UK Energy: Public Ownership versus Private, Renewable or Nuclear?

Introduction: The UK’s Energy Crisis and Rising Costs

The United Kingdom is in the grip of an energy crisis. Household energy bills have surged to record levels, with forecasts in late 2022 warning that annual costs could exceed £3,300 per household during the winter. Even with government interventions, typical bills doubled or tripled compared to just a year earlier. This has left millions of families choosing between heating and other essentials, highlighting a cost-of-living crisis fuelled by volatile global gas prices and a broken energy market. The UK’s continued reliance on imported gas and privatised utilities has exposed consumers to price shocks, raising urgent questions about our energy security and resilience.

Amid these challenges, The Modern Party is proposing a bold solution to fix Britain’s energy woes. We believe it’s time to rethink who owns and controls the UK’s energy – and to balance our investment between renewables and nuclear for a stable, affordable power supply. Should our electricity and heating be run for public good or shareholder profit? Can wind turbines and solar panels alone power Britain, or do we also need the steady hand of nuclear reactors? In this comprehensive look at public vs private energy and renewables vs nuclear, we lay out a vision for a secure, low-carbon, and affordable energy future under a new publicly owned model called UK Energy (UKE).

Public Ownership vs Private Ownership: Why “UK Energy (UKE)” Could Cut Bills

For decades, Britain’s energy utilities have been privately owned and driven by profit. The result? High prices, under-investment, and foreign investors reaping dividends while UK household’s struggle. Bringing energy into public ownership under a new model – UK Energy (UKE) – would put people before profit and help nationalise energy UK in the public interest. In fact, leading economists have crunched the numbers and found that public ownership of utilities could save around £8 billion per year by eliminating shareholder dividends and expensive private financing. That translates to an annual saving of over £300 per household on average – roughly £6 per week back in your pocket. Some estimates put the benefit even higher, around £315 per household each year, once all inefficiencies and investor payouts are cut. That’s real money which could be used to lower bills or reinvest in upgrading our energy system.

Under UKE, these savings stay in the UK economy rather than flowing to international owners. Whether used to reduce tariffs or fund infrastructure, £8 billion annually is a massive boost – about £750 million per region of the UK. Importantly, this isn’t a leap in the dark. Countries like France, Norway, and even China offer real examples of how public ownership can deliver affordable, secure energy:

France: Across the Channel, France has long kept a firm grip on its energy industry. The state owns a majority of EDF (Électricité de France), and this public control has been a shield for consumers. When global prices spiked, the French government capped electricity bill increases at just 4% in 2022, forcing EDF to take an €8.4 billion hit to protect households. In other words, France used public ownership as a tool to guard citizens from the crisis. While UK families saw their bills triple, France’s state intervention kept its people largely insulated. Public ownership gives governments the levers to prioritize citizens over profit – something private firms will not do voluntarily.

Norway: Norway’s energy model shows the long-term benefits of public ownership. The country’s abundant hydropower resources are mostly publicly owned, and the state-controlled utility Statkraft has quietly become Europe’s largest renewable energy producer. This publicly owned company pours its earnings back into society and renewable expansion, rather than into private pockets. Moreover, Norway famously kept public control over its oil and gas riches (through a majority stake in Equinor and a national oil fund), using the revenues to create the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund for its citizens. The result is that Norwegians enjoy reliable energy supply and, historically, lower electricity costs than most of Europe. Even during recent price spikes, the Norwegian government stepped in with support – including proposals for a fixed low electricity price (\~0.40 NOK/kWh) for consumers – to ensure affordable power. Norway demonstrates that national resources can be managed for public good, with profits reinvested in infrastructure and people.

