nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Santee Cooper finalizes settlement over leftover material at failed SC nuclear project

Santee Cooper finalizes settlement over leftover material at failed SC nuclear project, Post and Courier, By Andrew Brown abrown@postandcourier.com, Aug 31, 2020  

Santee Cooper may finally be able to recover some of the money it dumped into two unfinished nuclear reactors in South Carolina.

The board of the Moncks Corner power provider finalized a settlement this weekend with Westinghouse Electric that will enable the state-run utility to sell off leftover parts and materials from the failed expansion of the V.C. Summer project.

The settlement, which has been in the works for months, requires Santee Cooper and Westinghouse to split the profits from any remaining equipment that could be used on another site. …….

…….  The state-run utility still has more than $3.6 billion in bonds tied to construction at V.C. Summer, and Santee Cooper’s leadership said any proceeds from the nuclear equipment will go toward paying down that debt……..

The V.C. Summer project is widely considered one of the worst business failures in South Carolina history.

Santee Cooper was the minority owner of the project. It partnered on the unfinished reactors with Cayce-based South Carolina Electric & Gas, which was sold to Dominion Energy after construction was halted in mid-2017 after years of delays and cost overruns.

The two South Carolina utilities spent more than $9 billion on construction before the reactors were abandoned in July 2017.

By that time, Westinghouse had filed for bankruptcy and left the struggling project in the laps of SCE&G and Santee Cooper. As a result, electric customers for both utilities are still paying off debt tied to the abandoned project.

The amount of material left over from the two unfinished nuclear reactors is vast, and there’s one big reason for that. By the time SCE&G and Santee Cooper pulled the plug on the project, they had already purchased more than 90 percent of the parts. Yet only a third of the reactors were actually built.  ………….https://www.postandcourier.com/business/santee-cooper-reaches-settlement-over-leftover-material-at-failed-sc-nuclear-project/article_8d01c2e4-eba1-11ea-a8d5-5fad5583ac38.html…..

September 1, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, legal, USA | Leave a comment

Duke Energy Has Squandered Billions in Failed Natural Gas and Nuclear Projects,

Report: Duke Energy Has Squandered Billions in Failed Natural Gas and Nuclear Projects, Alex Formuzis, alex@ewg.org, EWG, 31 Aug 20, WASHINGTON – Since 2013, Duke Energy and its partners have scrapped natural gas pipelines and nuclear power plants totaling $11.6 billion, according to a new report by the Environmental Working Group.

For most businesses, this record of blowing billions of dollars on one failed project and boondoggle after another would send finances reeling and the executives in charge packing.

But not when you are the nation’s largest investor-owned electric utility, with a captive ratepayer base of 7.7 million across six states, and state lawmakers and regulators in your pocket who let you pass those losses onto customers through new fees and rate increases………………

Failed, costly projects like the ACP and the Edwardsport plant are business as usual for Duke, from the cancelled Lee nuclear plant in South Carolina to the cancelled Levy and shuttered Crystal River nuclear plants in Florida.

Plans for the construction of the Levy plant first began in 2006 under Progress Energy, which merged with Duke in 2012. The original estimate was $5 billion to $6 billion. By the time of the merger, the price tag had grown to $24 billion and the in-service date was pushed back eight years, to 2024.

Even in the face of overruns nearly five times higher than the original cost estimates, Duke was unfazed, pressing the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a license to build and operate the plant. The NRC granted Duke’s request in 2016, but that same year the utility announced it would halt production. Florida regulators allowed Duke to charge customers $800 million for a plant that never delivered a kilowatt of electricity.

To drag Duke and other utilities into the clean energy future, politicians and regulators must disrupt the monopoly model that has ceded control of energy to profit-first corporations. Electricity rates should be tied to efforts to increase efficiency and promote renewables like rooftop and community solar – both of which Duke has fought to deny the captive ratepayers in its vast expansive service area. And stockholders, not ratepayers, should bear the costs and risks of big capital projects.

