[NukeNet] Duke Energy CEO reveals doubts about nuclear plant

[Mike Ewall]

Now if we can just convince Duke that coal plants aren't worth 
building either...


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.