good is it.?
ReplyNew08Click to rate
2 of 3 repliesSee all replies
stuart39, london, United Kingdom, 1 hour ago
@SoCalledExpert Fusion is current fission is still not possible on large scale. So no he got it right and you are incorrect
11Click to rate
andy63, PORT TALBOT, United Kingdom, 1 hour ago
No I mean fusion,a nuclear reaction with a release of energy.
01Click to rate
The Englishman, Colchester, 1 hour ago
The French costed the project and got it wrong, their fault so it should be they that take the hit from their profits.
ReplyNew010Click to rate
Kim, Setubal, Portugal, 1 hour ago
The 13% fall in the pound against the euro may have something to do with it.
22Click to rate
intereverything, chesterfield, United Kingdom, 1 hour ago
Just wait till we get the final bill for hs2
ReplyNew27Click to rate
lodge60, abergavenny, 1 hour ago
Why is it that all public sector projects cost more than was forecast, from ships and roads, to nuclear power stations and computer system? I suspect it is because the private contractors who do the work can run circles a round the time-serving wallies in the public sector who are supposed to plan and oversee these things.
ReplyNew19Click to rate
Mr Babbage, Somewhere else, Switzerland, 36 minutes ago
Incompetent project management.
01Click to rate
sychnant, Chester UK, United Kingdom, 1 hour ago
By the time they get this lumbering white elephant into production we will hopefully have functioning fusion reactors running at a fraction of the cost... (it shouldn't have been allowed to go ahead)
ReplyNew06Click to rate
blumdum, Lesta, United Kingdom, 1 hour ago
French????????????????
ReplyNew07Click to rate
Mikae, Newbury, United Kingdom, 2 hours ago
This new power station will not be generating power in 2025, nor will it be built within the newly revised budget. I would be surprised if the plant is ever fully built. I could imagine EDF just getting one reactor built ten years late and scrapping the second one altogether. By the time it is built, distributed home energy storage and renewables will be far cheaper than nuclear power.
ReplyNew09Click to rate
Michael, Reading, 2 hours ago
Google Canary Island landslide causing massive tsunami, part of the path estimated is SW England. The cost of the clean-up in Japan after their devastating tsunami and lives lost makes me wonder if the safety wall is being calculated for these potential events. Clearly the Japs didn't think it was a worry and look what happened there.
ReplyNew21Click to rate
stuart39, london, United Kingdom, 1 hour ago
last time I checked Japan has earthquakes and we do not. The eurasia plate that we sit on is pretty stable where we are
11Click to rate
RWT, York, 2 hours ago
Is the UK looking at thorium reactors?
ReplyNew10Click to rate
Robert.R, Paris, France, 2 hours ago
Costs about 3 times as much as conventional nucelar reactors
02Click to rate
RWT, York, 1 hour ago
But the products are much safer and don't require the same degree of storage facility as for conventional reactors.
00Click to rate
RabD, Glasgow, United Kingdom, 2 hours ago
Hope they have a penalty clause wrote into the contract if building delayed
ReplyNew05Click to rate
Matt 1, Hungerford, United Kingdom, 2 hours ago
Is anyone really surprised ? The government feed the masses a figure so that there isn't too much protest & then when it's given the go ahead the bill racks up. Hs2 estimate £50 billion, it will be closer to £100 billion by the time it's finished !
ReplyNew04Click to rate
rise of the sheeple, future utopia, United Kingdom, 2 hours ago
This does not inspire good thoughts about safety.
ReplyNew02Click to rate
Robert.R, Paris, France, 2 hours ago
Indeed. This money is coming out of EDF's pocket - not from the UK government and not from the consumer. There is no report of the strike price being altered and no report of any request from EDF for the strike price to be altered. The strike price remains quite competitive with the strike price for all other UK low emission electricity generating projects covered by CfDs. As may be seen, the strike price for the Hornsea offshore wind project - said to be the largest off shore wind project in the world - is more the 50% higher than for Hinkley C. And it still doesn't provide reliable 24/7 electricity.
