Skip to main content

NRG’s Recent Cost Estimate Increases for STP 3&4 Due to a Weaker Dollar?

By now I’m sure most readers here have heard that NRG’s cost estimates to build two new reactors at South Texas Project increased around $4 billion just recently. Apparently quite a bit of the increase was due to a weaker dollar. From the Wall Street Journal:

Dollar weakness helped drive up cost estimates for two new reactors NRG Energy Inc. (NRG) is planning in Texas with Toshiba Corp. An NRG executive said last month the cost of equipment and materials from Japan climbed 13% to an estimated $2.5 billion compared with a 2007 estimate, mostly due to declines in the dollar.

Currency risk is just one variable for developers. Scana and Southern already have taken steps to eliminate the risk by using dollar-dominated contracts. For other projects, currency fluctuation typically is viewed as part of the larger issue of construction costs. Developers are trying to balance the massive cost and lengthy construction timetable with a tricky outlook for power demand and prices. Additionally, any decision by the U.S. government to place limits on carbon-dioxide emissions could heavily impact the economics of nuclear projects, since reactors become more competitive when a cost is placed on CO2.

It’ll be interesting to see what NRG and Toshiba agree on for the new cost estimates which were asked to be determined by the end of this year.

Comments

SteveK9 said…
I have heard very low numbers for the costs of essentially the same reactors in Japan ~ $1.4B. Anyone know if that is correct. If so, why is it SO much more here?
David Bradish said…
Probably a number of factors. The $1.4B you cite I'm guessing is for one unit, whereas the STP estimate is for two. As well, the $1.4B number was probably for a unit that came online more than a decade ago before commodities and labor costs increased dramatically. Also, I think the size of the ABWRs in Japan are smaller than the ones proposed in the US. And as the WSJ found, currency rates make a difference in costs. Those are just some guesses, though.
Anonymous said…
You numbers are correct, but not $1.4B per plant, $1.4B per gigawatt. So, a large 1600MW plant would be a little more. This was for gen-iii plants they built in the late `90s, not even the improved gen-iii plus models. Let's get our act together and start building electric cars, trains and nuclear plants like Japan!
uvdiv said…
Here are recent numbers Shika #2, an ABWR built over 2001-2006. It is the same reactor as the Texas project - 1,300 MWe ABWR (although oddly the IAEA source says 1,200 MWe gross, not sure about the discrepancy). The total project cost was 370 billion yen, according to table 3B from

http://web.mit.edu/ceepr/www/publications/workingpapers/2009-004.pdf

This is a nominal $3,033/kWe at current exchange rates. The table gives it as $2,280/kWe PPP-adjusted, or $2,350/kWe overnight cost.
Anonymous said…
It is interesting to remember the reason STP owners switched from a GEH ABWR to a Toshiba ABWR was to save money.
Anonymous said…
The switch to Toshiba was more about terms and conditions than about saving money. GE just didn't want to take any risk. Perhaps MSNBC is a true reflection of company policy?

Of course the equity participation from Toshiba (half a billion) was part of it.

One predictable consequence of the devalued dollar will be fewer imports and more domestic production. American pipe, labor, steel, valves, and engineers got cheaper. Expect more work on STP to be performed in the US and less in Japan.

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

Why Nuclear Plant Closures Are a Crisis for Small Town USA

Nuclear plants occupy an unusual spot in the towns where they operate: integral but so much in the background that they may seem almost invisible. But when they close, it can be like the earth shifting underfoot.

Lohud.com, the Gannett newspaper that covers the Lower Hudson Valley in New York, took a look around at the experience of towns where reactors have closed, because the Indian Point reactors in Buchanan are scheduled to be shut down under an agreement with Gov. Mario Cuomo.


From sea to shining sea, it was dismal. It wasn’t just the plant employees who were hurt. The losses of hundreds of jobs, tens of millions of dollars in payrolls and millions in property taxes depressed whole towns and surrounding areas. For example:

Vernon, Vermont, home to Vermont Yankee for more than 40 years, had to cut its municipal budget in half. The town closed its police department and let the county take over; the youth sports teams lost their volunteer coaches, and Vernon Elementary School lost th…