###

The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action. Visit www.ewg.org for more information.       https://www.ewg.org/energy/release/23293/report-duke-energy-has-squandered-billions-failed-natural-gas-and-nuclear

September 1, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment

The closure of Hunterston B will not cause power network outages

August 31, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, UK | Leave a comment

If the arms treaty with Russia ends USA will spend even more than the planned $1.2 trillion on nuclear weapons

August 27, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, politics international, USA, weapons and war | 1 Comment

Lehi City Council backs out of NuScam ‘small’ nuclear reactor project

Lehi City Council votes to back out of nuclear power project contract, Herald Extra,   By Connor Richards Daily Herald  26 Aug 20, 

The Lehi City Council voted unanimously Tuesday to withdraw the city from a multiagency nuclear power project that would provide nuclear power to cities across Utah, citing concerns over increasing costs.

The Carbon Free Power Project is an initiative by Oregon-based NuScale Power, the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems and the United States Department of Energy to build a small modular reactor power plant at the Idaho National Laboratory………

Earlier this month, the Utah Taxpayer Association called on cities to withdraw from the project ahead of the Sept. 14 deadline after a closed-door virtual town hall meeting on July 21 where officials warned of project delays, increased costs to cities and towns involved, and “dependence on unpredictable federal subsidies.”

“The UAMPS project will lock in 27 municipalities in Utah and several in surrounding states for a share of billions of dollars in costs and unclear risk in the pursuit of a cluster of small modular reactors (SMRs) touted by Oregon-based NuScale Power, which repeatedly has delayed timelines and increased costs associated with its SMRs,” Utah Taxpayer Association Vice President Rusty Cannon said in an Aug. 4 news release. “The risky project with massive cost escalations is being conducted largely out of the public eye.”

Earlier this month, the Utah Taxpayer Association called on cities to withdraw from the project ahead of the Sept. 14 deadline after a closed-door virtual town hall meeting on July 21 where officials warned of project delays, increased costs to cities and towns involved, and “dependence on unpredictable federal subsidies.”

“The UAMPS project will lock in 27 municipalities in Utah and several in surrounding states for a share of billions of dollars in costs and unclear risk in the pursuit of a cluster of small modular reactors (SMRs) touted by Oregon-based NuScale Power, which repeatedly has delayed timelines and increased costs associated with its SMRs,” Utah Taxpayer Association Vice President Rusty Cannon said in an Aug. 4 news release. “The risky project with massive cost escalations is being conducted largely out of the public eye.”

In November 2017, the total cost of the project was estimated at $3.6 billion. By November 2019, that number had increased to $4.2 billion. By July, the estimated cost had gone up to $6.1 billion.

That would cost Lehi $466 million at the city’s current subscription levels, Eves said. UAMPS would be responsible for paying $4.8 billion, while the DOE would pay $1.3 billion and NuScale Power would pay $5 million.  …………  https://www.heraldextra.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/lehi-city-council-votes-to-back-out-of-nuclear-power-project-contract/article_0af6e67c-24e5-5427-9029-e52b9f9d63ae.html

August 27, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, politics, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, USA | Leave a comment

City in Northern Utah pulls out of NuScam small nuclear reactors project

Northern Utah city opts out of planned nuclear power project over money concerns     Deseret News, Amy Joi O’Donoghue @Amyjoi  16  Aug 24, 2020, 

SALT LAKE CITY — Cost concerns over Logan’s participation in a next-generation nuclear power plant planned at Idaho National Laboratory led the city to withdraw from the project, and Lehi is considering a similar move in its council meeting Tuesday.

“My concerns were many and varied,” Logan Finance Director Richard Anderson said of last week’s decision

…….  changes in funding by the U.S. Department of Energy for the Carbon Free Power Project caused Anderson concern, as it did for Mark Montgomery, the city’s light and power director, and prompted both of them to recommend Logan withdraw its participation.

