South Carolina’s nuclear power to get ever more costly

“The cost trends clearly suggest that nuclear reactor construction is not only more costly than the alternatives today, but will be a great deal more costly than many more alternatives in the future,”

Report: Gov’t incentives favor nuclear over renewable energy in SC The State, South Carolina, 15, 2013 By SAMMY FRETWELL — COLUMBIA, SC — As SCE&G and other utilities work to complete atomic power plants, the law that made construction possible gives power companies less incentive to use solar, wind and other forms of alternative energy.

That’s one conclusion in a broad study that criticizes the way South Carolina, Georgia and Florida have helped utilities afford the multi-billion dollar costs of building nuclear power plants.

The report, released Thursday through the Vermont’ Law School, said ratepayers in the three Southern states are being soaked for the high costs of building atomic reactors. It recommends that the nuclear reactor projects be cancelled to save money in the long run because the projects are still years from completion and will cost billions more than originally projected. SCE&G is spending $10 billion on two new reactors at Jenkinsville because of a special financing method allowed by the state Legislature six years ago. Already, the company has incurred more than $280 million in extra costs building the plants, the report said. The plants are expected to become operational in 2017 and 2018.

Historically, utilities have had to show that power plants are up and running properly before they could recover the costs for construction, Vermont researchers said. Now, laws adopted in South Carolina, Georgia and Florida have allowed utilities to charge ratepayers for nuclear power plants before the reactors are built.

That takes away most of the risk of building the nuclear plants – and that could affect the rise of alternative energy, including solar power, according to the study by Vermont Law School economic analyst Mark Cooper….South Carolina, which produces a greater percentage of nuclear energy than most states, also has some of the most restrictive policies against solar energy in the country and routinely has scored low in national rankings of its willingness to embrace solar energy, The State newspaper reported last fall.

In the past, utilities have either opposed alternative energy legislation or stood by as bills died in the Legislature, the newspaper found. Power companies, whom critics say fear competition, spoke last month against a bill to make solar energy more affordable for consumers – and a House committee quickly derailed the bill.

While solar energy remains expensive for homeowners to install, the Vermont report said the costs of sun power are dropping, even as the costs of nuclear construction are rising – and that trend is expected to continue. But South Carolina is focused on nuclear, the report said.

The report said the only states that have moved forward aggressively on new nuclear projects are those with laws allowing the plants to be financed through ratepayers upfront, rather than traditional forms of financing…