The 2003 energy white paper was widely considered to have signalled the end of newnuclear power stations in the UK. Yet only three years later, new nuclear powerseemed so inevitable that Greenpeace took the British government to court over its !,;consultation process. Using political discourse theory, this thesis explores how suchan apparent reversal of policy could take place by examining the discoursessurrounding policy decisions over electricity generation generally and nuclear powerin particular. After first setting out political discourse theory and justifying its useover other approaches to policy analysis in this case, the history of nuclear power inthe UK is examined. This allows exploration of the meanings that have been attachedto nuclear power in governmental circles, from its status as a national success story toits abandonment after privatisation. Nuclear is traced from its politically untouchablebeginnings in military research, through the technological optimism of the 1960s, tothe economic disasters of the 1970s and the effect of green opposition of the 1980s.This provides the background against which the 2003 decision against nuclear isexamined. It is argued that although this white paper goes against nuclear andnominally in favour of renewables, there was little governmental enthusiasm for theproposals, primarily due to the radical changes to British lifestyles and energyprovision needed to enact them. They are adopted in the absence of alternatives. Thelobbying activity of a key pro-nuclear group, Supporters of Nuclear Energy, directlyfollowing this white paper is then examined. It is shown how this group specificallyadopted a public relations strategy aimed at portraying nuclear power in ecologicalmodernist terms, by following the 2003 white paper in reducing the concept ofsustainability to the problem of climate change alone whilst depoliticising electricitydemand. It is argued that this successfully set a discursive context in which nuclearpower could once again be adopted. The informal relationship between Supporters ofNuclear Energy and government figures problematises conceptualisations of the stateand its role in policy making in network governance theory, which are resolvedthrough reference to the work of Antonio Gramsci and Timothy Mitchell.