nuclear-news

Non nuclear energy strategy would save Ontario $billions

Nuclear power too costly, Ontario Clean Air Alliance argues  The Star, John Spears Business Reporter, 20 March 12, Abandoning nuclear power in favour of imported electricity from Quebec and new, high-efficiency natural gas plants, would save Ontario billions, says the Ontario Clean Air Alliance.

The money saved could be spent on health, education or other
provincial programs, the alliance argues in a new report……
Under the best-case outlook, new nuclear units would produce power at
8 cents a kilowatt hour, it says
But given the history of cost over-runs on nuclear projects an actual
cost of 19 cents or higher is more likely, it argues. (Moody’s, the
credit rating service, projects costs of 15 cents or higher, it
notes.)

What’s the alternative? The alliance says other sources are much cheaper.
Imported hydro power:…..
Conservation and efficiency:……
Combined heat and power plants:….
These plants – which generally use waste heat to produce steam for
industrial use – can also be expanded, the report argues. That costs
about 6 cents a kilowatt hour.

The cost of filling half of Ontario’s energy needs through imported
power from Quebec, plus combined heat and power plants and efficiency
would be $3.7 billion a year, the report calculates.

Meanwhile, the annual cost of the same amount of power from nuclear
units, even at 8 cents a kwh, would be $5.4 billion.

Gibbons argues that a non-nuclear strategy is also lower risk. The
risks of mega-projects like nuclear stations going over budget are
well known.

Long-term, fixed price contracts for imported power are very low risk,
he said: “Hydro Quebec is a very reliable supplier.”

Pursuing a multitude of smaller scale generation and efficiency
projects is also lower risk than nuclear mega-projects he said.

Ontario has another quick source of money, the report argues, which is
shutting down last units of the Nanticoke and Lambton coal stations
immediately. They’re due to shut down in 2014.

Ontario Power Generation has kept some units running at a loss,
because they were needed for technical reasons to balance the grid.
But the report argues that equipment put in place by Hydro One has now
eliminated that need.

That would save a subsidy of $367 million a year that OPG is now
receiving to keep coal units available.
http://www.thestar.com/business/article/1149273–nuclear-power-too-costly-ontario-clean-air-alliance-argues

March 21, 2012 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | business and costs, Canada