Skip to main content

New Nuclear Plants Okayed in Florida

A Florida regulatory agency, the Public Service Commission, has unanimously endorsed Progress Energy's proposal to build two new nuclear reactors on a site in Levy County. If approved by state and federal regulators, the two reactors could begin operations by 2016-2017.

Earlier this year, the Public Service Commission expressed unanimous consent on Florida Power & Light's request to build two new reactor units at its Turkey Point plant in Miami-Dade County.

Comments

Anonymous said…
$14B (according to Platts) is a lot of money for 2.2 GW of electricity. That is $6363 per kW installed. Not very long ago, people used to cower in fear if someone mentioned $3000 per kW. I am extremely pro-nuclear, but it is starting to look way too expensive at these price levels. $14B can easily escalate to $20B.
Unknown said…
Check out the Rocky Mountain Institute website for more on the fallacies of nuclear power:
http://www.rmi.org/images/PDFs/Energy/E08-01_AmbioNucIllusion.pdf

Since the Keystone findings, new nuclear plants’ uniquely rapid capital-cost escalation,
far from abating, has accelerated. The same top trade journal summarizes how the latest analyses,
including one by Keystone coauthor Jim Harding (former director of strategic planning at
Seattle City Light), have found the Keystone report’s lower cost range of $3,600/kW “no longer
believable” and its upper range of $4,000/kW “probably low.”27 Harding’s estimate of total current
construction costs (2007 $ including interest during construction) of ~$4,300–4,550/kW
matches prospective customer Constellation’s published, then redacted, estimate of
~$4,300/kW.28 That’s slightly above Standard & Poor’s (S&P’s) May 200729 and American Electric
Power’s August 2007 estimates of ~$4,000/kW, but well below Moody’s October 2007 estimate30
of ~$5,000–6,000/kW—which Moody’s called admittedly “only marginally better than a
guess” but still solid grounds for caution.
By early 2008, industry estimates were creeping even above Moody’s dismaying range.
In September 2007, Lew Hay, CEO of FPL Group, said the total cost of a new nuclear plant (all
in mixed future dollars as-spent) could be ~$5,000–7,000/kW, or “on the order of magnitude of
$13 to $14 billion” for a two-unit plant. Yet just five months later, FPL31 filed formal cost estimates
up to nearly twice that high—$12–24 billion (again in mixed future dollars) for a 2.2–
3.04-GW two-unit plant, equivalent to ~$4,200–6,100/kW in 2007.
Anonymous said…
http://www.rmi.org/images/PDFs/Energy/E08-01_
AmbioNucIllusion.pdf
Try again :>)
David Bradish said…
funky, I guess you missed the whole debate on why RMI's paper you just referenced is junk. Here's a link on why it's junk if you're interested in learning something.

Anon, no doubt nuclear plants are expensive to build. Many utilities, however, have found that all electricity technologies have become substantially more expensive as well and that new nuclear plants are still economical.
Joe Gimenez said…
Hi:
I'm doing research for a paper. Could someone tell me whether these plants are the earliest new plants to come on line in the U.S.? How about worldwide?

Is there an official report on this somewhere.
thanks,

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...

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...

Nuclear Utility Moves Up in Credit Ratings, Bank is "Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy"

Some positive signs that nuclear utilities can continue to receive positive ratings even while they finance new nuclear plants for the first time in decades: Wells Fargo upgrades SCANA to Outperform from Market Perform Wells analyst says, "YTD, SCG shares have underperformed the Regulated Electrics (total return +2% vs. +9%). Shares trade at 11.3X our 10E EPS, a modest discount to the peer group median of 11.8X. We view the valuation as attractive given a comparatively constructive regulatory environment and potential for above-average long-term EPS growth prospects ... Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy. SCG plans to participate in the development of two regulated nuclear units at a cost of $6.3B, raising legitimate concerns regarding financing and construction. We have carefully considered the risks and are comfortable with SCG’s strategy based on a highly constructive political & regulatory environment, manageable financing needs stretched out over 10 years, strong partners...