Skip to main content

How Much Is that Pony in the Window?

The purchase of a major asset, whether a car or a new power plant, frequently involves a trade off between the purchase price and operating costs. A column by Joseph B. White published in The Wall Street Journal's Eyes on the Road column on June 16, 2008 titled, "Still Waiting for Hybrids to be the Smartest Buy", updates us on the trade-off between the higher purchase price and lower fuel costs of hybrid cars like the Toyota Prius.

White shows that, even with gasoline at $4 per gallon, a typical consumer would have to drive the hybrid vehicle for more than seven years to begin to realize net savings compared to the non-hybrid alternative. Said differently, if the consumer expects to keep the vehicle for more than seven years, purchasing the hybrid could make sense economically. Interestingly, the article also mentions some of the non-economic reasons buyers offer to explain their willingness to pay a premium for a hybrid. Among them are a desire to be "greener" and gain access to commuter lanes reserved for high occupancy vehicles and hybrid cars.

Similarly, electricity suppliers are looking at the trade off between initial construction costs and fuel costs for the next generation of power plants now under consideration. While recent press reports (typical is an article in the June 11 Chattanooga Times Free Press) often highlight the cost of constructing new nuclear power plants (i.e., the initial purchase price), they seldom mention the lower, and by comparison more stable, cost of nuclear fuel (part of the operating costs).

These articles offer opportunities for eye-catching headlines, but there is much more to the story. For the consumer, the real issue is not what the initial purchase price will be, but what will be the "cost of ownership", i.e., the cost of the electricity produced by the new power plant. Our analyses and our review of outside studies indicate that the price of electricity produced by new nuclear power plants will be very competitive when they enter the market in 2016 and beyond.

Finally, as was mentioned by hybrid owners quoted in the Wall Street Journal article, there are important non-economic reasons to consider. Chief among them is the importance of maintaining diversity in our energy supply, helping to keep our electric system among the most reliable in the world. NEI has long maintained that the nation will need to tap all of the available options to meet its electricity needs, including efficiency and conservation, renewables, clean coal, and gas.

Later this week, the NEI Blog will present additional information on the cost of new nuclear power plants. Stay tuned.

UPDATE at 2:45pm, 6/17/08
A tip of the hat to our friend and former co-worker Eric McErlain who forwarded a link to an interesting mention of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) in Nashville, Tennessee this week. Thanks, Eric.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Better start building fast. It is going to take 100,000+ nuclear reactors for the rest of us to live like Al Gore..
Qzaki: 100,000 Chernobyl-type Nuclear Reactors to Sustain Al Gore's Lifestyle [XLS]
Anonymous said…
That's great! :-)

You could add:

-number of (2 MWe) wind turbines?

-tons of coal?

-sq. ft. of solar panels?

-no. of Three Gorges Dam Projects?

-no. of US electric power systems?

-or other? :-)

Anonymous said…
If one cuts the cost of the hybrid car by purchasing used, plus has a long commute, the payback time is shorter - perhaps 3 to 4 years.

Very important in this consideration is the car owner's current vehicle - both its trade-in value and gas mileage.

I spent a couple of months earlier this year where my loan-value-to-hybrid was within $1,000 of par, but I am currently sitting nicely in the black with my July 2006 purchase of an '03 Prius.

Thats a lot more than many SUV owners can say right now.

Before anyone purchases a vehicle, they should use a spreadsheet to evaluate that vehicle's potential resale value 3 years down the road, their individual commutes, and maintenance/repair costs.

I'm happy with my hybrid and am very glad I did not purchase the Mazda that caught my eye 2 years ago.
Matthew B said…
Ruth,

In 2006, you were able to purchase a used Prius for a reasonable price. Not so today, the used Prius market is pretty dry. Even fairly old ones are within a few thousand of new.
Anonymous said…
Trivia Question:

What is the only activist movement responsible for a petagram of AVOIDABLE CO2 in the atmosphere every year?

Answer: The US anti-nuclear environmental movement. Here's the calculation:

The Mother of All Carbon Footprints: Environmentalists Responsible for 1 Billion Metric Tons of CO2 Each Year [XLS]

Isn't it ironic that the very group lecturing us today is, by their own calculus, responsible for the single largest slice of avoidable CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere?!?!

Popular posts from this blog

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

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

Ohio faces a decision soon about its two nuclear reactors, Davis-Besse and Perry, and on Wednesday, neighbors of one of those plants issued a cry for help. The reactors’ problem is that the price of electricity they sell on the high-voltage grid is depressed, mostly because of a surplus of natural gas. And the reactors do not get any revenue for the other benefits they provide. Some of those benefits are regional – emissions-free electricity, reliability with months of fuel on-site, and diversity in case of problems or price spikes with gas or coal, state and federal payroll taxes, and national economic stimulus as the plants buy fuel, supplies and services. Some of the benefits are highly localized, including employment and property taxes. One locality is already feeling the pinch: Oak Harbor on Lake Erie, home to Davis-Besse. The town has a middle school in a building that is 106 years old, and an elementary school from the 1950s, and on May 2 was scheduled to have a referendu

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