[NukeNet] Duke Energy CEO reveals doubts about nuclear plant

[MoJo]

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/local/16504751.htm
  CHEROKEE COUNTY, S.C. 
Duke Energy CEO reveals doubts about nuclear plant 
Proposal faces obstacles of storage and finance 
 
CHRISTOPHER D. KIRKPATRICK 
ckirkpatrick at charlotteobserver.com 
 
Charlotte Observer, January 20, 2007 
 
Duke Energy Chief Executive Jim Rogers said Friday he was growing 
pessimistic about the company's chances of building a nuclear power plant 
on schedule -- or at all -- because of concern over costs and other 
issues. 
 
Rogers spoke about his doubts to boost his case for building two 
coal-fired units for the utility's Cliffside facility 55 miles west of 
Charlotte. 
 
"I'm not a true believer. ... We're talking about a renaissance in 
nuclear. I don't see it," he told members of the N.C. Utilities Commission 
at a hearing to help determine whether Duke can build the coal-fired 
units. 
 
It was his strongest language yet to commissioners that the proposed 
nuclear plant might not be built. 
 
Duke had hoped to have the two nuclear reactors at the proposed plant in 
Cherokee County, S.C., running by 2016 to meet predicted energy demand. 
 
But Rogers told the commission in Raleigh that Duke is unlikely to meet 
that deadline as long as issues of where to store nuclear waste and 
financial challenges are unresolved. They include the rising costs of 
building nuclear facilities and getting permission from the state to 
recover the development costs from ratepayers if the plant is not built. 
 
The commission this week held three days of hearings on the Cliffside 
project, whose costs have increased from $2 billion to $3 billion. It will 
review testimony from supporters and opponents before making a decision by 
Feb. 28. 
 
Duke has said the planned S.C. nuclear plant, about 55 miles south of 
Charlotte, would cost $4 billion to $6 billion and take about a decade to 
build and develop. Company spokeswoman Paige Sheehan said the costs could 
rise above $6 billion. 
 
In an interview after the hearing, Rogers said nuclear plants are becoming 
more of a challenge to build. "There are scenarios I can imagine that it's 
not built at all," he said about the company's planned nuclear facility. 
But he said Duke was still committed to the project. 
 
For years, environmentalists have opposed construction of new nuclear 
plants. They cited potential dangers to the public and environment from 
accidents. 
 
But nuclear energy has gained acceptance in recent years by some 
environmental groups because it's considered a clean-air technology that 
could help reduce carbon dioxide -- which scientists say is a major cause 
of global warming. 
 
Coal-fired power plants are among the largest producers of carbon dioxide 
-- a fact that crystallized the opposition on display Friday during the 
hearing. 
 
The testimony and cross-examinations Friday of Rogers and other Duke 
witnesses provided a glimpse into the corporate thinking and strategy of 
the Charlotte power company. 
 
Rogers urged the commission to approve the Cliffside project, in part, 
because he hopes the units will be exempted from carbon regulations being 
debated in Congress. The new Democratically controlled Congress has 
pledged to pass legislation to curb carbon gas emissions by using a tax or 
a complicated pollution credit system, which might cost Duke and other 
power companies. 
 
Cliffside could be exempted from any possible legislation because it 
recently received $125 million in clean-coal technology credits from the 
federal government, Rogers said. 
 
Duke has said it needs the 800-megawatt coal-fired units at Cliffside and 
the new nuclear plant to meet future demand. 
 
Rogers reiterated his position Friday that Duke needed coal as a hedge 
against the price volubility of natural gas and the uncertainty of nuclear 
plant projects, which in the past have run into political and regulatory 
obstacles. 
 



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Each of the Iraqi children killed by the United States was our child. Each of the prisoners tortured in Abu Ghraib was our comrade. Each of their screams was ours. When they were humiliated, we were humiliated. The U.S. soldiers fighting in Iraq - mostly volunteers in a poverty draft from small towns and poor urban neighborhoods - are victims just as much as the Iraqis of the same horrendous process, which asks them to die for a victory that will never be theirs": Source: Arundhati Roy, "Tide? Or Ivory Snow? Public Power in the Age of Empire," 

Molly Johnson 
6290 Hawk Ridge Place
San Miguel, CA  93451
Cell: 805 296-0524
 
---------------------------------
Check out the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/nukenet_energyjustice.net/attachments/20070121/2b30a8e0/attachment.html