HC Deb 22 July 1976 vol 915 cc582-3W
Mr. Michael Latham

asked the Secretary of State for Energy (1) when he now expects the completion of the SGHWR programme, with all the reactors on stream; and what proportion of electricity generation will be provided by those reacators when they are fully operational;

(2) what is the percentage proportion of electricity which will be generated by nuclear power stations at the target date for the completion of the SGHWRs in the event of the cancellation of: (a) one, (b) two, (c) three and (d) all of the proposed SGHWRs.

Mr. Benn

I am currently reviewing the SGHWR programme in discussion with the organisations concerned. It is clear that there is more work to be done in launching the system than expected in 1974. It is also clear that the electricity boards' requirements for new capacity are now later than they forecast in 1974. This makes practicable a longer time scale for the programme than was originally envisaged.

Mr. Michael Latham

asked the Secretary of State for Energy what is the current proportion of electricity provided by nuclear power; what is the estimated percentage when all the AGR and SGHWR reactors are on stream; and what is the target date for that.

Mr. Benn

I refer the hon. Member to the answer to his previous two Questions. Nuclear power currently accounts for 11 per cent. of the elecricity generated by the Central Electricity Generating Board. All the AGR reactors are expected to be on stream by 1979.

Mr. Michael Latham

asked the Secretary of State for Energy why, in his article in Colliery Guardian for May 1976, he referred to the contribution made to energy supply by Magnox and AGR nuclear reactors, but made no mention of the Government's SGHWR programme.

Mr. Benn

This article was concerned with the coal industry. The reference to nuclear power was in the context of the development of our energy supplies over the next few years—up to about 1980. No SGHWR reactor could be operating by that date.

Mr. Michael Latham

asked the Secretary of State for Energy whether he will give an assurance that he has not decided to cancel or reduce the SGHWR programme.

Mr. Eadie

I refer the hon. Member to the reply to the hon. Member for Bedford (Mr. Skeet) on 28th June.—[Vol. 914, cols. 23–24.]