China: China’s approach underscores what massive state-led investment can achieve. China’s energy companies are primarily state-owned, and Beijing directs them to aggressively build out capacity. As a result, China leads the world in clean energy investment – spending $546 billion on renewables in 2022 alone, nearly half the global total. Chinese state utilities are rapidly expanding wind, solar, and nuclear (with over 50 reactors in operation and more under construction) at costs often far lower than western private projects. This unprecedented scale and speed – building the equivalent of an entire power grid in a few years – is only possible via central coordination and public ownership. Of course, the UK is a democracy with a market economy, not China, but the lesson remains: strategic state investment can deliver infrastructure faster and cheaper when profit isn’t the only motive.

Bringing UK energy back into public hands would not mean a return to the inefficiencies of 1970s nationalisation. The Modern Party’s proposal for UK Energy (UKE) is a modern public enterprise: commercially run, accountable, and focused on long-term planning over short-term profit. UKE would integrate generation, grids, and supply under one roof, eliminating the costly internal contracts and siloed bureaucracy that fragmented private companies created. By operating as a not-for-profit public service, UKE could cut out the “energy profiteering” that has seen companies rake in billions while families shiver. In fact, a recent analysis by Unite the Union found that excess profits and inefficiencies in 2022 cost UK consumers £45 billion – about £1,800 per household that could have been saved under public ownership. Instead of paying bloated dividends or overseas shareholders (95% of UK energy firm shares are held by foreign investors), a public UK Energy would reinvest in affordable bills, grid upgrades, and clean power projects.

In summary, the case for public ownership is compelling: lower bills for everyone, more control over our energy security, and the ability to plan a clean energy transition at the national level. UKE would aim to emulate the best of France’s price protection, Norway’s reinvestment, and China’s scale – while remaining fully accountable to the British public. It’s a commonsense idea whose time has come, promising to save around £8bn a year and £300+ per household. With those savings, we can then tackle the next big question: how do we build a low-carbon power system that keeps the lights on? This is where the balance of renewables vs nuclear comes in.

Renewables vs Nuclear: Striking a Balance for a Clean Energy Future

When it comes to decarbonizing electricity, Britain has made great strides with renewable energy. We’re a world leader in offshore wind and have rapidly expanded solar farms and onshore wind installations. The government’s 2030 renewable target are ambitious – for example, a pledge to reach 50 GW of offshore wind by 2030 (up from about 14 GW today) – alongside major growth in solar, tidal, and other clean sources. The Modern Party fully supports these goals: renewables are essential to achieving a net-zero, clean energy future. Wind and solar farms provide clean power with zero fuel cost, and their prices have plummeted over the past decade, making them some of the cheapest new sources of electricity.

However, as promising as renewables are, we must also acknowledge the real-world limitations and challenges the UK faces in relying on them exclusively, at least in the near term. The path to 100% renewable energy is not as simple as setting targets – we need the grid and investment structure to catch up, and that isn’t happening fast enough. Consider a few realities:

Grid Delays: Right now, hundreds of new wind and solar projects are stuck in a massive grid connection queue. Our aging electricity grid was never designed to handle so many new, decentralised power sources. Upgrades and connections are lagging. In fact, developers report that if you got permission to build a wind farm today, you might have to wait over 10 years – until the late 2030s – just to plug it into the grid! This grid bottleneck is slowing down Britain’s renewable revolution. Ofgem and National Grid are scrambling to reform the process, but unless we overhaul grid capacity and planning, the 2030 targets could slip out of reach. Renewables can’t do their job if we can’t connect them.

Funding and Market Issues: The recent offshore wind auction debacle was a warning sign. In 2023, for the first time, not a single offshore wind project got built in a government auction – developers walked away because the price offered was too low to cover surging costs. This resulted in zero bids for new offshore wind farms, putting the 50 GW by 2030 goal in jeopardy. While wind turbine costs rose (due to inflation, supply chain issues, and higher interest rates), the government’s contract price cap didn’t budge, so firms said projects were unviable. The lesson? We need a smarter approach to financing renewables, one that accounts for economic realities – something a publicly owned UKE could do by investing directly in projects and accepting a lower rate of return than profit-hungry private investors. The Modern Party would ensure vital wind and solar farms are built on time, either through better subsidy design or public investment, so that short-term market conditions don’t derail our renewables target.