ReplyNew20Click to rate
RevoltingPensioner, Up NORF, United Kingdom, 3 hours ago
20 Billion ? That is only the Deposit surely !!!
ReplyNew03Click to rate
roger beale, BRISTOL, United Kingdom, 3 hours ago
scrap it spend the money on solar panels made in the UK fit them on every roof top in the UK in the south first that get the most sun then move up the UK still fitting them with all the extra power they make send it into the grid and then we can supply free power to the homes up north that don't get the sun long enough .
ReplyNew17Click to rate
Craig, Ardrossan, United Kingdom, 2 hours ago
Nice. Like it. Very practical.
07Click to rate
Linkchanger, Staffordshire, United Kingdom, 3 hours ago
Another legacy of the poisonous Osbourne/Cameron years
ReplyNew16Click to rate
Mikesmith8828, London, 3 hours ago
Doesn't this cost overrun and delay entitle us to cancel the contract? Isn't this our chance to pill out of a costly mistake now ?
ReplyNew013Click to rate
paulp, singapore, 3 hours ago
This is just the beginning, this is a white elephant. The cost overruns and time overruns have only just started to come to the fore. There has never been a uk nuclear power plant that has been brought in on time and to budget. There are so many things wrong with this project but nobody will stand up and admit it.
ReplyNew011Click to rate
antler, Truro, United Kingdom, 3 hours ago
the rest of the wold is moving on with energy production, the rich are busy buying up volcanoes for geo thermal energy and we are still giving handouts to rich mates to build dangerous nuclear nonsense.
ReplyNew05Click to rate
anonnymouse sinick, stretford and carlisle, United Kingdom, 3 hours ago
Scrap it! Build coal powered, dig the coal! Employ communities! Filter the emissions! £20 billion goes a long way cane would make us virtually independent for electricity supplies and no more bloody wind farms!!
ReplyNew117Click to rate
jaundicedeye, munich, 3 hours ago
Off down the mine yourself? Or are you a 'manager'
92Click to rate
Notasillybilly, Davao City, Philippines, 3 hours ago
They still havent been able to get the proposed type of reactor to work yet
ReplyNew014Click to rate
David, UK, United Kingdom, 3 hours ago
This is an even bigger white elephant than HS2 and that is a terrible waste of money. Both projects need to go, now, before we waste another pound piece on them. The two big projects we really need are a new six or eight runway hub airport capable of operating 24/7/365 in all weathers and a national water grid to move fresh water from where it is abundant to reservoirs where we struggle. Oh, and the cost of Hinckley Point doesn't include the billions it will cost to dispose of it when it closes.
ReplyNew115Click to rate
thommo, solihull, 3 hours ago
the compensation for breach of contract on both projects will dwarf the extra costs if we cancel now. Tories signed them both off, there must be a magic money tree somewhere!!
08Click to rate
Tom, Swansea, United Kingdom, 3 hours ago
Battery technology is going to be a game changer shortly. Certainly before this power station is completed. Wind and solar sources will be able to store power in future. Batteries will also enable us to generate and store our own power from our houses and sell back to the grid. I learned this from numerous articles in the Daily Telegraph not Greenpeace Monthly. And one accident at Hinckley Point would render much of the south west and South Wales uninhabitable.
ReplyNew09Click to rate
Alan, Birkenhead, United Kingdom, 3 hours ago
So here we go yet again, Yet another Con on the UK taxpayer, why is it that all of these projects costed by government at one price rapidly escalate after work commences Hinkley up £1.5 Billion so far I would expect this to continue rising probably doubling over the course of the build in common with HS2, Olympic stadium, New aircraft carriers, and countless other projects. No money for public services yet billions can be found for these vanity projects. SCRAP THEM!!
ReplyNew09Click to rate
glen stockport, stockport, United Kingdom, 3 hours ago
Scape it .... the ongoing payments for electricity are too high , never mind.construction cost
ReplyNew19Click to rate
mobair, Hedge End-Southampton, United Kingdom, 3 hours ago
Halfway through they will demand a LOT more dosh - and the government will have NO OPTION but to pay! Mark my word!