“We don’t have the experience to be swimming in these waters. I didn’t feel good about it,” Anderson said.  

The city, as a member of the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems, invested $400,000 and
was due to commit another $654,000 by Sept. 14 or vote to bow out altogether.
……..  The project is backed heavily by the U.S. Department of Energy, which gave NuScale a competitive award of $226 million in 2013 to develop the technology. Two years later, the federal agency gave NuScale $16.7 million for licensing preparation.

Ultimately, the energy department committed to spend $1.4 billion on the project with an eye toward reducing carbon emissions, combating climate change and to position the country as a world leader in nuclear technology.

But critics say the proposed 720-megawatt plant is too risky and ratepayers — hence taxpayers — should not be footing the cost for technology they say is yet to be proven.

LaVarr Webb, spokesman for the municipal power association, said the investment schedule was specifically designed with these exit opportunities if cities or special districts become nervous.

The project, he added, will not proceed if costs prove too high.

The project has also come under criticism for what some say is a lack of transparency.

Earlier this month, the Utah Taxpayers Association urged cities to withdraw ahead of the deadline and complained about meetings in which groups were turned away unless they were project participants.

Rusty Cannon, vice president of Utah Taxpayers Association, said because the municipal power association is exempt from Utah’s open meeting laws, it can close its doors to others.

“We asked to observe a recent meeting and were denied access. That is the same response many others have also received,” Cannon said.

While association leaders have spent hours on video calls with the association and others, Cannon said that format does not provide the same answers.

Webb said meetings in which non-project participants were turned away, with perhaps the exception of one, are in line with why other governmental entities can close meetings under Utah law, such as contractual issues, litigation or personnel issues.

On Tuesday in Lehi, the City Council will consider a resolution outlining the city’s withdrawal from the project…….   https://www.deseret.com/utah/2020/8/24/21399537/northern-utah-city-opts-out-of-planned-nuclear-power-project-over-money-concerns

August 25, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, USA | Leave a comment

Philippines wary of nuclear power: costs to be borne by tax-payer

August 25, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, Philippines | Leave a comment

Installing solar PV can increase house prices by an average of £32,459 across the UK.

Solar Power Portal 21st Aug 2020, The value of residential solar has been touted after new research revealed
that the technology can boost the value of houses by over £30,000. The
research comes from EffectiveHome.co.uk, a website dedicated to providing
information and guidance for homeowners regarding solar. It found that
installing solar PV can increase house prices by an average of £32,459
across the UK. Houses in London see the biggest increase, with the value
jumping by £90,000. The country’s capital therefore has the largest
increase in value of the ten largest cities in the UK, followed by Bristol
(£45,142), Edinburgh (£40,095) and Leicester (£31,577).

https://www.solarpowerportal.co.uk/news/residential_solar_boosts_house_prices_by_average_of_30000

August 23, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, decentralised, UK | Leave a comment

City of Logan cuts its losses, withdraws from risky NuScam “small” nuclear reactor project

Logan withdraws from risky nuclear power project, Cache Valley Daily  Charlie Schill August 19, 2020  LOGAN – Members of the Logan City Council voted Tuesday to end the city’s partnership in an increasingly expensive nuclear power project.

As a member of the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS), Logan City owned a partial interest in a first-of-its-kind nuclear plant proposed to be constructed at the Idaho National Laboratory.

Faced with Sept. 15 deadline to ante up more funding for the risky project, both Mark Montgomery, the city’s light and power director, and Logan Finance Director Richard Anderson recommended that Logan withdraw from the Carbon Free Power Project…….

Montgomery told city council members that Logan had invested about $400,000 in the Small Modular Reactor (SMR) project since 2017. If the city had opted to continue its participation in the project into its initial licensing phase through 2023, the price tag would have been another $654,000.