Intermittency and Reliability: Wind and solar power are intermittent by nature – they produce energy only when the wind blows or the sun shines. The UK’s wind fleet has a high capacity but still delivers around 30–50% of its rated output on average (and practically zero during rare “wind droughts”). Solar is even more variable, especially in winter when days are short. This is not to dismiss renewables – but it underscores the need for reliable backup. Huge strides in energy storage (like batteries and pumped hydro) and demand response will help smooth out renewables, but those alone can’t cover a weeks-long lull in wind during a cold spell. We must plan for “Dunkelflaute” scenarios (dark, still days) to keep the lights on. Currently, much of that backup comes from gas-fired power plants – which is expensive and carbon-intensive. This is where nuclear energy enters the picture as a reliable workhorse for our grid.

Nuclear power provides steady, carbon-free electricity 24/7, regardless of weather. One reactor can generate a gigawatt of power day and night, often at 90% or higher capacity factor (indeed, South Korea’s reactors average an incredible 96% output reliability). In the 2020s, as the UK tries to decarbonize heating and transport with electric cars and heat pumps, our overall electricity demand is set to skyrocket – some estimates say 50% higher by 2035. We will need every bit of generation we can get. Renewables vs nuclear is sometimes framed as an either/or battle, but to meet our climate goals and ensure security of supply, Britain likely needs both: as much cheap renewable power as we can build and new nuclear plants to provide a stable backbone.

Think of wind and solar as the primary engines of a clean grid, and nuclear as the insurance policy and anchor that guarantees power when nature doesn’t cooperate. While wind is the “jewel in the UK’s renewable crown”, even industry groups acknowledge we need firm power sources to shoulder the load when wind output is low. Modern nuclear stations, like the ones The Modern Party proposes, can run for 18–24 months straight between refuelling, offering a dependable output that complements renewables. With emerging grid-scale battery projects and possible green hydrogen storage, the hope is that one day we can cover longer renewable lulls without fossil fuels. But until those technologies mature, nuclear is our best large-scale zero-carbon source for continuous power.

In short, our energy future is not Renewables OR Nuclear – it’s Renewables AND Nuclear. Embracing both will put the UK on a stable path to net zero by 2050, hitting the 2030 clean power goals while keeping our system reliable. Now, building new nuclear does require vision and commitment – which has been lacking in recent decades. That’s why The Modern Party is championing an ambitious plan to build 10 new nuclear reactors as part of UKE’s mandate, focusing on a proven design that can be delivered on time and on budget. In the next section, we explain why and how.

Why the UK Should Build 10 APR-1400 Nuclear Power Plants

Reviving the UK’s nuclear capacity is key to The Modern Party’s energy plan. We propose to construct 10 identical nuclear reactors of the APR-1400 design as a cornerstone of Britain’s energy strategy. The APR-1400 is a modern Advanced Pressurised Reactor design with a capacity of about 1.4 GW per unit. It’s a technology with a strong track record – developed by South Korea and already delivering power in Korea and the United Arab Emirates. Here’s why opting for APR-1400 reactors and building ten of them makes sense for the UK:

Massive Low-Carbon Power Output: Ten APR-1400 units would provide roughly 14 GW of firm electricity capacity. To put that in perspective, that’s 35–40% of the UK’s current electricity demand. The math is compelling: the UK used around 263 TWh of electricity in 2023. Ten 1.4 GW reactors operating at high efficiency (say ~90% capacity factor) would generate on the order of 110–115 TWh per year – approximately one-third or more of our total power needs. In practice, this fleet of reactors could supply over a third of all UK homes and businesses with electricity. It’s a huge contribution to energy security and would rival the output of our entire existing nuclear fleet (most of which is set to retire by the early 2030s). For example, look at the UAE’s new Barakah nuclear plant: its four APR-1400 reactors (5.6 GW total) now produce about 25% of the UAE’s electricity. If four reactors can do that for the UAE, ten could do close to 40% for Britain – a game-changing impact.

