This is the submission done by Global 2000 ,which they say you are welcome to copy and paste - Just add your name, email address and the date at the end. Send to firstname.lastname@example.org
You don't have to send it all and if there are any other points you want to raise, the scruffily put together facts in my last blog might be useful. There are some good links there too.
To: EU Commission - Directorate-General for Competition
Subject: Hinkley Point C
I am very concerned about the current plans of the UK government to make a new nuclear power plant possible by granting enormous support for it.
We would like to encourage the EU Commission to stick to its clear analysis, because we as CITIZENS/ NGOS/ BUSINESS in the UK do not want to be forced into paying a fixed high electricity price to EDF for several decades, with no chance of the possibly of making use of lower electricity prices.
It does not seem fair to me, that one type of energy receives this amount of support in addition to the fact that EDF would get this size of contract without even having had to win a tender, because EDF simply received this deal competition-free.
The supplier AREVA became known in the past years for having severe problems with the construction of its “flagship reactor” EPR on time: The ongoing cost increases! Delay of completion is ongoing both at Olkiluoto and Flamanville, so it cannot be expected that EDF would complete the EPR reactors at Hinkley according to schedule. The delay at the Finnish site Olkiluoto is already 5 years, Areva was reported as having left the construction site a month ago, so no new reliable date is known.
There are many more possibilities to secure the electricity supply for the UK. It does not enhance energy diversity and independent supply if the enormous amount of up to £17 billion in public subsidies is spent on two units of EPR.
We are convinced that the state aid for Hinkley Point C would be at the expense of other energy forms in the UK, because the money set aside for the support of low-carbon projects up to 2020 (counterparty body) will be spent mostly on the new NPP.
The Carbon Connect report shows that the investors can expect bigger returns on the Hinkley project than with comparable projects thus proving that the Hinkley Point C project would not only receive state-aid, but to such a high level, that it is over-compensation. Furthermore the EU Commission made clear that the existence of market failure need be doubted, because in Finland and in France the reactors were ordered without granting state aid as is now planned for Hinkley. The UK government’s plan for the next NPP, is utterly incomprehensible to us, because the EU Commission characterized the chosen financing model (CfD – Contracts for Difference) with the following words:
”…the CfD is conceived to entirely eliminate market risks from the commercial activity of electricity generation, for a period of time, the initial 35 years of operations of the plant.”
This is an extreme preference for one type of electricity generation, one specific project of one specific investor, which we believe the EU Commission will not see as compatible with the rules of the Common market.