In early August, the Utah Taxpayers Association urged all Utah cities to reconsider their participation in the SMR project due to its potential for out–of-control costs………

In the original CFPP proposal, the U.S. Department of Energy was to foot the bill for the development of the project’s first module. After pledging up to $1.4 billion for those expenses, federal officials have since backed out of that agreement, leaving UAMPS holding the bag for the project’s first-of-its-kind risks.

Montgomery added that estimated cost of the project have also escalated since 2017, jumping from $3.6 billion to $6.1 billion as of July of this year……… https://www.cachevalleydaily.com/news/archive/2020/08/19/logan-withdraws-from-risky-nuclear-power-project/#.X0BMOOgzbIU

August 22, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, USA | Leave a comment

UK relations with China at a low point; bad news for nuclear power projects

August 22, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, China, politics international, UK | Leave a comment

Climate, weather extremes, threaten nuclear reactors, and costs of preparing for them are increasing

Dozens of US nuclear power plants at risk due to climate change: Moody’s, S and P Global, Author Steven Dolley     Washington Editor,  Keiron Greenhalgh 19 Aug 20

HIGHLIGHTS

37 GW of nuclear capacity at risk from flooding

48 GW at risk from heat, water stress

Merchant plants have fewer options to recover mitigation costs

Washington — Dozens of US nuclear power plants, comprising nearly half the country’s operational nuclear generating capacity, “will face growing credit risks” in the next 10 to 20 years due to flooding, hurricanes, heat stress and other predicted impacts of climate change, Moody’s Investors Service said in a report Aug. 18.

“The consequences of climate change can affect every aspect of nuclear plant operations – from fuel handling and power and steam generation to maintenance, safety systems and waste processing,” the report said, noting that “the severity of these risks will vary by region, with the ultimate credit impact depending on the ability of plant operators to invest in mitigating measures to manage these risks.”

Moody’s did not specify mitigation measures that are being, or should be, taken.

Water cooling needs expose plants to the risk of flooding, sea-level rise and hurricanes, and “about 37 gigawatts (GW) of US nuclear capacity [have] elevated exposure to flood risk,” Moody’s said.

Also, the report noted, “rising heat and water stress can have an adverse impact on plant operations,” with “about 48 GW of nuclear capacity [having] elevated exposure to combined rising heat and water stress.”

“Regulated or cost-based nuclear plants,” comprising about 55 GW of capacity in the US, “face elevated heat and water stress across most locations, with moderate to high risk of floods, hurricanes, and sea level rise for certain coastal plants,” Moody’s said. However, it added: “The credit impact of these climate risks is likely to be more modest for operators of these nuclear plants, relative to market-based plants, because they have the ability to recoup costs through rate recovery mechanisms.”

By contrast, “market-based plants,” with a total of about 44 GW of capacity, “face elevated heat stress and more water stress than regulated/cost-based plants, with fewer plants at risk of floods and hurricanes,” it said.

The highest risk, or “red flag,” category includes plants that are “highly exposed to historical and/or projected risks, indicating high potential for negative impacts,” Moody’s said.

According to the report, five plants with a combined capacity of about 9.1 GW are in the red flag category for floods. Some 13 plants with a combined capacity of about 23.8 GW were found to be at red-flag risk for heat stress. The categories of hurricanes, sea level rise and water stress each had one plant expected to be at red-flag risk.

Because some US nuclear units “are seeking to extend their operations by 20, or even 40 years,” Moody’s said, “operators will have to consider these risks when implementing resilience measures.”………. https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/electric-power/081820-dozens-of-us-nuclear-power-plants-at-risk-due-to-climate-change-moodys

August 20, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, climate change, USA | Leave a comment

Hitachi renews interest in Wylfa nuclear project, wants government assurance on funding

Hitachi seeks to resurrect Welsh nuclear plant plans, Ft.com, 16 Aug 20, 

Japanese industrial group wants clarity from UK ministers on financing model,

Hitachi is talking to the UK government about resurrecting plans for a nuclear power plant in north Wales, which were frozen at the start of last year.

