Tweet
http://www.usatoday.com/money/indust...y-return_N.htm
By Paul Davidson, USA TODAY
Several companies have taken significant steps that will likely lead to completion of four reactors by 2015 to 2018 and up to eight by 2020. All would be built next to existing nuclear plants.
[..]
Still, some hurdles are emerging. Some companies are submitting incomplete applications or seeking design changes at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), possibly delaying approval. At least two utilities recently said they're switching to different reactor models because they couldn't receive assurances on costs and the timetable. And since several models are new, problems could emerge as they're built in the USA for the first time. The type of reactor planned for Maryland is being built in Finland, where it's three years behind schedule and $2 billion over budget.
"We're talking about a new generation of technology," says John Reed, CEO of Concentric Energy Advisors. "You have to demonstrate to (lenders) that you can make money with these."
[..]
Today, 104 reactors supply 20% of the nation's electricity. Just to hold that share, all 26 proposed reactors would have to be completed by 2030.
[..]
Under new rules, power companies can apply for one license to both build and operate a nuclear reactor, streamlining the review. Designs must be approved separately before construction begins. And power companies are using just five blueprints. Regulators hope they'll churn out cookie-cutter versions of each design. Yet, even as they seek licenses, only two of the five designs have been certified.
"They're putting the cart before the horse," NRC Commissioner Gregory Jaczko says. "They should get the design done" before applying for a license. Also, he says, some reactor makers are proposing extensive modifications to their designs. Westinghouse, for instance, wants to make about 100 changes to its AP1000 reactor, says Vice President Ed Cummins. He says they're largely minor.
[..]
To avoid cost overruns, power companies want to lock in prices and put the onus on equipment vendors to pay added fees if a project is delayed. Vendors are reluctant to set prices because the reactors lack a track record, and it's impossible to predict the cost of labor and materials when construction starts in a few years.
NRG (NRG), an independent power producer that's building two reactors in Texas, has signed a contract with Toshiba that nails down most costs, says Steven Winn, CEO of the NRG unit building the plant. That's possible, he says, because Toshiba owns 12% of the venture and has already built four of the same model units, called an ABWR, in Japan.
Others are having mixed success at locking in terms. Exelon, for instance, recently said it was no longer going to use a General Electric Hitachi reactor because GE (GE) couldn't sufficiently guarantee fixed prices and a firm schedule. "We have to be careful and pragmatic" about risks, says GE Vice President Danny Roderick.
With lenders hesitant to take chances on nuclear energy, 10 companies seek a total of $93 billion in federal loan guarantees for new nuclear plants. But only $18.5 billion is available — enough to finance three or four projects.
NEI President Marvin Fertel told Congress this month that independent power producers would likely abandon projects if the entire $93 billion is not funded, slowing the nuclear revival.
Bill Wicker, spokesman for the Senate Energy committee, says guarantees are meant to bankroll only the maiden versions of new models. No more than another $18 billion is likely to be funded, he says. "It's not like a bottomless cup of coffee."
[..]
Only one company, Japan Steel Works, builds the 600-ton steel forgings used to make reactor vessels. It can make only five or six a year. Southern, SCE&G, NRG and Constellation have spent tens of millions of dollars reserving such items. Those building reactors after the front-runners could face bottlenecks, Standard & Poor's says. But Japan Steel Works has said it's expanding its capacity by about a third, while others are entering the market. In the U.S., factories to make nuclear parts are being built in Virginia, Louisiana, Indiana and Tennessee.
*****
I wonder why the article was published on the 30th? The Senate's energy committee discussed nuclear on March 18th.
It's the USA Today, so the target audience is nothing out of the ordinary.
By Paul Davidson, USA TODAY
Several companies have taken significant steps that will likely lead to completion of four reactors by 2015 to 2018 and up to eight by 2020. All would be built next to existing nuclear plants.
[..]
Still, some hurdles are emerging. Some companies are submitting incomplete applications or seeking design changes at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), possibly delaying approval. At least two utilities recently said they're switching to different reactor models because they couldn't receive assurances on costs and the timetable. And since several models are new, problems could emerge as they're built in the USA for the first time. The type of reactor planned for Maryland is being built in Finland, where it's three years behind schedule and $2 billion over budget.
"We're talking about a new generation of technology," says John Reed, CEO of Concentric Energy Advisors. "You have to demonstrate to (lenders) that you can make money with these."
[..]
Today, 104 reactors supply 20% of the nation's electricity. Just to hold that share, all 26 proposed reactors would have to be completed by 2030.
[..]
Under new rules, power companies can apply for one license to both build and operate a nuclear reactor, streamlining the review. Designs must be approved separately before construction begins. And power companies are using just five blueprints. Regulators hope they'll churn out cookie-cutter versions of each design. Yet, even as they seek licenses, only two of the five designs have been certified.
"They're putting the cart before the horse," NRC Commissioner Gregory Jaczko says. "They should get the design done" before applying for a license. Also, he says, some reactor makers are proposing extensive modifications to their designs. Westinghouse, for instance, wants to make about 100 changes to its AP1000 reactor, says Vice President Ed Cummins. He says they're largely minor.
[..]
To avoid cost overruns, power companies want to lock in prices and put the onus on equipment vendors to pay added fees if a project is delayed. Vendors are reluctant to set prices because the reactors lack a track record, and it's impossible to predict the cost of labor and materials when construction starts in a few years.
NRG (NRG), an independent power producer that's building two reactors in Texas, has signed a contract with Toshiba that nails down most costs, says Steven Winn, CEO of the NRG unit building the plant. That's possible, he says, because Toshiba owns 12% of the venture and has already built four of the same model units, called an ABWR, in Japan.
Others are having mixed success at locking in terms. Exelon, for instance, recently said it was no longer going to use a General Electric Hitachi reactor because GE (GE) couldn't sufficiently guarantee fixed prices and a firm schedule. "We have to be careful and pragmatic" about risks, says GE Vice President Danny Roderick.
With lenders hesitant to take chances on nuclear energy, 10 companies seek a total of $93 billion in federal loan guarantees for new nuclear plants. But only $18.5 billion is available — enough to finance three or four projects.
NEI President Marvin Fertel told Congress this month that independent power producers would likely abandon projects if the entire $93 billion is not funded, slowing the nuclear revival.
Bill Wicker, spokesman for the Senate Energy committee, says guarantees are meant to bankroll only the maiden versions of new models. No more than another $18 billion is likely to be funded, he says. "It's not like a bottomless cup of coffee."
[..]
Only one company, Japan Steel Works, builds the 600-ton steel forgings used to make reactor vessels. It can make only five or six a year. Southern, SCE&G, NRG and Constellation have spent tens of millions of dollars reserving such items. Those building reactors after the front-runners could face bottlenecks, Standard & Poor's says. But Japan Steel Works has said it's expanding its capacity by about a third, while others are entering the market. In the U.S., factories to make nuclear parts are being built in Virginia, Louisiana, Indiana and Tennessee.
*****
I wonder why the article was published on the 30th? The Senate's energy committee discussed nuclear on March 18th.
It's the USA Today, so the target audience is nothing out of the ordinary.
Comment