News and Discussions > Nuke News
New Nuclear Plants Status
B.PRESGROVE:
Excellent link, lets you really get a pretty good feel for what is next and down the pike. Thanks Ren.
Rennhack:
You are welcome. I'm just happy to find the resource.
ddm502001:
With the current economic shifts, is there concern these plants will end up along with those canceled in the 80's? I work at Callaway, we see a lot of activity toward Unit two but the commitment still isn't there among the managers. AUE is still considering coal units elsewhere.
matthew.b:
--- Quote from: ddm502001 on Mar 09, 2008, 06:52 ---With the current economic shifts, is there concern these plants will end up along with those canceled in the 80's? I work at Callaway, we see a lot of activity toward Unit two but the commitment still isn't there among the managers. AUE is still considering coal units elsewhere.
--- End quote ---
I think you can list multiple reasons for all of the cancellations before, and only some of them are in play today.
In the 80's, many plants were done and ready to go online, but couldn't because of regulatory hurdles. I strongly doubt that will happen again. That delay compounded with high interest rates really hurt the utilities bottom lines. The most troubling trend today is the credit market. It will still take a long time to build new plants, and if the utilities have to pay exorbitant rates it will hurt.
As for the previous factors that I doubt are in play: Our grid is far more overextended than at any time previously. The possibility of an overbuild resulting in idle plants is negligible. An overwhelming majority of the capacity added in the last 20 years has been gas turbine plants. With the high price of natural gas, any new nuke brought online can easily bump those gas turbine plants offline and run 100% whenever they are available. Yes, some utilities are also adding coal, but I doubt it will be enough. Clean coal is also expensive to build coal, evening out the cost somewhat. Couple that with much more resistance to new coal and that helps nuclear.
Don't ignore the fact that in Texas, there was outcry over coal plant plans, but near silence over multiple nuclear plant applications. I believe the majority of public sentiment is on our side now.
rlbinc:
Industrial Load Growth faded in the 1980's as manufacturing jobs were exported and recession ensued. There were still many plants on order post-TMI, which were ultimately cancelled due to slow electrical demand growth, high interest rates and rising vendor costs.
One out of three of those conditions exist today, and that reflects on the odds of a planned unit reaching commercial operation. Just like Shoreham, Midland, Black Fox, Marble Hill, Bellefonte, Cherokee, etc. - some plants won't make it.
If any are built, the odds favor Texas. Load growth, economic conditions, and political environment combine to favor builds in this region.
If we can build there and generate economically - other states will follow suit.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version