Proven Design, Lower Costs: Unlike the bespoke and delay-prone projects the UK has seen (such as the over-budget Hinkley Point C), the APR-1400 is a standardised design with a solid construction record. South Korea built multiple APR-1400 reactors on schedule and exported this design successfully. Crucially, the cost per kilowatt for APR-1400 plants built by Korea has been dramatically lower than recent UK projects. Estimates show South Korea’s overnight construction costs are about $2,200 per kW for nuclear – roughly £2,000–£2,200 per kW – whereas Britain’s Hinkley Point C is projected to cost well above £8,000–£10,000 per kW by the time it’s finished. To illustrate, Hinkley’s two reactors (3.2 GW total) were initially priced at £18 billion, then £25–26 billion, and now £31–34 billion and delayed to 2029. That’s roughly £10 billion per gigawatt – an eye-watering figure, partly due to first-of-a-kind EPR reactor design and financing costs. In contrast, South Korea’s APR-1400 units come in at a fraction of that cost. They achieved this by building reactors in series, using domestically trained workforce, and avoiding constant redesigns. If the UK partners with Korea or leverages their approach, we could save tens of billions on our new nuclear build. Indeed, Korea recently offered to build a set of APR-1400 reactors overseas (e.g. in Poland) at an estimated cost of about $5 billion per reactor – around one-third the per-unit cost of Hinkley. It’s clear: by choosing a proven design and sticking to it for 10 reactors, we unlock huge economies of scale.

Energy Security and Independence: Ten new reactors would bolster energy security UK by providing a reliable domestic source of power that isn’t dependent on the weather or imported fuel volatility. Uranium fuel for reactors is compact and can be stockpiled easily (and sourced from stable suppliers like Canada or Australia), insulating us from geopolitics far better than gas imports do. With a fleet of APR-1400s, the UK would have a backbone of always-on electricity that could run for 60+ years. This long-term certainty is priceless. It means that even during a deep winter anticyclone (when wind farms are still) or at night (when solar is offline), a huge chunk of British power generation would hum along steadily. This kind of resilience is critical for a modern economy – keeping industry, hospitals, and homes powered under any conditions. It also reduces our reliance on gas-fired peaking plants and expensive imports when demand peaks, thereby shielding consumers from future price spikes.

Jobs, Skills and Industrial Revitalisation: Building 10 large reactors is not only an energy plan – it’s an industrial strategy. Such an undertaking would create tens of thousands of skilled jobs across the UK. From construction workers and steel fabricators, to engineers, project managers, and nuclear scientists, the demand for talent would explode. The Modern Party’s vision is to pair the nuclear build with a massive investment in workforce training and apprenticeships, so British workers can fill these roles. We would work with universities and trade schools to train a new generation of nuclear engineers, welders, electricians, and safety specialists. This program can rejuvenate our manufacturing base too: key components like reactor pressure vessels, steam generators, and high-grade pipes can be fabricated in UK factories, if we start ramping up now. By coordinating the build schedule of 10 reactors, we’d give suppliers the confidence to invest in facilities and hire staff, knowing a steady pipeline of work is coming for the next 15+ years. In essence, UKE’s nuclear program could spark a renaissance in UK heavy industry – like how the French nuclear build-out in the 1980s created thousands of jobs, or how South Korea’s program turned it into a world-leading nuclear exporter. These are long-term, well-paid careers that would level up regions from Somerset to Yorkshire. And once the plants are running, there are permanent jobs in operations and maintenance (each large plant employs around 500–1,000 people for decades). The community benefits would be enormous.

