Skip to main content

Duke Energy to Merge With Progress Energy

large_duke-energy That’s the news. Here are some details:

Duke's offer was a 6.4 percent premium over the last 20 trading days, the company said, and the deal would be accretive to Duke's earnings in the first year.

The transaction would create an industry giant with approximately 7.1 million electricity customers in North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky and Ohio, and 57,000 megawatts of generating capacity.

And here’s what the proposed merged company wants to do:

The two North Carolina companies will serve more than 7 million electricity customers, and will use the opportunity to eliminate redundancies in their service areas to focus on beefing up their nuclear power offerings. Duke and Progress have long been expanding their nuclear ambitions, and say the new combined company will have the largest regulated nuclear fleet in the U.S.

Here are comments from Duke Energy’s Jim Rogers (from Duke’s press release):

“Our industry is entering a building phase where we must invest in an array of new technologies to reduce our environmental footprints and become more efficient,” said Jim Rogers, chairman, president and chief executive officer of Duke Energy. “By merging our companies, we can do that more economically for our customers, improve shareholder value and continue to grow.

“Combining Duke Energy and Progress Energy creates a utility with greater financial strength and enhanced ability to meet our challenges head-on,” Rogers continued.

And Progress Energy’s Bill Johnson (same source):

“This combination of two outstanding companies is a natural fit,” said Bill Johnson, chairman, president and chief executive officer of Progress Energy. “It makes clear strategic sense and creates exceptional value for our shareholders. Together, we can leverage our best practices to achieve even higher levels of safety, operational excellence and customer satisfaction, and save money for customers by combining our fuel purchasing power and the dispatch of our generating plants.

“This merger also provides predictable earnings and cash flows to support our dividend payments to shareholders,” Johnson added. 

As noted above, both companies are headquartered in North Carolina and their nuclear plant holding reflect this. Duke Energy owns Catawba (S.C.), McGuire (N.C.) and Oconee (S.C.). Progress Energy owns Brunswick (N.C.), Crystal River (Fla.), Harris (N.C.) and Robinson (S.C.)

Comments

Anonymous said…
It's still very much on the drawing board, but there was talk of Duke Energy partnering with Areva to build a new nuclear plant in Southern Ohio, at the site of a former enrichment facility in Piketon, OH.

I hope any merger doesn't derail those plans. I think more nuclear generating capacity in Ohio will probably be a good thing for our state.
Anonymous said…
Thank goodness. Someone's got to knock that chip of Exelon's shoulder. And, being in the regulated south, this utility will have quite the advantage with respect to - among other things - a new-build program.
Unknown said…
I fear this may not be good news for new nuclear. Duke already had plans with a SC AP1000 and the Areva plant in Ohio. Progress "has" an EPC for a FL AP1000 and another COLA for a NC AP1000. Both have shown interests in finding parterns for their new nuclear because of forcast changes in electrical demand. Thus, I think one of these Carolina plants will be on the chopping block.


Furthermore, Jim Rodgers is a big supporter of new nuclear. His new role seems like a transisition to retirement. Not to say Bill Johnson is not big on nuclear, he just has not been as vocal about it to the public.
Anonymous said…
Lots of Progress nuclear staff will be on the chopping block. Progress new plants will take a back seat to Duke new plants, if not scrapped. Customers will eventually see rates rise due to new market power dynamics. I am not optimistic about this merger. More power to the power company means less power to the employees, regulator, and rate payers. Possibly good for stock price, but not for others that are not shareholders.

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...