Tag Archives: nukes

Coal, Nuke Bailout Could Reach $34 Billion, New Study Says

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

So apparently the bailout of nuclear and coal plants is still a thing that is under consideration, so I have to keep writing about it. This time, there’s a new study out that says the new bailout is going to cost $34 billion – that’s B-illion, with a “b” – to implement. When there are more competitive solutions like solar and wind on the open market.

Are we tired of all the winning yet?

[wds id=”3″]

The Houston Chronicle reported today on the study, which was prepared for pro-solar advocacy group Advanced Energy Economy by the The Brattle Group, which the newspaper points out is opposed to the bailout plan (as are most Americans, based on all the support solar and wind get in all of the polls, Katie). I’ve included the entire report below, and it is certainly worth reading in its entirety. But I’ll post a couple of highlights from the executive summary to whet your appetite:

  • “Current and likely future wholesale market conditions will continue to add pressure on some coal and nuclear plants to retire even if a financial support mechanism is put in place.”

    Damn that INVISIBLE HAND! It seems that no matter how much Donald Trump and Rick Perry want to prop up these failing plants, Adam Smith’s Hand will come along to keep them failing.

  • “We conservatively estimate that cost-of-service recovery (including embedded capital) could at least double the policy cost to between $20 and $35 billion per year.”

    Well, now isn’t THAT a lovely thought? So we’re going to throw good money after bad and STILL not be able to save the coal jobs Trump promised.

    And as for the nuclear side of things…I have two nuclear plants built in the 1970s and 1980s that are STILL being paid off by me and my fellow ratepayers. Exactly how long are we planning these bailouts to last? And aren’t these the same government officials who keep telling us we have to reduce spending so we don’t leave an enormous debt burden to our children? Where is that restraint now?

This bailout is the same boondoggle it has always been, a giveaway to the monopoly utilities (another instance of cognitive dissonance that nearly makes my head explode, but that’s a discussion for another day) and their wealthy investors, while your average taxpayer and ratepayer get screwed. Tell me again the one about how you love the free market and how the government shouldn’t be picking winners and losers?

To hell with the lotta ya.

More:

Well, There Goes That Bulwark: Powelson’s Retirement Puts Coal, Nuke Bailout Back On The Front Burner

FERC Commissioners Tell Senate: Coal, Nuke Bailout Unnecessary

Despite True Believers, EXPERTS Say Trump Nuke Bailout Could Cost $17 Billion Per Year In Overly High Electric Bills

Brattle_AEE_Final_Embargoed_7.19.18

FERC Commissioners Tell Senate: Coal, Nuke Bailout Unnecessary

FERC

By Frank Andorka, Senior Correspondent

Yesterday, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) commissioners appeared before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and told the Senators what the rest of the world already knows: Water is wet. The Pope is still Catholic. And the nuclear and coal plant bailout Trump demanded is entirely unnecessary.

While the solar industry has been saying this since Trump first floated this Bob Murray special two years ago, Energy Law 360 reports that when asked if the bailout of failing nuclear and coal plants was important to national security, the crickets could be heard loud and clear from out on the National Mall. We’ll let Energy Law 360 set the stage:

“Do any of you believe that in the wholesale power markets, we’re facing an actual national security emergency at the moment?” Sen. Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., asked the FERC commissioners.

Democratic Commissioner Cheryl LaFleur answered first.

“I do not, Senator,” LaFleur said. “I think the markets are reliable.”

“Anyone willing to answer that with a yes?” Heinrich then asked.

No other FERC commissioner responded.

Like we said, crickets.

It has long been policy of this president to try to prop up failing nuclear and coal plants by any means necessary. It was what was behind the study Secretary of Energy Rick Perry ordered shortly after his appointment into the importance of “baseload power” and the completely arbitrary idea that electrical generation facilities must have 90 days of reserve power on site.

The study was expected to find that an increase in coal and nuclear plants were necessary. When it didn’t, Perry ordered the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to issue a rule that would have provided for bailouts of failing nuclear and coal plants. FERC respectfully declined.

Which is why the ball has landed back in the Department of Energy’s court, and they appear to be on the verge of simply ordering grid operators to buy power from these plants to provide the plant operators with a financial bailout orchestrated by the federal government.

It’s no shock that this action is coming. After all, it was President Trump who stood in front of West Virginia coal miners and offered them the impossible dream of bringing coal jobs back to the United States, despite the electricity market – including a majority of utilities – voting against such a move with their market-based plans to close the plants instead. To fulfill his campaign promise, the only way to save those jobs is to rig the system in favor of coal plants.

More:

FERC Commissioners Deny Necessity Of Coal, Nuke Bailout

Trump Throws Free Market Principles Out Window On Behalf Of Coal, Nuke Plants