Skip to main content

Why the Renewed Interest in Nuclear Energy?

One of the main drivers behind the passage of the 2005 Energy Policy Act was the inclusion of incentives (investment protection, production tax credits and the like) electric utilities said were necessary to spur the building of new baseload generating capacity like coal and nuclear.

If the activity since the bill was signed into law this past August is any indication, the law is working exactly as intended. Accounting for the announcements made by Duke Energy and Constellation Energy last week, there are now 10 distinct projects underway investigating the possibility of new nuclear build.

But the incentives in EPACT 2005 are only part of the story. Another piece of the puzzle is the incredible volatility we're seeing around the world in natural gas markets. As our President and CEO Skip Bowman put it last week in a speech in Savannah, Georgia:
Even before Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, oil and natural gas prices were increasing and our energy supply and delivery infrastructure already were stressed. The hurricanes pushed that infrastructure beyond the breaking point.

Through the summer of 2005, natural gas prices were in the $6 to $7 per million BTU range—high by any standards. But last week, natural gas at one of the major trading hubs in Texas was over $13 per million BTU, and the 12-month forecast on the New York Mercantile Exchange was above $11.

In the Gulf of Mexico, 50 percent of natural gas production and 60 percent of oil production is still shut down—either because of damage to offshore platforms or to onshore infrastructure. The Gulf of Mexico accounts for approximately one-quarter of U.S. natural gas production and roughly 30 percent of oil production. Most experts believe production will not be restored fully until the end of the first quarter of 2006, at the earliest. There’s little prospect of quick relief from the pressure on natural gas supply and prices.

Louisiana and Mississippi have suffered greatly, to be sure, but our entire nation will suffer economic damage because of higher energy prices.

In those parts of the country that depend heavily on natural gas for electric power generation—Florida, the West Coast, New England—we can expect significant increases in electricity prices. One Florida electric utility reported last week that its fuel costs have increased by about one-third this year. This, in turn, will increase the cost of electricity to commercial and industrial users by 25 to 40 percent.
For many Americans, it looks to be an expensive Winter, as consumers who use natural gas to heat their homes will have to compete for access to a constrained supply with utilities who use natural gas to generate electricity as well as industrial users who use natural gas as a feedstock.

But it isn't only natural gas prices that are roiling markets. We've seen similar price volatility in coal markets since the late 1990s and some coal prices have doubled in the last 24 months. And there are other hidden costs as well. In emission trading markets, allowances for SO2 or sulfur dioxide have quadrupled in just 26 months between December 2003 and October 2005.

If you had to put the reasons for the revival of interest in nuclear energy on the back of an index card, it would read as follows:

1) Nuclear energy produces large amounts of baseload (24x7) power at competitive prices -- unlike many renewable sources of energy that simply can't provide the heavy lift that nuclear provides on the electric grid;

2) Because fuel costs make up such a small share of nuclear production costs, nuclear energy provides tremendous forward price stability -- an attribute with significant value in a volatile commodity market;

3) Because of its emission-free character, nuclear energy has a significant clean air compliance value -- something that will only become more important in what is sure to become a carbon constrained world.

Technorati tags: , , , , , , ,


Justin said…

i was wondering why can't any nuclear-related article be found in your blog about iran's nuclear programs. i believe there is no way iranian government is making bombs. because India, Pakistan, North Korea, Israel, even China have nuclear bombs but no one is afraid. however when iran touches on nuclear energy Bush administration and UN gets annoyed.

i know iranian people well enough to tell that a bomb that is targeted toward killing human in mass is unacceptable in their culture and belief. they are more brave than you might assume; they choose to fight with swords if they think using bomb will kill any body innocent.

in Iraq-Iran war the only targets for Iranian bombs were in agreed fighting lines and none of them ever reached Baghdad or any other city with people. But Iraq bombarded tehran everyday and other cities as well.

The energy demand is rising in finland, japan, uk, italy, and in iran as well. i will be glad to see more politically justified facts on your blog next time i visit it.

anyway, nice blog guys.
Rorschach said…
Who says nobody is afraid of Pakistan, NK, India or China? Personally I think they are all loose cannons on the world stage. China has been spending BILLIONS of dollars to build up thier military at a time in which nobody threatens them. That leads me to believe that they plan to take something away from someone else. My bet is either Siberia or Australia, or perhaps both. NK's economy is shot to hell, thier people are starving, but yet instead of buying food, they build bombs. WHY? Nobody threatens them. They must be planning to threaten someone else, my bet is SK. anything to deflect attention away from the fact they are starving to death. "The Great Leader" is as megalomaniacal and unbalanced as they come. The world will be far safer place when he has had a 7.62 mm lead injection to the cerebellum. The same is true for the leaders of Iran, Pakistan and India as well.
Joshua Giordano said…
Nice article. I was wondering if you could tell me which area of govt. will be paying for most of the 2005 Energy Law subsidies?

For instance, there is a subsidy that supports cost overruns up to $500M. Is the check written by the DOE, FERC, NRC.... personal check from the president??

Popular posts from this blog

Making Clouds for a Living

Donell Banks works at Southern Nuclear’s Plant Vogtle units 3 and 4 as a shift supervisor in Operations, but is in the process of transitioning to his newly appointed role as the daily work controls manager. He has been in the nuclear energy industry for about 11 years.

I love what I do because I have the unique opportunity to help shape the direction and influence the culture for the future of nuclear power in the United States. Every single day presents a new challenge, but I wouldn't have it any other way. As a shift supervisor, I was primarily responsible for managing the development of procedures and programs to support operation of the first new nuclear units in the United States in more than 30 years. As the daily work controls manager, I will be responsible for oversight of the execution and scheduling of daily work to ensure organizational readiness to operate the new units.

I envision a nuclear energy industry that leverages the technology of today to improve efficiency…

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Nuclear: Energy for All Political Seasons

The electoral college will soon confirm a surprise election result, Donald Trump. However, in the electricity world, there are fewer surprises – physics and economics will continue to apply, and Republicans and Democrats are going to find a lot to like about nuclear energy over the next four years.

In a Trump administration, the carbon conversation is going to be less prominent. But the nuclear value proposition is still there. We bring steady jobs to rural areas, including in the Rust Belt, which put Donald Trump in office. Nuclear plants keep the surrounding communities vibrant.

We hold down electricity costs for the whole economy. We provide energy diversity, reducing the risk of disruption. We are a critical part of America’s industrial infrastructure, and the importance of infrastructure is something that President-Elect Trump has stressed.

One of our infrastructure challenges is natural gas pipelines, which have gotten more congested as extremely low gas prices have pulled m…