The Hypocritical Whining of the Nuclear Industry

[kristopher]

Why The Economics Don't Favor Nuclear Power In America

This guest article is by Mark Cooper, senior fellow for economic analysis at Vermont Law School’s Institute for Energy and the Environment.
2/20/2014

From 2011 through 2013, as the overwhelming majority of the new reactors that had been proposed as part of the “Nuclear Renaissance” were abandoned or delayed, the industry blamed low natural gas prices. In 2013, when five old reactors were retired early, and today with many old reactors being considered for early retirement, the industry blames low wholesale prices that result from a market that is distorted by the entry of subsidized wind power.

The irony in these complaints is that for fifty years the selection of generating capacity has been rigged in favor of nuclear power with socialized accident insurance and waste management costs, forced purchase of overpriced power, and advanced recovery of construction costs. Nuclear advocates complaining about policies that balance things out a bit to give other generation resources a decent chance of delivering electricity would be laughably hypocritical, if it weren’t so important. In fact, if the playing field were actually level, nuclear would be in even more trouble than it is.

The nuclear hypocrisy does not stop with complaints about subsidies. The nuclear utilities continue to complain about the challenges of the safety and licensing requirements imposed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, even after they convinced Congress to streamline and reform the process in the 2005. Yet, these challenges are matched by the obstacles utilities put in the path of alternatives at the public utility commissions, with hostile interconnection requirements, unfair contract conditions and uneconomic tariffs.

The fifty year failure of nuclear power to be economically competitive compels nuclear advocates to label every pro-consumer analysis as anti-nuclear. The anti-nuclear label is used to avoid the inconvenient truth about nuclear: it is and has been unable to compete economically with the alternatives available. More importantly, it is not likely to be able to compete for the foreseeable future.

The economic reality is that efficiency...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/energysource/2014/02/20/why-the-economics-dont-favor-nuclear-power-in-america/

[kristopher]

1. One of the recent nuclear whines

Nuclear Energy Operators Say Market Stacked Against Them

When Entergy Corp. made its decision to close its Vermont Yankee nuclear facility, it opened the door to discussions on how to allow all electric generating facilities fair access to the markets. The utility says that the action it has taken could become more widespread unless system operators make corrections.

Grid operators, or those who order up power and schedule those deliveries across the transmission lines, want to ensure that regions have ample and reliable electricity supplies. The downfall of any facility that runs 24-7 erodes those goals, especially if the energy source is carbon-free and helping the Northeastern states meet their climate objectives.

“Markets have to address these issues or you will see a fallout of perfectly well-run units such as Vermont Yankee, and potentially others,” says Bill Mohl, who heads Entergy’s merchant nuclear operations in Massachusetts, Michigan, New York and Vermont. “You can’t stack the market with state regulations and environmental policies and expect competitive fuel sources to effectively compete.”

Mohl’s contentions: The abundance of shale gas has resulted in sustained low natural gas and wholesale energy prices while market designs especially in the Northeast have resulted in artificially low energy prices. That’s a vague reference, in part, to wind energy that is subsidized and that does not provide electricity around the clock.

If an electricity market is going to be economically sustainable for investors and consumers...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kensilverstein/2014/02/06/nuclear-energy-operators-say-market-stacked-against-them/

[kristopher]

2. “Barbarians at the Gates or Utility 2.0.”

Distributed Generation Complicates Resource Planning for Utilities
Utilities might lobby for state regulatory tweaks, Dominion exec says

Wayne Barber, GenerationHub
February 24, 2014

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Distributed generation is complicating the previously straightforward task of resource planning, a Dominion (NYSE ) official told a Washington, D.C., gathering Feb. 20.

“Even in Virginia, where the sun doesn’t shine like it does in Arizona,” and rates are relatively low, more customers are choosing to produce power during daylight hours via rooftop solar, said David Shuford of Dominion Resource Services.

Shuford, the company’s vice president of policy and business evaluation, said this further complicates utility integrated resource planning. Regulated utilities already use an analytical “crystal ball” to predict population growth and economic trends.

Now, however, utilities also have to estimate how many people in their regulated territory might employ distributed generation through rooftop solar in coming years.

Shuford appeared at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. as part of a presentation sponsored by ICF International, a technology, policy and management consulting firm. ICF dubbed the presentation, “Barbarians at the Gates or Utility 2.0.”

....

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2014/02/distributed-generation-complicates-resource-planning-for-utilities?cmpid=SolarNL-Tuesday-February25-2014

[kristopher]

3. Nuclear Energy Operators Say Market Stacked Against Them

Nuclear Energy Operators Say Market Stacked Against Them


When Entergy ETR -0.85% Corp. made its decision to close its Vermont Yankee nuclear facility, it opened the door to discussions on how to allow all electric generating facilities fair access to the markets. The utility says that the action it has taken could become more widespread unless system operators make corrections.

Grid operators, or those who order up power and schedule those deliveries across the transmission lines, want to ensure that regions have ample and reliable electricity supplies. The downfall of any facility that runs 24-7 erodes those goals, especially if the energy source is carbon-free and helping the Northeastern states meet their climate objectives.

“Markets have to address these issues or you will see a fallout of perfectly well-run units such as Vermont Yankee, and potentially others,” says Bill Mohl, who heads Entergy’s merchant nuclear operations in Massachusetts, Michigan, New York and Vermont. “You can’t stack the market with state regulations and environmental policies and expect competitive fuel sources to effectively compete.”

Mohl’s contentions: The abundance of shale gas has resulted in sustained low natural gas and wholesale energy prices while market designs especially in the Northeast have resulted in artificially low energy prices. That’s a vague reference, in part, to wind energy that is subsidized and that does not provide electricity around the clock.

If an electricity market is going to be economically sustainable for investors...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kensilverstein/2014/02/06/nuclear-energy-operators-say-market-stacked-against-them/