From Greenpeace:
Hinkley Deal Makes No Economic Sense: Greenpeace
LONDON – Commenting on the agreement struck by French-owned EDF and China’s CGN on Wednesday to build a fleet of new nuclear reactors at Hinkley and other two locations in the UK, Greenpeace UK chief scientist Dr Doug Parr said:

“With this deal George Osborne is not so much backing the wrong horse as betting billions of consumers’ money on a nag running backwards. There’s no end in sight for the nuclear industry’s dependence on billion-pound handouts whilst the renewable sector is on the verge of going subsidy free. Backing the former and punishing the latter makes no economic sense whatsoever. Our grandchildren will one day wonder why their bills are propping up a foreign-owned, outdated, and costly nuclear industry instead of supporting cutting-edge UK firms producing cheap clean energy. There’s no other reason for the government to go through with this rotten deal but saving George Osborne’s face.”

Key facts:

Greenpeace estimates the subsidy package for the new reactors at Hinkley, Sizewell, and and Bradwell could add an extra £33 to the average household bill

The UK government has committed to paying Hinkley’s owners a fixed price of £92.50 for every megawatt/hour produced at the plant – or £89.50 if the Sizewell reactor goes ahead too – for 35 years. This is nearly twice the current market price for electricity.

The government’s own auctions for clean energy have now found that onshore wind and solar are both cheaper than the strike price for Hinkley – and on shorter contracts – whilst the cost of offshore wind is falling fast.

All EDF’s other attempts to build Hinkley-style EPR nuclear plants in other countries are running behind schedule. Construction of the EPR reactor at Flamanville began in 2007 and EDF has now asked for permission to push back the start date to 2020. The EPR Okiluoto reactor in Finland was supposed to start in 2009 and might now come online in 2018.

Hinkley has been variously described as the ‘most expensive object ever built in Britain’, ‘one of the worst deals ever’ for British consumers, and a ‘bottomless pitand a big white elephant’. In a damning report, experts at banking giant HSBC wrote that they saw ‘ample reason for the UK government to delay or cancel the project’, pointing to major technical setbacks and sky-high costs.
Independent campaigning organization that uses non-violent, creative confrontation to expose global environmental problems, and to force solutions that are essential to a green and peaceful future.
Emphasis added. See original here with embedded links-references here:

There is the problem of a defective reactor pressure vessel and other defective parts; substandard construction at Flamanville. There were problems with substandard construction at Okiluoto, as well.

And, there’s no solution for the nuclear waste (and it is costly for perpetuity either in the form of container upkeep or healthcare or both).

This is even more true for the UK than many places, because it is an overcrowded island with a very wet climate which accelerates corrosion. There are many underground bunkers in the London area which could make good nuclear waste storage facilities, but they don’t want the waste. They will let the Chinese build a new nuclear reactor near London itself though, after this one! Even if Scotland wanted the waste, and they don’t, if Scots were allowed to return home, Scotland would be as crowded as England. It’s not fair to kick people out and take their land for a nuclear waste dump, now is it? It is happening, of course, in America, already. The entire continent belongs to the Native Americans-First Nations, was stolen, and now is being used as an international nuclear waste dump.

Any one with a pea-brain can see that it’s probably not a good idea to let a foreign country own their nuclear reactors, whether French or Chinese. France is at least in the EU with the UK.