( By Carrington Dillon ) [Approx. Read Time: 6 minutes]
Recently, Senior Vice President of Governmental Affairs for the Nuclear Energy Institute, Alex Flint, offered an extensive update on the current condition of the nuclear industry as well as a forecast for the future. Mr. Flint addressed the Senate Republican Conference on June 8th, 2009. We’re a month late with this, but I don’t remember seeing it reported anywhere else (I could be wrong).
Here are some excerpts from Mr. Flint’s prepared exchange:
Addressing nuclear costs, Mr. Flint commented about CWIP and Loan Guarantees:
“In general, U.S. utility companies are not large enough to finance these projects using traditional utility financing schemes – a 50:50 debt:equity structure.
However, there are steps that can be taken to address that challenge.
A number of projects that are regulated by public utility commissioners will be financed using the Construction Work-in-Progress (CWIP) approach in which a company is permitted to recover part of the cost before the plant goes on-line, a concept that is similar to putting a larger down payment on a house. Such an approach is estimated to result in long-term savings to the consumer of 25 percent.
The DOE loan guarantee program could also significantly reduce interest costs on new plants, making it possible for utilities to order plants, reducing long-term costs to consumers.
It is for that reason that NEI strongly supports reform of the DOE’s Title XVII loan guarantee program and proposals such as the authorization of a Clean Energy Deployment Administration.”
Mr. Flint then addressed job creation and positive economic impacts by the industry:
“It is important to understand the economic significance of constructing 45 nuclear plants. That effort will generate up to 82,800 construction jobs (with peak employment at 128,800).
These jobs include skilled trades such as welders, pipefitters, masons, carpenters, millwrights, sheet metal workers, electricians, ironworkers, heavy equipment operators, insulators, engineers, project managers, and construction supervisors.
Once built, these 45 plants will generate up to 32,200 high paying permanent fulltime jobs in rural counties where the plants are located.
Each year, each new reactor will generate approximately $430 million in expenditures for goods, services and labor, and through subsequent spending because of the presence of the plant and its employees.
The average nuclear plants also contributes more than $20 million annually to state and local tax revenue, benefiting schools, roads and other state and local infrastructure. By 2030 these 45 new nuclear plants will be generating over $3.3 billion in annual revenue to the federal government.”
Mr. Flint then lays it all out with his take on the whole Yucca Mountain situation. This part actually got me pumped up a little bit:
“First, all credible scientific evidence to date suggests that Yucca Mountain is suitable to serve as a geologic repository for spent fuel.
But it is clear that due to political commitments the President made during the campaign, the administration may not support opening the Yucca Mountain repository even if it receives a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Given that the Nuclear Waste Policy Act remains the law of the land, and recognizing the legal and moral obligation that the government has to fulfill its responsibility under that law, the industry believes the NRC’s review of the Yucca Mountain license application should continue.
In parallel, the administration should convene an independent panel of the best scientific, environmental, engineering and public policy leaders to fully investigate the critical issues and make a recommendation to President Obama and Congress on how best to proceed with managing used nuclear fuel.
Given the clear need for expansion of nuclear energy programs in the United States and worldwide, the nuclear industry proposed two years ago that our nation should revisit the decision to use a once-through fuel cycle and instead pursue a closed fuel cycle that includes recycling. This integrated approach includes at-reactor storage, private sector or government-owned centralized storage, research and development on recycling technology and continued development and licensing of a federal repository.
If the administration unilaterally decides to abandon the Yucca Mountain project without enacting new legislation to modify or replace existing law, it should expect a new wave of lawsuits seeking further damage payments as well as likely requests for refunding of at least $22 billion already collected from consumers that has not been spent on the program from the Nuclear Waste Fund. Further, given the uncertain path forward for the Yucca Mountain project and the difficult economic times facing American families and businesses, Energy Secretary Steven Chu should reduce the fee paid by consumers to cover only licensing costs incurred by DOE, NRC and local Nevada government units that provide oversight of the program.”
You should really read the entire speech here. You can watch it here. It is a great synopsis of the industry, and that’s why I thought it was necessary to post on Clean Energy Insight. Thanks, Alex. Keep up the good work.
