Skip to main content

Friends of the Wretched Child

Oliver Our opinion about Friends of the Earth swings a bit between annoyance and amusement – the former because the environmental group plays so loosely with facts, the latter because they are often quite maladroit even with their loose facts. Consider:

This week Congress will vote on whether to take teachers away from students so that they can give nuclear reactors a $9 billion preemptive bailout. We continue to be shocked that Congress brazenly puts the interests of corporations above the needs of regular Americans, including teachers and children. This is further proof our political system has been corrupted by corporate influence and special interests.

That brazen Congress! We fully expect to see Dickensian children in rags crowding the doors of local nuclear plants begging for alms if this horrid bill passes. Or would, if the cruel taskmasters of the nuclear energy industry weren’t also masterminding legislation to put those wretched children to work hauling overflowing bales of uranium up steep hills to feed the voracious maws of the flame-belching reactors.

Honestly!

(Funning aside, we should mention that the $9 billion is for loan guarantees, for which recipients pay a hefty fee plus interest. It’s not a direct charge against government revenues, which the schools portion would be. That would go back to the “loose with facts” part. But that’s our FOE!)

Mark Lester from the film Oliver! (1968). Lester left acting in 1977 and became an acupuncturist in his native England, where he currently has his own acupuncture clinic.

Comments

gunter said…
Howdy folks,

That "hefty fee plus interest" Mark menstions is actually around 1% or less where even federal highway loans require 5%.

Given the uncertainty and growing risk of industry default has already been determined by Congress to be "significantly more than 50%"(in 2003 dollars), this is practically a give-a-way for that next Atomic Big Dig.
JD said…
Howdy gunter,

As I'm sure you're well aware, the 50% default rate estimate from the Congressional Budget Office was from seven years ago. (I think that's what you meant by saying 50 percent in 2003 dollars...)

More recently, the CBO posted on its Director's Blog the following information (emphasis mine):

"A number of people have inquired as to whether the information in those estimates is relevant to estimates of the credit risk of the announced loan guarantees. The short answer is: not necessarily."

"The assumptions and analyses supporting that estimate reflected information about the technical, economic, and regulatory environment as it existed in 2003, almost seven years ago. Such generalized estimates of credit risk may not apply to a guarantee for any particular power plant because of variations in the technical, economic, regulatory, and contractual characteristics of each project. Without such information, much of which would be proprietary, CBO has no basis for estimating the cost to the government of any specific loan guarantee of this type."

So let's be fair. You can hardly make the case that there is a "growing risk of industry default", and the 50% figure you cited has been deemed out of date by the very organization that came up with it in the first place.

But I know you follow these issues. Obviously you already know this. So why post things so obviously misleading? Do your ends justify your means? I don't understand you, gunter.

(Link to CBO's blog: http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=478)


P.S. -- Feel free to prove that you aren't intentionally deceiving people by using the caveat "The CBO estimated in 2003 that the default rate of new nuclear projects would be well above 50% but more recently has said that this estimate does not necessarily apply today. Energy Secretary Chu said this year that he believes the default rate will be far lower." If you revise your post to be more accurate, I will gladly rescind my criticism.
gunter said…
Greetings JD,

If anything the percentage the risk of default has gone up not down.

What's changed that might affect that to the contrary?

Off the top of my head there are several significant areas indicating just how thin the ice remains:

--the projected cost-of-completion continues to steeply rise;

--the projected time-to-completion for new construction continues in demonstrated longer delays;

--design certification surprises abound for these untested designs signalling more and longer delays;

--and the streamlining of federal licensing procedures has not eliminated intervenors.

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…

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…

Innovation Fuels the Nuclear Legacy: Southern Nuclear Employees Share Their Stories

Blake Bolt and Sharimar Colon are excited about nuclear energy. Each works at Southern Nuclear Co. and sees firsthand how their ingenuity powers the nation’s largest supply of clean energy. For Powered by Our People, they shared their stories of advocacy, innovation in the workplace and efforts to promote efficiency. Their passion for nuclear energy casts a bright future for the industry.

Blake Bolt has worked in the nuclear industry for six years and is currently the work week manager at Hatch Nuclear Plant in Georgia. He takes pride in an industry he might one day pass on to his children.

What is your job and why do you enjoy doing it?
As a Work Week Manager at Plant Hatch, my primary responsibility is to ensure nuclear safety and manage the risk associated with work by planning, scheduling, preparing and executing work to maximize the availability and reliability of station equipment and systems. I love my job because it enables me to work directly with every department on the plant…