ReplyNew19Click to rate
stillhopeful, stroud, United Kingdom, 3 hours ago
Have EDF got a plant of this type running and handed over? They hadn't when the go ahead was given. Given that government must not only be managed correctly but be seen to be run properly this has questions of probity all over it.
ReplyNew06Click to rate
Notasillybilly, Davao City, Philippines, 3 hours ago
They havent been able to get one of these type of reactors to work yet
04Click to rate
Twosides2it, London, United Kingdom, 4 hours ago
It is the wrong place to put a power station, the Bristol channel could be hit by a tsunami in the coming decades, it has happened before it can happen again. £20billion should be spent on tidal energy in the channel.
ReplyNew09Click to rate
Benevolent Dictator, Wales, United Kingdom, 3 hours ago
Well a tsunami should really get those turbines spinning.
00Click to rate
Captain Synical, Trowbridge, United Kingdom, 4 hours ago
Who is pocketing this money, someone in high office
ReplyNew114Click to rate
Peter, Sutton, United Kingdom, 4 hours ago
The 'plebs' among us can see the cost of electricity shooting up to cover the cost of this generator when it comes on line. No use thinking that refusing to buy from EDF will avoid problems. Changing suppliers won't help as the output will go into the national grid & we will all suffer, the low income group most of all. An ill thought out scheme arranged by very inexpert negotiators.
Nick, Manchester, United Kingdom, 4 hours ago
So what, it will work 24/7 providing more power than all the intermittent wind turbines Who's combined costs in subsidies and building runs into hundreds of billions.
moreaghast, Medway, United Kingdom, 4 hours ago
Surprise ! Why they bother with estimates is a mystery -- everyone with their feet on the ground could have told them thai it would cost three times as much , and take 10 years longer to build == do we actually pay someone for these estimates ?
eloracbmulp, Manchester, United Kingdom, 4 hours ago
This along with HS2,should be scrapped. We need these billions for REAL projects,like NHS,police,nurses,and firemens wages.
John, Herts, 4 hours ago
A huge white elephant that the British will be paying for for decades. We should be investing in Britain and British companies and scientists to sort out our energy requirements.
gus, balbeggie, 4 hours ago
Cheapest tender is not always best.
Penny Farthing, Westmorland, United Kingdom, 4 hours ago
Of course the real reason the FRENCH Power Station has gone up in price is the Pound has fallen 20% against the Euro consequently it is costing EDF 20% more.
ElizabethA, Bristol, United Kingdom, 4 hours ago
Why are we getting all these delays? Also, why is the long-suffering taxpayer being saddled with all the extra costs?
Myopioncounts, London, United Kingdom, 4 hours ago
EDF own this site, they have to pay for it, but most of their UK customers like me will have changed their supplier by then so the French people will be lumbered with the cost. Well, that's what you get for taking over another countries electricity stations. The design of these stations is old and dangerous anyway.
hinksey, PRESTON, United Kingdom, 5 hours ago
I appreciate Theresa May was lumbered with this deal half way through from George Osbourne which would have meant a severe financial penalty if she had pulled the plug but there are now other options to offset the heavy financial energy burden the British public will endure. Shale gas U.K is the perfect bridging fuel to allow the U.K to be energy self sufficient, low carbon emissions and a financial boom to the economy. Renewable energy is just a few decades away from being a financially viable option without subsidies. Lets use our shale gas to plug the hole and become free from Russia, Qatar and Europe for our energy needs. Renewable energy technological advancement will flourish during these decades helped by the tax revenues of the shale industry and subsequent feeder industries created by cheap energy I feel the Ace in the hole with the development of shale gas would also weaken the Russian financial power across Europe enabling a Nuclear Disarmament program to kick start again.
Mick23454, London, United Kingdom, 5 hours ago
It doesn't matter, the magic money tree will provide!
ReplyNew09Click to rate
Bigmouth29, Sheerness, United Kingdom, 5 hours ago
You mean the tax payer as usual
Benevolent Dictator, Wales, United Kingdom, 3 hours ago
Yes the poor British taxpayer as usual. Absolutely scandalous and very predictable.