 Horizon Nuclear Power, a UK-based subsidiary of Hitachi, has been holding “detailed conversations” with the government in recent weeks to persuade ministers that the proposed Wylfa Newydd plant on Anglesey could be quickly re-mobilised if they can produce a new financing model for large nuclear power stations in Britain.
 Hitachi suspended the £20bn Wylfa project at the start of 2019 after failing to reach an agreement over financing. The Japanese group decided at the time the project still posed “too great a commercial challenge”, despite the UK government offering to take a one-third equity stake and provide debt financing.
But Hitachi has maintained a skeleton staff at Horizon and continued to pursue planning permission for Wylfa after the government launched a review into a “regulated asset base” funding model, which would see consumers pay upfront through their energy bills for a new plant and significantly reduce the construction risk for developers.
 There has also been talk in the industry of the state taking majority stakes in nuclear schemes, which could enable developers such as Horizon to become contractors. A decision on Wylfa’s planning application is expected by the end of next month.   ……….
the clock is also ticking for Horizon, which has to submit a business plan to its parent company by December before its funding expires early next year. It wants clarity from government on its nuclear strategy and a potential funding model by the autumn, when ministers had been expected to publish a delayed energy white paper and national infrastructure strategy.
 If sufficient commitment isn’t forthcoming, Mr Hawthorne conceded it would be “easy” for Hitachi to “say we’re out of here” and sell the site, raising fears CGN could potentially move in. …….
Environment activists insist Britain should not be pursuing large new nuclear plants as other forms of power generation, such as offshore wind, are substantially cheaper.  https://www.ft.com/content/6ec9bdb2-8b5b-4aa3-ad51-a799734273f2

August 17, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, politics, UK | Leave a comment

Nothing is more expensive than nuclear power

Readers sound off on the costliness of nuclear power, By VOICE OF THE PEOPLE, NEW YORK DAILY NEWS |AUG 15, 2020    

Nuclear is not so cost-effective

Manhattan: Re “The inconvenient truth: We need nuclear” (op-ed, Aug. 10): Nothing is more expensive than nuclear power. Estimates for the cleanup of Japan’s 2011 Fukushima disaster range as high as $300 billion, albeit total removal of radioactivity from that land, and ocean, is impossible. In Japan, as everywhere, the costs of such disasters are born by the taxpayer, not the utility companies: There is no such thing as a $300 billion insurance policy.

The cost of creating nuclear-waste storage sites (we don’t know how to do that, so we don’t have any) will also be borne by the taxpayer. And, transporting nuclear waste from 95 reactors in 29 states to storage sites yields a high likelihood of spills. Today, the waste is stored at reactor sites, many of which show signs of leaking. Additionally, it is not possible to “shut down” nuclear reactors even after they have run their life spans. They remain a radioactive danger indefinitely, and will always require flawless maintenance of containment domes — assuming we design domes that can function indefinitely.

The Indian Point power plant, where numerous leaks and mechanical breakdowns have already occurred, is 36 miles from Midtown Manhattan. Since there is no way to evacuate NYC in the event of a serious accident, no such plan exists. Not to mention that Indian Point is already years past its original 40-year operating permit. The list of nuclear power’s unsolvable problems is much longer than this. Per capita, no country consumes and wastes more energy than the U.S. Let’s stop that. Ingrid Eisenstadter   https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-letter-august-15-20200815-z5emj4x33zaclka7efi4et3mme-story.html

August 17, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, USA | Leave a comment

Alberta premier’s small nukes pipe dream makes no economic sense.

Look Over There! Jason Kenney’s Phoney Nuclear Power Distraction   Why the Alberta premier’s small nukes pipe dream makes no economic sense., David Climenhaga 14 Aug 20,  | TheTyee.ca   

When Alberta Premier Jason Kenney says small nuclear reactors “could be a game changer in providing safe, zero-emitting, baseload power in many areas of the province,” as he did this week in a tweet, he’s pulling your leg…….

