Skip to main content

NEI's 2007 Wall Street Briefing

This morning in Manhattan, NEI conducted its annual Wall Street Briefing. Details from the NEI press release:
The challenge of building the new nuclear power plants that the nation needs will require innovative financing approaches and constructive input to the federal government from the financial community, among others, nuclear energy industry leaders told Wall Street analysts here today.

As the industry prepares federal license applications for more than 30 new plants and invests heavily in design and engineering work and the procurement of long-lead time plant components like reactor vessels, it also is striving to extract the value intended by Congress from the Energy Policy Act of 2005, Nuclear Energy Institute President and CEO Frank L. (Skip) Bowman said at NEI’s annual briefing for the financial community.

The legislation provides limited investment incentives for construction of new nuclear plants and other high-capital-cost clean energy technologies. But it does not by itself resolve all financing challenges, particularly with regard to the Department of Energy’s implementation of the clean technology-neutral loan guarantee program that the energy bill authorized, he said.

“The construction period is when a new nuclear project most needs credit support,” Bowman said. “Unfortunately, the Department of Energy’s interim guidelines published last year were developed without input from companies with financial expertise, and are not optimal for large power projects. So we must continue to work cooperatively with the agency as it moves forward. Constructive input from credible organizations and institutions, including the financial community, will be essential to making this program a success.”

Properly implemented, the loan guarantee program will reduce financing costs and thus reduce our consumers’ cost of electricity from the project, Bowman said.

Anthony Earley, the chairman and CEO of DTE Energy and chairman of the NEI board of directors, said the business challenges facing the industry are manageable.

“In fact, the business challenges facing nuclear energy are not necessarily larger or more formidable than those facing coal or natural gas or any other source of electric power,” Earley said.

“The climate for nuclear power is changing. We have a more complete understanding of the business risks associated with new nuclear plant construction than ever before. And I am confident in our ability to manage those risks.”

DTE two weeks ago announced its plans to submit an application to build a possible new nuclear plant to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. It is among 15 companies and consortia that are preparing license applications for as many as 33 new reactors that would be built over the next 10-20 years. By the end of this year, the industry will have invested more than $2 billion in preparing license applications, procuring long-lead components and equipment and design and engineering on advanced-design plants, Bowman said.

Currently, 103 nuclear plants operating in 31 states supply electricity to one of every five U.S. homes and businesses. Early estimates for 2006 show that they produced the second-highest amount of electricity in the industry’s history—about 787 billion kilowatt-hours (kwh)—and posted a record-low electricity production cost for fuel and operations and maintenance expenses—1.66 cents/kwh.

As the industry continues to achieve excellence in operations, it also sees growing bipartisan support, particularly among leaders in the new Congress, Bowman said. He noted comments made recently by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who told the House Science Committee recently, “In the early days of my life in Congress, I was an opponent of nuclear energy because of questions on how to dispose of the waste. Your question is good because the technology has changed, and I bring a more open mind to that subject now because I think we should look at this technology, and compare it to the alternatives…it has to be on the table.”

Bowman said that the industry is seeing renewed interest at the state level as well. Supportive legislation has passed or is being considered in Georgia, Iowa, Wisconsin, Florida, Virginia, Kansas, South Carolina and Texas.

“We see increasing evidence that state political leaders and policymakers recognize the value of a diverse energy portfolio that includes new nuclear plants,” he said.
For a copy of the presentation, which is filled with plenty of interesting and insightful data, click here (MS Word).


gunter said…

DOE's Bodman has indicated that even with EPACT 2005 money the revised projected time-to-completion for the first of these new white elephants has already slipped from 2010 to 2014. And nobody is even out of the starting gate with an COL application.

The record already shows that industry projected cost-of-completion at $1500-$2000/KW is not achieveable and being revised upward... Japan's new construction cost in 2003 dollars was $1796-$2827/KW.

In the words of Talking Heads:
"same as it ever was... same as it ever was..."

gunter, nirs
Rod Adams said…
There is no doubt that the estimated cost of large scale nuclear plants is higher today than it was a couple of years ago.

There is also no doubt that the same cost increases are affecting other large scale energy projects. Here are a few headlines for you.

Feb 21, 2007 - MSNBC "Exxon cancels gas-to-liquids project in Qatar" (Here is the stated reason: "When the first agreement between Exxon and Qatar was signed in July 2004, the GTL project's estimated cost was $7bn. Since then, costs across the industry have risen sharply, threatening its profitability.")

Feb 18, 2007 - The Desert Sun "Curtailing of oil sands conversion hurts price" (Here is some explanation from the article: Although Petro-Canada has not precluded future sales, the company believes that the substantial oil price drop and the increased cost of conversion since November have depressed values at this time.

Although most observers have focused on short term oil price volatility, few have addressed the incredible cost increases that have marked the utilization of this proven alternative to traditional hydrocarbon excavations.")

In other words - you bet that costs have increased for many of the basic components of nuclear plants like steel, concrete, and labor. It is also true that it is going to take a long time to build the plants.

We should have started a long time ago! Ever feel any guilt, Mr. Gunter, that my children are breathing dirtier air than they should be breathing?

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…