Theadeptone, Tonbridge, United Kingdom, 5 hours ago
We the non experts knew the costs would shoot up...they always do....power to the people or is that too much of a shock.
Crisp, Birmingham, United Kingdom, 5 hours ago
Last week half the electricity in the UK was supplied with solar. Why aren't we pursuing that technology?
Benevolent Dictator, Wales, United Kingdom, 3 hours ago
We need something that works off "battleship" grey clouds.
Eric Price, Paranaque, Philippines, 1 hour ago
Can do with high capacity battery and invertor
Schickofit, Weston, United Kingdom, 5 hours ago
This is exactly what happened at Flammanville in France when they built the same reactor there. The only differences are the cost rose by another £4 billion and there were a great many accidents in the building of it.
Dibble, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom, 5 hours ago
Here we go - the start of the inevitable delays and cost over runs. Maybe it's time to pull the plug on this project now before it's too late. We could build a gas fired power station with the same capacity for around 2 billion and have it up and running in just a few years.
Tony, Petersfield, 5 hours ago
Government - What is your lowest price? Supplier - Is that the bid to get the contract price? Government - Yes Supplier - Not the actual price then? Government - No
Worn Out, Skid Row, United Kingdom, 5 hours ago
The plant they are building in Finland is years overdue and budget out of control so no-one should be surprised. The only surprise should have been why they were awarded the contract in the first place with their lousy track record. Of course i'm sure there's nothing dodgy about it.
Galahad, The Meadows, United States, 6 hours ago
They appear to be taking cost overrun lessons from the F-35 program.
ReplyNew014Click to rate
TootyMan, Leeds, United Kingdom, 6 hours ago
Needs scrapping with hs2 but we are weak
blocksof, Cen sored by DM., United Kingdom, 6 hours ago
who ever agreed the contract didn't write in the clause "any addition cost and delay is bourne by the contractor." How hard is it to write that into the contract unless you are getting plenty of brown bags?
Uncleboab, Anywherebuthere, United Kingdom, 6 hours ago
The Tories played a belter when they negotiated THAT deal! Now just think how good they're going to be at negotiating brexit? Is that the sound of the plug being pulled and the UK being flushed down the global toilet? Hell yeah!
lester50, Chatham, United Kingdom, 7 hours ago
Let's scrap this before it costs the country more money, it should not have been given the go ahead in the first place and someone is making an awful lot of money out of this project when similar projects have cost a fraction of the 20 billion this will cost. Our utility bills have increased by 74%in the last 7 yrs, imagine what this is going to cost the consumers,eyewatering.
JAMMY, London, United Kingdom, 7 hours ago
Greedy bankers.
Tej_92, London, United Kingdom, 7 hours ago
This was.a deal simply to please china
Alvelon, Melbourne Australia, Australia, 7 hours ago
??? AND HOW MANY COAL FIRED POWER PLANTS HAVE BEEN DESTROYED BECAUSE OT THE UN IDIOTS NEW WORLD ORDER CARBON TAX ???...
Maj General Mustard, Ex B Battery Ist Regt RHA, United Kingdom, 8 hours ago
Do we need Trident? The Germans, French, and Spanish own our utilities and transport, the 3.2 million EU migrants have destabilised our housing, jobs, schools, GPs, and NHS. What is left to defend?
Spartan-092, London, United Kingdom, 1 hour ago
Yes we do. That's because of Thatchers privatisations. Our housing has been a mess since the right to buy- that is what has decimated our housing stock, even now we have the lowest building rate in Europe.
Spartan-092, London, United Kingdom, 1 hour ago
Yes we do. That's because of Thatchers privatisations. Our housing has been a mess since mthe right to buy- that is what has decimated our housing stock, even now we have the lowest building rate in Europe.
Destructivedave, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 8 hours ago
Scrap it. And this time use british companies to build whatever is needed. Enough of this money wastage start investing in our own technology and people.