No electrical utility is ever going to buy one unless they are forced to by government policy or regulation — the kind of thing Alberta’s United Conservative Party purports to oppose……..

Small nuclear reactors are not as cheap to build as the premier’s fairy tale suggests.

Bringing an acceptable small nuclear reactor design all the way from the drawing board to approval by a national nuclear regulatory authority will cost hundreds of millions of dollars.

While dozens of speculative companies are printing colourful brochures with pretty pictures of little nukes being trucked to their destinations, very few are serious ventures with any possibility of building an actual reactor. The United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency says diplomatically there are about 50 concepts “at different stages of development.” Those that are serious, like NuScale Power in the United States, have huge amounts of government money behind them. 

The only small nuclear reactor plant known to be operating in the world now is the Akademik Lomonosov, Russia’s floating power barge with two 35-megawatt reactors aboard. From an original estimate of US$140 million in 2006, its cost had ballooned to US$740 million when the vessel was launched last year.

The kind of small reactors Kenney is talking about won’t be cheap by any yardstick.

Small reactors are less economical to run than big reactors…….

This is why nobody wanted to buy the scaled-down CANDU-3 reactor, development of which was paid for by Canadian taxpayers in the 1980s. At 300 megawatts, they were just too small for commercial viability. A working CANDU-3 has never been built.

The cost of small reactors would have to come down significantly to change this. And remember, the research and development requirements of small reactors are just as high as for big ones. With nobody manufacturing modules, there are no existing economies of scale. In other words, dreamy brochures about the future of small reactors are just that — dreams.

By the way, in 2011 the Harper government privatized the best commercial assets of Crown-owned Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. to… wait for it… SNC-Lavalin Group Inc. Think about that every time you hear Conservatives in Ottawa screeching about the goings on at SNC-Lavalin!

Small reactor designs mostly require enriched uranium, and Canada doesn’t produce any……

Small reactors might be safer than big ones, but we don’t really know.

Kenney and Savage talk about small reactors as if it were a fact they’re safer than big reactors. Maybe they are. But we don’t really know that because nobody but the Russians actually seems to have built one, and in most cases they haven’t even been designed.

Remember, the Russians’ small reactors are both on a barge. For what it’s worth, critics have called it “Floating Chernobyl.”

Small reactors won’t be safe without public regulation……..

Then there’s the matter of waste disposal.

Nuclear plants don’t produce a lot of waste by volume, but what there is sure has the potential to cause problems for a very long time. Thousands of years and more. So safe storage is an issue with small nukes, just like it is with big ones.

Where are we going to store the waste from all these wonderful small nuclear reactors Kenney is talking about?

How many jobs is it likely to create here in Western Canada? Well, Saskatchewan’s Ministry of Environment recently posted a job for a director of small modular reactors. That person will supervise four people. That’s probably about it for jobs for the foreseeable future.

If Alberta ever ends up with the same number of people working on this, we’ll be lucky https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2020/08/13/Kenney-Nuclear-Power-Plant-Distraction/

August 15, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, Canada, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment

Nuclear blackmail in Illinois — Beyond Nuclear International

Ratepayers robbed of renewables as well as cash

Nuclear blackmail in Illinois    https://wordpress.com/read/feeds/72759838/posts/2851460456

Exelon stranglehold on energy legislation runs long and deep

By David Kraft, 9 Aug 20 

The recent Illinois lobbying corruption scandal involving Exelon Corporation, its subsidiary Commonwealth Edison and Democratic House Speaker, Michael Madigan, demonstrates the extent to which nuclear “power” is about more than electrons.

The FBI arrests of the Ohio House Speaker and five others in a $60 million bribery/corruption scheme; the $10 billion Exelon nuclear bailout in New York; the questionable circumstances surrounding Exelon’s 2016 PepCo merger; and the South Carolina $9 billion SCANA fraud case, suggest that this may be a national pandemic.