Fast-Track to Net Zero: Nuclear power isn’t just about keeping the lights on; it’s about hitting our climate targets. Every gigawatt of nuclear we build is essentially carbon-free and can displace fossil fuels. Ten APR-1400s (~14 GW) could prevent on the order of 40–60 million tonnes of CO₂ emissions per year (depending on what mix of gas/coal they replace), a huge contribution to net-zero goals. They also complement renewables by providing baseline power, so we don’t need to build redundant gas plants as insurance. The Modern Party’s plan is to ensure the UK can meet 100% of electricity demand with zero-carbon sources by the early 2030s – an aggressive target that will require both rapid renewable deployment and new nuclear. France managed to decarbonise its grid in under 20 years by building nuclear; Britain can decarbonise by combining our offshore wind riches with new reactors. We’ll also explore advanced nuclear technology (like small modular reactors and next-gen designs) as a supplement, but our priority is to get conventional nuclear build moving now, using a design that’s ready to go.

Of course, such an ambitious nuclear build will require upfront investment. The Modern Party would leverage public financing (taking advantage of government’s ability to borrow cheaply) to fund UKE’s reactor construction, thereby avoiding the exorbitant private financing costs that plagued Hinkley Point C. By owning these plants publicly, the nation would reap the return over time – the cheap electricity in the 2040s and beyond – instead of foreign investors. We’d also seek partnerships with the Korean nuclear industry for technology transfer and project management assistance, given their expertise with APR-1400. With proper planning, the first of the 10 reactors could be online by the early 2030s, and all ten in operation by the early 2040s – securing roughly 40% of our power from clean nuclear by that time.

Conclusion: A Secure, Low-Carbon, Affordable Energy Future for Britain

The Modern Party’s vision for UK energy is bold but achievable: a secure, low-carbon, affordable energy future underpinned by public ownership and strategic investment in both renewables and nuclear. By bringing our energy sector into public hands via UK Energy (UKE), we can nationalise energy for the public good – cutting bills by reinvesting profits, coordinating infrastructure upgrades, and ensuring no one must choose between heating and eating. We’ve seen that countries like France and Norway use public ownership to protect consumers and plan for the long term, and it’s high time Britain did the same. No more runaway bills and no more foreign shareholders profiting off an essential service – under UKE, energy security and affordability will be the priority.

At the same time, we embrace a balanced clean energy mix. There is no false choice between renewables or nuclear – we need both to guarantee a clean energy future. The wind and sun will do the heavy lifting to get us to net zero, and our beautiful island is blessed with plenty of both. But when they falter, British-engineered (and maybe Korean-assisted) nuclear plants will ensure the grid stays powered with zero-carbon electricity. Our plan to build 10 APR-1400 reactors would give the UK a reliable backbone of ~14 GW firm power – about 35–40% of our needs – at a cost per unit far lower than past projects by learning from the best international examples. This investment, combined with a push to hit the 2030 UK renewables target (and to fix the grid bottlenecks stalling that progress), will set Britain on course to 100% clean power while keeping energy affordable

The stakes could not be higher. Energy is the lifeblood of our economy and a necessity for every citizen. The choices we make now – public vs private control, renewable vs nuclear emphasis – will determine whether we continue stumbling through crises or build an energy system fit for the 21st century. The Modern Party is offering a clear, positive plan: public ownership and a balanced clean energy portfolio to end the crisis and deliver long-term prosperity. We envision a Britain where winter fuel poverty is a thing of the past, where your energy bills are stable and reasonable, and where clean, British energy powers a thriving green economy with skilled jobs from Teesside to Taunton.

It’s time to take back control of our power. By voting for the Modern Party and our UK Energy plan, you’re choosing lower bills, energy security, and climate leadership. Together, let’s harness the power of the wind, sun and the atom, under public ownership, to light up every home in an era of shared abundance. This is the future we can build – a Britain empowered by secure, affordable, low-carbon energy for all.