Rev. LLew, Somewhere over the rainbow, United Kingdom, 2 hours ago
Everyone was invited to put forward proposals. The truth is that no British companies can and/or want to get involved in large projects that do not offer an easy return. So we end up having to pay the French government & Chinese investors for decades once this thing is up & running.
Sean nz, Hamilton, New Zealand, 9 hours ago
wow something is not right hereabout 8 years ago i worked on the construction of a gas fired powerstation at a place called Huntly here in New Zealand,this powerstations produces 400MW of electricity and cost just under 600 million nz dollars to build,which roughly equates to 300 million pounds,so do the math-if you built 8 of these stations they would produce 3200MW which is what Hinkley point c would produce and the cost of producing these stations would be about 5 billion nz dollars or about 2.5 billion pounds,admittedly that was 8 years ago so even if you doubled the cost it would still be about 5 billion pounds for 3200MW of electricity,how can they justify spending 20 billion plus pounds to generate that amount of electricity.
Rev. LLew, Somewhere over the rainbow, United Kingdom, 1 hour ago
But the cost of producing 3200MW's of energy is of course very different from the cost of building the power station(s). The initial build for nuclear is very high. But the life span of a nuclear reactor is much longer than that of a gas powered plant. The running costs are also significantly lower. But on the other hand you need to factor in the cost of decommissioning the plant.
Sean nz, Hamilton, New Zealand, 1 hour ago
According to Siemens who construct and maintain combined cycle gas turbine powerstation around the world they have a lifespan of around 40 years and nuclear powerstations need to be decommissioned after 40 years due to neutron embrittlement or cracks that develop on the metal surfaces due to radiation.But even you should be able to see the massive discrepancy in cost in building this powerstation compared to the example i gave.The discrepancy being a small matter of around 15 billion pounds!!
njm7461, Sarasota, United States, 9 hours ago
Why are you building it in honor of the guy who shot Regan?
Kiss my arris EU, Giving Brussels a wide berth, Turks And Caicos Islands, 9 hours ago
This is one of those wheezes where the favoured buzz-words, 'green' and 'sustainable' win out for board members on all fronts. The costs will indeed be passed to customers and because the site will be deemed Critical National Infrastructure the bulk will become a taxpayer burden as well. For board members, what's not to like... 'green' meaning sold a duff idea to wet-behind-the-ears politicians and 'sustainable' because the costs will be borne by everybody else but the company in perpetuity.
ReplyNew020Click to rate
madmanc, manchester, United Kingdom, 9 hours ago
this is a national humiliation, a once proud innovator reduced to an impoverished client state.
ReplyNew050Click to rate
Neo, Leeds, United Kingdom, 9 hours ago
If only the government would listen to an individual like me, I'm well versed in thermodynamics and while free energy isn't possible there are many things that are. With around 1 million pounds and a few permissions I could create electricity 24 7 it would be green energy and at the same time no blight on the landscape and great for wildlife. 1 hour and I could show an official ways to make green energy cheaply and profit from it.
Morganhector, hove, United Kingdom, 6 hours ago
Why would the government be interested in free energy ? There no money in it
04Click to rate
Neo, Leeds, United Kingdom, 2 hours ago
There would be money in it if it was a business run by the government.
00Click to rate
Watson and Holmes, Baker Street, United Kingdom, 10 hours ago
A small, crowded island could well do without the dangers of nuclear.
ReplyNew48Click to rate
Watson and Holmes, Baker Street, United Kingdom, 10 hours ago
Have you any idea how many wind turbines, tidal barrages, solar power plants and other renewable power sources could be built for the kind of money being squandered on Hinkley C?
ReplyNew410Click to rate
Donk, Donkland, United Kingdom, 6 hours ago
All good and well, unless it's night time, on a still night and you're inland...
30Click to rate
Watson and Holmes, Baker Street, United Kingdom, 10 hours ago
This is just a foolish waste of money.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4663144/Bill-Hinkley-Point-nuclear-power-station-hits-20bn.html#ixzz4lrOmHdWy
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
