Skip to main content

Loan Guarantees and Desperation

Chet Edwards small-thumb-425x321 We’ve seen surprisingly little news for it, but maybe it’s a little too inside nuclear baseball. That doesn’t mean the news isn’t good, though:

House lawmakers approved a spending bill Thursday that includes $25 billion in loan guarantees for new nuclear reactors, an amount that could enable the expansion of North Texas' Comanche Peak plant.

That last bit explains why this is appearing in the Dallas News. And Luminant is certainly ready to roll:

Dallas-based Luminant, which owns the plant, said the additional amount "would be sufficient" to allow funding for its plan to build two reactors. Luminant said it was "the first alternate" last year when the U.S. Department of Energy selected four nuclear projects to further consider for loan guarantees.

"We can't guarantee it, but this is a very important step to enabling it," said David Campbell, chief executive of Luminant, the power-generation unit of Energy Future Holdings.

No playing favorites from us, but we wish them the best. Let’s see how it goes.

---

Interestingly, Campbell give a shout-out to his local Representative Chet Edwards (D-Texas)

Campbell credited Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Waco, with helping to secure the funding. An earlier draft of the legislation didn't include funding for the nuclear program, which is unpopular among liberals in the House.

"We are at the dawn of a nuclear power renaissance in the United States, which will create hundreds of thousands of good-paying jobs and the clean energy our nation needs," Edwards said in a prepared statement.

Well, not all liberals in the House, surely. But Edwards didn’t say that, the reporter did (and shouldn’t have.) What Edwards said – all good.

---

But back to the loan guarantees. The House had already moved $9 billion of the Obama administration’s loan guarantee authority request from 2011 to a 2010 supplemental spending bill, so the total authority between the two would be $34 billion. And an additional $25 billion has been committed for 2011 to renewable energy sources (so you can tweak your friends who try to portray this as a “bail-out” for nuclear energy).

Because, whether for nuclear or renewable energy sources, there’s no taint of bail-out here. As we point out every time we mention them, loan guarantees are not direct payouts from the government to an industry. Instead, they give private lenders confidence to loan money for nuclear energy plant construction.

Government offsets the risk in part because government, through regulation and a long licensing process, adds to the risk yet has a societal interest in new baseload (in the case of nuclear energy) electricity generation that does not produce greenhouse gases.

There are other considerations, too, including that the U.S., unlike other countries, leaves the energy sector largely to private business. Those businesses’ are relatively small – the largest U.S. electric company has a market value of about $33 billion and most are considerably smaller. So loan guarantees help ensure that an electric company isn’t risking financial disaster – obviously, also a social good. You can see NEI’s response here.

So – the news is good.

---

Well, not for everyone:

This is nuclear power's summer of desperation. It has just a few short weeks to grab billions in taxpayer funding for new nuclear plants.

Last time we wrote, a $9 billion package was being slipped into an "emergency" war appropriations bill.

Now the industry is demanding $25 billion for unspecified projects. Again, your voice can make a difference.

This comes from Bonnie Raitt, Jackson Browne and Graham Nash. As happens, our summer of desperation is going just fine, thank you very much. Maybe to add to the good vibe, we’ll “demand” some iced tea and lay some of their vinyl on the turntable. Good entertainers all.

Rep. Chet Edwards.

Comments

JD said…
As a joke a friend signed me up for that nukefree.org newsletter. I replied to this most recent one, asking if they were in fact referring to loan guarantees. The letter itself only says "$9 billion package" and "demanding $25 billion", and of course the government won't be out this much money unless every single nuclear-related project fails.

Interestingly enough they failed to mention that the appropriations bill doesn't so much call for $9 billion in nuclear loan guarantees, as it calls for $18 billion in energy loan guarantees, split equally between nuclear and renewables.

Where then is the criticism of renewable energy loan guarantees in the appropriations bill?

I fear I know the answer to this question. Nukefree.org knows what's best for us, so it's okay if they mislead people toward that end. They've seized on the war appropriations bill because it's convenient, not because they disagree with the non-war spending. They don't mention renewables getting loan guarantees because if loan guarantees are "bailouts" (as nukefree.org constantly says) what does that mean for renewables?

Popular posts from this blog

A Design Team Pictures the Future of Nuclear Energy

For more than 100 years, the shape and location of human settlements has been defined in large part by energy and water. Cities grew up near natural resources like hydropower, and near water for agricultural, industrial and household use.

So what would the world look like with a new generation of small nuclear reactors that could provide abundant, clean energy for electricity, water pumping and desalination and industrial processes?

Hard to say with precision, but Third Way, the non-partisan think tank, asked the design team at the Washington, D.C. office of Gensler & Associates, an architecture and interior design firm that specializes in sustainable projects like a complex that houses the NFL’s Dallas Cowboys. The talented designers saw a blooming desert and a cozy arctic village, an old urban mill re-purposed as an energy producer, a data center that integrates solar panels on its sprawling flat roofs, a naval base and a humming transit hub.

In the converted mill, high temperat…

Seeing the Light on Nuclear Energy

If you think that there is plenty of electricity, that the air is clean enough and that nuclear power is a just one among many options for meeting human needs, then you are probably over-focused on the United States or Western Europe. Even then, you’d be wrong.

That’s the idea at the heart of a new book, “Seeing the Light: The Case for Nuclear Power in the 21st Century,” by Scott L. Montgomery, a geoscientist and energy expert, and Thomas Graham Jr., a retired ambassador and arms control expert.


Billions of people live in energy poverty, they write, and even those who don’t, those who live in places where there is always an electric outlet or a light switch handy, we need to unmake the last 200 years of energy history, and move to non-carbon sources. Energy is integral to our lives but the authors cite a World Health Organization estimate that more than 6.5 million people die each year from air pollution.  In addition, they say, the global climate is heading for ruinous instability. E…

Sneak Peek

There's an invisible force powering and propelling our way of life.
It's all around us. You can't feel it. Smell it. Or taste it.
But it's there all the same. And if you look close enough, you can see all the amazing and wondrous things it does.
It not only powers our cities and towns.
And all the high-tech things we love.
It gives us the power to invent.
To explore.
To discover.
To create advanced technologies.
This invisible force creates jobs out of thin air.
It adds billions to our economy.
It's on even when we're not.
And stays on no matter what Mother Nature throws at it.
This invisible force takes us to the outer reaches of outer space.
And to the very depths of our oceans.
It brings us together. And it makes us better.
And most importantly, it has the power to do all this in our lifetime while barely leaving a trace.
Some people might say it's kind of unbelievable.
They wonder, what is this new power that does all these extraordinary things?