Nuclear power stations for safety reasons are located next to reliable sources of water. This for availability is mostly not located around elevated scenic lakes but at sea level. In the case of Hinkley, on the Severn with its tidal
As we all know [and agree] climate change is accelerating exponentially faster than predictions.
The likely hood of a [beyond design limit] storm surge occurring during the lifetime of the Hinckley plant [is looking likely
early and multiple] is above a low risk chance and may create a multiple events status.
Due to Hincley being sited on a soft tidal grounding, the heavy foundation may experience critical hydrolic submarine erosion, resulting in a subsidence
tilt to the station [reactor and cooling sysstems] putting the station beyond opperational function and at a secondary risk [flooding with solids damage as a first event] risk of a meltdown.
Nuclear power stations cost a lot of
money in three ways: 1. The build requirements are complex and intensely expensive. 2. The operation costs require high salaries for highly qualified operators of all types and the cost of the redundant fail safes are the most expensive insurance
premiums known. 3. Decommissioning amounts to an average of a third of the cost of overall station life spans.
The revenues collected from sales is variable and often [as is to date] has to be subsidised.
The cost of a critical station failure
puts the cost loss into freefall for the station and any surrounding damage cost not to mention the health and political damage.
Hinckley-C is a matter of when and how bad, not if.