The UK’s nuclear ambitions face fresh scrutiny after a government-commissioned task force concluded that Britain is now the most expensive country in the world for building new nuclear power stations. The findings, delivered to ministers ahead of a major policy review, warn that the country’s energy transition risks being undermined by a system weighed down by costs, bureaucracy, and slow-moving oversight.

The review examined ongoing and future nuclear projects as part of Britain’s push to expand low carbon power by the mid-2030s. It found that the UK’s construction costs far outpace those of France, South Korea, China, and even the US, despite shared technologies and similar global supply chain pressures. The task force attributed the surge in costs to overlapping layers of regulation, fragmented decision-making, and inconsistent political direction stretching back more than a decade.

One of the clearest examples is Hinkley Point C, the country’s flagship project and its first new nuclear plant in a generation. Originally priced at £18 billion, its estimated cost has risen multiple times, with delivery dates pushed back substantially. Although Britain sees nuclear as a critical stabiliser for its future grid, escalating expenses now risk overshadowing the long-term benefits of the technology.

In its report, the task force argues that the country’s nuclear framework has become “a sprawling bureaucracy”, with too many agencies sharing responsibility for approvals, safety assessments, financing oversight, environmental compliance, and construction monitoring. This structure, it says, slows down decisions, duplicates requirements, and inflates budgets that are already under pressure from inflation and supply disruptions.

To reverse this trend, the task force called for the creation of a powerful “super regulator” that would consolidate nuclear oversight into a single authority. According to the report, such a body would streamline approvals, improve long-term planning, coordinate financing structures, and reduce the administrative bottlenecks that currently raise costs and delay timelines.

The recommendations arrive at a time when the UK is attempting to reinvigorate its nuclear strategy, which includes developing small modular reactors, extending the lifespan of existing plants, and attracting private investment into large-scale projects. Without major reform, the report warns, the country risks falling behind global competitors that are already delivering nuclear projects faster and at significantly lower cost.

Energy analysts say the findings highlight a deeper challenge. Britain’s nuclear sector has suffered from fluctuating political support and uncertainty over financing models, making investors cautious and complicating cost control. Although recent governments have reaffirmed nuclear’s place in the UK’s future energy mix, the industry still lacks the streamlined structure found in countries with decades of consistent investment.

As the government prepares its next steps, business leaders and energy experts say the conclusions should serve as a wake-up call. Britain needs reliable nuclear power to meet its climate targets, stabilise electricity prices, and reduce dependence on gas. But unless the structural barriers identified by the task force are addressed, the country’s nuclear ambitions could remain stalled on paper rather than built in concrete.

At the centre of the debate is a simple question: can the UK make nuclear affordable and deliverable again, or will the world’s costliest environment for construction undermine one of its most important long-term energy goals?