So why aren't they building these things in Illinois...trying to protect their expensive electricity?
When the economics are undeniable...how will the nuke folks respond to this? Will they become militant, take out a nuclear plant?
Do you think our NRC scheme can hold back the dike of poor economics...
Maybe Texas has the pipe capacity while Illinois does not.
I think the lack of NG pipe capacity in New England is collusion on a giant level...
Don't worry guys, the state and federal regulator will bail out the utilities with stranded cost scam of the century.
But the environment, enormus corruption on the grid, approaching global warming, the once in a hundred natural gas miracle, the load disappearing for the grid and low electric prices and the general obsolescence of our grid and infrastructure...can you even blame our great electric utilities for being dizzy. Remember when we had great politicians who crush the approach of bad history.
Then the problem nobody even cares about, our problem with decent secure and adequate income for the bottom half.
What can we do if we just don't give a shit anymore, all of us...
Did Exelon Corporation Just Quietly Admit That Nuclear Power Is Dead?
April 21, 2015 | Comments (8)
That's the percentage of power generated by Exelon Corporation (NYSE: EXC ) that originates in a nuclear power plant. That should come as no surprise, considering the company owns over 19,000 MW of nuclear capacity, which has among the highest utilization rates of any energy source. Of course, Exelon is not immune to market forces challenging the economics of traditional nuclear power, even if individual states that are heavily reliant on the company's atomic footprint pitch in to provide artificial buoyancy.
The fast-falling costs of renewable energy and sudden global abundance of natural gas have turned the tables on nuclear power generators, which suffer from relatively high maintenance costs and, for newer plants, absurdly high upfront construction costs.
Therefore, it should also not come as a surprise that Exelon has been carefully hedging against its existing nuclear power plants by investing in lower-cost generation. For instance, the company recently handed General Electric Company (NYSE: GE ) over $500 million for four next-generation natural gas turbines, which will combine to generate over 2,000 MW of electricity for the Texas grid. Is this a quiet admission that traditional nuclear power is dead?
Natural gas to the rescue for investors?
General Electric spent over $1 billion developing two next-generation natural gas turbines: the 600-MW 9HA for Europe and the 500-MW 7HA for the United States. They're the world's largest and most efficient natural gas turbines; capable of achieving the Holy Grail of power efficiency while consuming less natural gas and emitting one-third less carbon dioxide than older and more commonly used turbines.
The turbines will be an important product for General Electric as it refocuses on manufacturing and winds down financial services, although there likely won't be any difficulties selling them. The company disclosed close to $2 billion in 9HA/7HA sales at the end of September from customers in France, Japan, Germany, Russia, and the
The turbines will also be an important addition for Exelon as it insulates its power generation portfolio against losses from its nuclear fleet and duly invests in the future of energy. The four 7HA turbines, which will ship in 2016 and come online in 2017, will be be put into service at two new power plants currently under construction near Houston and Dallas. The ultra-efficient units will save millions of gallons of water in cooling applications every day -- nothing to take lightly in drought-stricken Texas -- as they're cooled with forced air instead. Additionally, each unit is expected to save $8 million in annual fuel costs.
Although the details surrounding the natural-gas-fired turbines look favorable for investors, some simple number-crunching certainly favors the thesis that traditional nuclear power is dead, even if Exelon hasn't explicitly mentioned the possibility (or considered it internally). While the company won't be ditching its existing nuclear facilities anytime soon, investors surely shouldn't expect it to build any new nuclear capacity, either. Consider how the next-generation natural gas turbines from General Electric stack up when compared to a new nuclear power plant, using Southern Co.'s new Vogtle Unit 3 and 4 nuclear reactors for comparison.
Metric Exelon 7HA Units Southern Co. Vogtle Expansion Investment $0.5 billion ~$15.0 billion Capacity (Gross) 2,000 MW 2,500 MW Construction Time
2 years ~5 years Source: SEC filings, press releases.
