Uk's First Small Nuclear Power Station to Be Built in North Wales
Postedabout 2 months agoActiveabout 2 months ago
bbc.co.ukResearchstory
calmmixed
Debate
40/100
Nuclear PowerEnergySustainability
Key topics
Nuclear Power
Energy
Sustainability
The UK plans to build its first small nuclear power station in north Wales, sparking discussion about the challenges and benefits of nuclear power, including project timelines, costs, and local acceptance.
Snapshot generated from the HN discussion
Discussion Activity
Light discussionFirst comment
1h
Peak period
5
2-3h
Avg / period
2.3
Comment distribution14 data points
Loading chart...
Based on 14 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Nov 13, 2025 at 6:39 AM EST
about 2 months ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Nov 13, 2025 at 7:54 AM EST
1h after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
5 comments in 2-3h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Nov 13, 2025 at 1:45 PM EST
about 2 months ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 45913721Type: storyLast synced: 11/20/2025, 1:20:52 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
To me, that's the real test of nuclear power: can it actually be switched on, on time, and on budget? Too many projects fail that.
At least building at the Wylfa site avoids the need for grid upgrades.
Generally small projects work better than big ones, not just for nuclear power. Everything from IT systems to railways (the latter being particularly a sore point here in NE England)
Do you mean the small reactors are more likely to be on time? I ask because you follow up with this and I'm not sure your position.
> Generally small projects work better than big ones
There were issues such as having ignored the risk of an earthquake; when it became clear that earthquakes can damage reactors, the reactors that were being built needed late engineering changes that led to cost overruns. Things like that. But nothing related to reactor size.
(Note that this was about cost overruns. Not about the costs that stayed at the projected level.)
I’m glad people are still researching it, but it may turn out to be a dead end (or only be economic if heavily subsidised)
A perfectly good nuclear power plant was less than 60km from New York City, and provided 2 GW of electricity. It bothers me a lot that it was shut down . It was replaced with natural gas power plants.
My home is safe now. But I still think nuclear power in its current state is not a responsible option. The spent fuel remains dangerous after hundreds or thousands years.