This is from a comment by the ever-reliable quokka on the bravenewclimate.com ” Open Thread 20”:
Anti-nuclear types are attempting to mount a legal challenge, based on purported subsidies, in the EU to new nuclear power stations in the UK.
One [of] their main gripes, it would seem, is the proposed carbon floor price in the UK implemented by a contract for difference mechanism. If the market price for carbon is less than the floor price, then the generators pay the government the difference. If it is higher, the government pays the generators. Current market price is about EUR 7 per tonne. Proposed market price is GBP 16. The intent seems to be to provide stability for investors in low emission plant.
Though some “green” groups back the floor price, it seems that the UK Green Party and Greenpeace do not and are actively opposing it:
This is an unedifying sight, exhibiting an extraordinary level of political opportunism in the anti-nuclear crusade. Was a $23 per tonne price in Australia (roughly equal to the UK proposed floor price) opposed? Of course not. I doubt that many seeking serious emissions abatement believe that a price on carbon is not necessary (though not sufficient) and I personally find the Greenpeace position contemptuous.
One further “argument” that appears to be doing the rounds is that nuclear fuel is not subject to tax (except in Germany) and this constitutes a subsidy. That’s easily fixed. How about $100 per tonne, regardless of fuel type in electricity generation? Investors would be falling over themselves to build nuclear.
Personally, I hold Greenpeace (in particular) responsible for most of the coal-plant carbon emissions dumped into our atmosphere since 1980. Every megawatt of nuclear power that Greenpeace has successfully blocked has been replaced by a filthy coal plant, or more recently by less-filthy-but still polluting gas plant. Yes, Greenpeace can take the blame for the insane German anti-nuclear policy.