Or think about it another way: Exelon's investment will increase its 2013 natural gas capacity by 25% and represent more capacity than the company's total wind and solar assets. Even if the company paid twice as much for future next-generation natural gas turbines, or $1 billion for 1,000 MW of capacity, it could replace its entire 19,000 MW nuclear fleet for just $19 billion. That's 126% of the price tag Southern Co is shelling out for just 2,500 MW of new nuclear capacity!
If that doesn't communicate the fact that new construction of traditional nuclear power is a thing of the past, then perhaps nothing will.
What does it mean for investors?
The numbers overwhelmingly stack up against traditional nuclear power. Simply put, spending just $500 million for a combined capacity of 2,000 MW of clean, affordable, and efficiently produced electricity is something only next-generation natural gas turbines can achieve. The fact that Exelon is going all-in on cheaper and more profitable power generation is terrific news for investors, and the wider trend sweeping the power industry will be great news for General Electric investors, too.
Study: Exelon subsidy would cost $1.6 billion over 5 years
Study: Exelon subsidy would cost $1.6 billion over 5 years
A report by state agencies indicates the shutdown of three Exelon nuclear plants in Illinois � including this one in Clinton � would lead to billions of dollars lost in economic activity and 8,000 job losses.
Posted: Tuesday, April 21, 2015 11:46 pm | Updated: 12:14 am, Wed Apr 22, 2015.
A study ordered by consumer groups finds a plan to financially reward Exelon Corp. for producing carbon-free nuclear energy would cost $1.6 billion over five years and strain financially strapped business and municipal government budgets.
Kestler Energy Consulting conducted the study released Tuesday at the state Capitol for the Better Energy Solutions for Tomorrow Coalition. The coalition opposes legislation to financially reward Exelon for producing energy without emitting harmful greenhouse gases.
Exelon says without the subsidy it might have to close three nuclear plants. Spokesman Paul Elsberg points to a state study from January that shows closing those plants would cost the state $1.8 billion annually in economic activity.
Critics say the Illinois proposal would reward nuclear plants. Under the system, electric suppliers would have to buy credits from carbon-free energy producers. Exelon says the plan would benefit nuclear plants, hydroelectric dams, and other solar and wind projects.
BEST Coalition director Dave Lundy says Exelon should prove its case by opening finances to outside experts.
For example, if the bill were to pass, the coalition's study says the financial reward to Exelon would cost the City of Chicago nearly $14 million, Chicago Public Schools $7 million, Cook County Government $3.3 million and a small independent grocery store more than $13,000, according to the coalition's website.
Findings of the coalition's study are:
- The Low Carbon Portfolio Standard would increase electric costs by $2.38 per MWh ($0.00238/kWh) for ComEd customers and $2.17 per MWh ($0.00217/kWh) for Ameren.
- In total, it would cost ComEd and Ameren ratepayers $1.599 billion or $295.2 million per year over the statutory contract period of five years and five months (from January, 2016 through May, 2021).
- The bill would increase average wholesale electricity supply costs approximately 8.45 percent for ComEd customers and 8.35 percent for Ameren customers.
Exelon officials have defended the proposal, by calling it a "market-based" solution that allows each resource to compete.
Exelon has said it might have to close at least three of its six Illinois plants, if it didn't receive a clean air incentive — Quad Cities Generating Station in Cordova, Byron Generating Station in Ogle County and Clinton Power Station in DeWitt County.
Operations in La Salle County, Morris and Braidwood are not considered at risk.
An analysis by state agencies estimated the cost of producing power at three plants proposed for closure may exceed the payments they get, though they could not be certain.
Exelon and other around-the-clock plants sometimes take losses when wind turbines produce too much electricity for the system.
Exelon remained profitable overall, making $1.6 billion last year. Exelon has said competition from lower-priced natural gas has taken a hit on its nuclear fleet's profit.