All of this was summarized nicely in a recent New York Times opinion column, “When Utility Money Talks,” (8/2/20).

However, the situation in Illinois with Exelon, and its subsidiary ComEd, has been longstanding and particularly egregious.

For decades, Exelon’s stranglehold on Illinois energy legislation, in cooperation with the currently investigated Mr. Madigan, has stuck Illinois with more reactors (14) and high-level radioactive waste (>11,000 tons) than any other state. It has also severely stifled expansion of renewable energy and energy efficiency, and hampered the Illinois energy transformation to renewables needed to deal with the worsening climate crisis.

For decades, the Illinois environmental community has seen renewables expansion thwarted because no significant renewable energy buildout could occur without concessions to either Exelon or ComEd, and without Speaker Madigan’s approval. The most recent instance was the 2016 $2.35 billion bailout of three uncompetitive Exelon reactors.

This “nuclear blackmail” politics has forced environmentalists wanting to see new legislation pass that would expand renewables, into a reluctant and grudging alliance with Exelon, but on Exelon’s terms, with capacity market “reform” rewarding both renewables and ten of the company’s operating reactors.

If passed in its presently proposed form, this new legislation would provide yet another nuclear bailout under the disguise of “market-based reform.”

To ratchet up the pressure to enact this nuclear prop-up even more, Exelon CEO Chris Crane, in Exelon’s 2Q quarterly earnings call with analysts, once again dangled the prospect of closing up to six reactors if this market-based-bailout is not granted in 2021.

Under the current ongoing FBI corruption investigation, this reluctant alliance of necessity has turned disastrous, given the political toxicity of any current association with either ComEd or Exelon.

It is just and reasonable that ComEd executives (and the so-called “bad apples” who “retired” already), should be penalized and prosecuted for their misdeeds, even if they are reportedly “cooperative.”

However, a $200 million “settlement” penalty for a $34 billion corporation, which for decades has gouged billions from Illinois ratepayers through admittedly corrupt illegal practices, is a slap on the wrist.

Further, the $200 million penalty agreement provides no restitution for the decades-long societal damage done via nuclear pay-for-play.

Illinois rate payers deserve restitution from these and any predatory, corrupt companies that would engage in such activities. This may require explicit legislation. How can one logically or ethically assert that ill-gotten gains (e.g., the 2016 $2.35 billion nuclear bailout) are still “good for the public” when bribery and corruption were used to get them?

Last Fall, a spokesperson for Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker stated, “The governor’s priority is to work with principled stakeholders on clean energy legislation that is above reproach.”  Gov. Pritzker – your moment of truth has arrived.

We urge the governor and the legislature to begin the restitution process by repealing the $2.3 billion 2016 nuclear bailout. Further, and as others like Crain’s Joe Cahill have suggested, Crane must step down completely from all functions at Exelon.

The legislature should also enact explicit utility ethics legislation, with transparent oversight of utility contracting and philanthropic giving activities, to insure that this kind of corrupt behavior is not repeated.

And if Crane’s threat of imminent reactor closure is true, then community just-transitions legislation to protect those negatively impacted communities should be a priority of the legislature.

As NEIS has maintained — and advocated since 2014 — it’s the reactor communities (and equally adversely affected coal mining and power plant communities) that need state support and bailouts when plants are threatened with closure, not profitable private corporations like Exelon.

Finally, we support the FBI’s continued investigation into the activities of Speaker Madigan, his associates, and other legislators if necessary, to ferret out the remaining political corruption that has abetted this corporate larceny.

This is the only way to send a significant and lasting message that nuclear pay-for-play in Illinois is over.

David Kraft is the director of Nuclear Energy Information Service

 

August 10, 2020 Posted by | business and costs, politics, secrets,lies and civil liberties, USA | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »