Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
evidently some projects are moving forward in spite of what some pleople think........ Nuclear Power in the USA
Several projects have proceeded to engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contracts while the relevant COL applications are being processed:
The AP1000 consortium of Westinghouse and the Shaw Group in April 2008 signed an EPC contract with Georgia Power for two new 1100 MWe AP1000 nuclear units at the existing Vogtle site in Georgia. It already has two 1215 MWe reactors on the site. The units are expected to enter commercial operation in 2016 and 2017.
Six weeks later Westinghouse and Shaw signed a second EPC contract with South Carolina Electricity & Gas and Santee Cooper to build two new 1117 MWe AP1000 reactors at their VC Summer, SC site, which already has one 966 MWe unit. Total cost of $9.8 billion includes forecast inflation and owners' costs for site preparation, contingencies and project financing, all of which would approximately double the bare plant costs. The units are expected to enter commercial operation in 2016 and 2019.
At the end of December 2008 Westinghouse and Shaw signed a third EPC contract with Progress Energy Florida to build two 1105 MWe AP1000 units on a greenfield site in Levy county, Florida. The contract is for $7.65 billion ($3462/kW), of an overall project cost of about $14 billion, including land, inflation, site preparation, licensing, financing costs and fuel. A further $3 billion will be required for transmission infrastructure. The reactors would go on line over 2016-18. A final decision to build will be made when NRC issues a COL for the project, about 2012.
Lot of talk, not anybody actually committed to building a plant. During that time way more wind capacity is brought on line each year ~ 8,000 MW last year alone.
I'm all for companies stepping up and building nukes as long as they bear the risk of cost overruns. IMO nuclear is an acceptable technology.
What it sho0ws is that parties can actually stick to a disasterous plan come hell or high water until it kills the country rather than say they were wrong. The rest of the world has certainly gone nuclear with France making 70% of their elctric power that way now.
It does. Wind projects are built by third party developers. Prior to financial closing the developer will have negotiated a fixed price contact with the host utility. Cost overruns and poor performance come out of the developers hide.
That isn't true of so called "rate base" plants -- coal and nuclear.
I noticed that Seabrook Station here in NH is no longer owned by Public Service of NH but by a private company based in Georgia. I do not see why new nuclear power plants cannot be built by private companies and sell the power to the utility for distribution and resale. The cost over runs can be eliminated by a ban on obstructionist lawsuits, design changes and good construction management. I would prefer the power plants be built by private sector construction companies but owned and operated by a government agency styled on the TVA. The associated fuel reprocessing plants would also be built by private contractors and owned and operated by the Nuclear Power Agency. In this way the private sector would benefit from the construction while the operations and fuel would always be under government control and provide a real cost of generation for the utility rate setting agencies.
Cost overruns and poor performance come out of the developers hide.
Fail. Do you really think people are stupid enough to believe that? Maybe you do because you keep repeating it.
Do a search for PTC and ITC and educate yourself about the massive amount of subsidation wind gets.
Here's an article from an enviro site for some current information:
Quote:
Production Tax Credit for Renewable Energy | Union of Concerned Scientists
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (H.R. 1), signed into law by President Obama on February 17, 2009, extended the production tax credits (PTC) and investment tax credits (ITC), which have been critical to the growth of the renewable energy sector, and added a new a new incentive, Treasury grants taken in lieu of tax credits, designed to promote the growth of renewables despite the economic downturn.
Of course this has alreeady been pointed out but you contiue to post the same nonsense over and over.
Quote:
... in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.
Fail again, an investors only concern is the bottom line. A project that runs over budget is still receiving massive subsidies ultimately absorbing those costs. Private investment would dry up in a heartbeat without the subsidies.
I suggest that building and operating electric utilities at the whims of private investment is a very bad idea. We should invest public money into this industry and operate the system at cost.
I suggest that building and operating electric utilities at the whims of private investment is a very bad idea. We should invest public money into this industry and operate the system at cost.
You don't get much innovation in that case. There are some significant benefits if and when you can create a functioning market.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
