People living near proposed nuclear plants and wind farms will lose the right to question their necessity or general safety, as planning inquiries are limited to considering local issues for projects of national importance, Alistair Darling, Trade and Industry Secretary, said.

Most household windmills and solar panels will become exempt from planning permission as part of a strategy to encourage “microgeneration” of renewable electricity close to home. The measures will reduce Britain’s carbon emissions by between 19 million and 25 million tonnes by 2020, a cut of between 13 and 17 per cent on current projections. This will bring the country more than a third of the way towards the Government’s goal of cutting 1990 emissions by 60 per cent by 2050. The decision to back a new generation of nuclear reactors infuriated environmental groups. Tony Juniper, of Friends of the Earth, said: “This is a huge mistake. Nuclear power is unsafe, uneconomic and unnecessary.”

Others, however, welcomed the backing for nuclear as the only sensible option. Professor Robin Grimes, of Imperial College London, said: “New nuclear build is the only viable way of generating the capacity to deliver a reduction in carbon emissions.”

While the review increases support for renewable energy and efficiency savings, the document is clear that these measures cannot in themselves fill the “energy gap” and provide Britain with the low- carbon, secure electricity supply that it needs.

Mr Darling said that as 25 gigawatts of coal-fired and nuclear capacity was due to be lost by 2020 — 30 per cent of the present total — some of this would have to be replaced by new atomic plants to prevent over-reliance on imported natural gas.

New nuclear reactors would have to be funded entirely by the private sector, without government subsidies, and the review does not state how many plants or of what sort should be built. For both the renewable energy and nuclear goals to be achieved, however, the planning system needed an urgent overhaul to stop urgently needed plants and wind farms being held up for years, Mr Darling said.

At present, wind farms take an average of 21 months to secure planning consent, and 11 gigawatts of renewable energy capacity is awaiting consent. Without reform, the prospects for nuclear are likely to be even worse: the inquiry into the last plant to be built, Sizewell B, lasted more than six years and the prospect of similar delays is discouraging new investment.

To overcome this, the Government will issue national “statements of need” after consultation, in the case of nuclear power, in a White Paper towards the end of the year. Once such statements have been issued, local inquiries will not be able to challenge the necessity of individual plants, but only to hear objections based on local concerns.

Mr Darling said that nuclear plants “could make a contribution to reducing carbon emissions and reducing our reliance on imported energy”, but that the Government took no view on how many should be built.

Without nuclear power, Britain will be dependent on natural gas for 55 per cent of its energy needs by 2020, compared with 38 per cent at present. As North Sea stocks are being exhausted, up to 90 per cent of this would have to be imported, much of it from potentially unstable countries.

Possible sites for nuclear power plants will be investigated in a government-led initiative, which will begin early next year. A new system of safety licensing will also be introduced. Instead of considering each application to build a nuclear reactor from scratch and in isolation, the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII) will instead “pre-license” individual designs.

The NII will examine the safety case of a proposed design, a process that is expected to take about three years. If it passes muster, it will issue a design acceptance certificate valid for ten years. After an operator selected a site and obtained local planning permission, it would then begin the phase of the licence application. The NII would assess the proposed site and issue a formal licence within twelve months. After a design acceptance certificate has been issued for one reactor, it would clear the way for the construction of similar models. For each new plant, only a site licence would be required, which would take up to 12 months to secure, compared with four to five years under the existing regime.

REACTION FROM THE INDUSTRY

“The energy review has failed to deliver the bold decisions that we have been waiting for”
Sir David Wallace, vice president of the Royal Society

“The energy review is a damp squib, full of rehashed and recycled policies. The Government’s continued dalliance with new nuclear power is a massive distraction from delivering a truly sustainable energy future”
Keith Allott, head of climate change for WWF-UK

“The support for nuclear is not surprising as this form of power is a vital part of the overall energy mix needed to enable the UK to protect and maintain its power supply”
John Garstang, of the environmental policy advice firm ADAS

“The energy review fails to deliver any real or rapid content on reducing carbon emissions”
Professor Stuart Haszeldine, of the UK Energy Research Centre

“If we are to address global warming, both nuclear and renewable technology are required, and, what is more, they need to work together” Professor Robin Grimes, Imperial College London

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Phoebe Caldwell wins Times/Sternberg Award
• Raging against fake pop has its own pitfalls
• How a voice for everyone led to stalemate