Are America's Environmental Groups In Favor of Anything at All?

From time to time, I've referred to a number of anti-nuclear groups as being part of the "no solutions" gang. But after decades of letting the world know what they're against, folks are starting to catch on to the fact that they're not in favor of anything that would provide energy that's both affordable and environmentally sensitive.

Here's Les McClain from the Energy Tribune (subscription required):

They hate fossil fuels. They don’t like current fuel economy standards or oil consumption rates. They are stridently opposed to drilling on the California coast, the Florida coast, and virtually all of the East Coast. They refuse to consider drilling in Alaska. They don’t like Middle Eastern oil. Oh, and they despise nuclear power.

Given this laundry list of complaints, what exactly do America’s biggest environmental groups want when it comes to energy policy? After talking to Sierra Club, Greenpeace, Environmental Defense, National Audubon Society, and the Natural Resources Defense Council, that’s mostly what we came away with: talk. They said lots about what won’t work, but very little about what will.

While that sort of stance might help raise money through direct mail, it isn't exactly helpful when it comes to planning for the future. Here's Robert McGhee, Chairman and CEO of Progress Energy:

"Some people think we can reduce consumption and meet demand with no new generation. The way I look at it is... They can afford to be wrong. But as a regulated utility, we do not have that option."

After reviewing the various policy positions of all the green groups -- with the exception of the National Resources Defense Council -- McLain comes to an interesting conclusion:

If the greens want to be seen as anything but complainers with plenty of objections to the energy policy debate but no real fixes, they need to start accepting the realities of the country's predicament, and operate within that framework to propose solutions that don't defy the numbers or bank on impracticalities. And if they really want to stop global warming, they're going to have to accept short-term solutions, like nuclear, while working toward long-term goals.

Read the rest right now.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Power, Electricity, Environment, Energy, Politics, Technology, Economics, EDF, Greenpeace, National Audobon Society, NRDC, Sierra Club

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap...

Wednesday Update

From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin...

Nuclear Utility Moves Up in Credit Ratings, Bank is "Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy"

Some positive signs that nuclear utilities can continue to receive positive ratings even while they finance new nuclear plants for the first time in decades: Wells Fargo upgrades SCANA to Outperform from Market Perform Wells analyst says, "YTD, SCG shares have underperformed the Regulated Electrics (total return +2% vs. +9%). Shares trade at 11.3X our 10E EPS, a modest discount to the peer group median of 11.8X. We view the valuation as attractive given a comparatively constructive regulatory environment and potential for above-average long-term EPS growth prospects ... Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy. SCG plans to participate in the development of two regulated nuclear units at a cost of $6.3B, raising legitimate concerns regarding financing and construction. We have carefully considered the risks and are comfortable with SCG’s strategy based on a highly constructive political & regulatory environment, manageable financing needs stretched out over 10 years, strong partners...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog