April, 29 2009, 04:07pm EDT
New Report Finds CPS Energy Choosing Most Expensive Power Option in South Texas Nuclear Project Expansion
The proposed expansion of the South Texas Nuclear Project (STP) would cost as much as $22 billion, boost the cost of electricity for consumers and curtail investment in energy-efficiency programs and solar power, a report released today by Public Citizen finds.
SAN ANTONIO, Texas
The proposed expansion of the South Texas Nuclear Project (STP) would cost as much as $22 billion, boost the cost of electricity for consumers and curtail investment in energy-efficiency programs and solar power, a report released today by Public Citizen finds.
The report, "Costs of Current and Planned Nuclear Power Plants in Texas: A Consumer Perspective," provides some answers to many of the key questions about CPS Energy's proposed partnership in the STP expansion that municipal candidates have said must be resolved before they can decide what is right for San Antonio.
"We've been down this road before," said Tom "Smitty" Smith, director of Public Citizen's Texas office. "This nuclear expansion will have a significant impact on consumers in San Antonio, and perhaps throughout the Texas market. It is an irresponsible investment."
The report also finds that the massive capital outlays for nuclear power may drain available financial resources needed to pursue San Antonio's visionary Mission Verde project, Mayor Phil Hardberger's aggressive plan to green the city's infrastructure, businesses, energy sources and technology. According to Peggy Day, from the Alamo Group of the Sierra Club, Mission Verde could turn San Antonio into one of the nation's greenest cities, even as it creates nearly 10,000 local and non-local jobs.
"This new report indicates that we're going to have to decide now which energy future we want for San Antonio," said Bexar County Commissioner Tommy Adkisson. "If CPS becomes a partner in the South Texas Project expansion, we are simply not going to have the financial resources to front Mission Verde. We can either choose the most expensive option possible and send our jobs to Bay City and overseas contractors, or pay a fraction of the cost to create thousands of jobs here at home and power the city with clean, green energy."
To estimate the real cost of the STP expansion, report author Clarence Johnson, an independent consultant with 25 years of experience in the electric utility regulatory world, investigated the construction and cost history of the original power plant. Johnson also served as the director of regulatory analysis for the Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel and has presented expert testimony in nearly 100 regulatory proceedings on a wide range of issues, including generation capacity expansion.
The report finds that given the history of cost overruns and delays from the last generation of nuclear power plants, the construction cost and schedule for STP ($5.8 billion with a four year completion time) are incredibly optimistic. Most nuclear power plants built in the 1970s and 1980s left a legacy of cost overruns and construction delays, but coming on line seven years after the proposed construction date and four and a half times over budget, STP, which was completed in 1989, was among the worst.
"Studies produced by the NRC itself have found that things went as poorly as they did due to the inexperience of the project team," Johnson said. "The single most important factor in assuring quality and timeliness in nuclear power plant construction is prior nuclear construction experience. Unfortunately, NRG Energy, the company building STP, lacks that crucial experience. Given the fact that no new nuclear power plants have been built in the U.S. in two decades, NRG is unlikely to find seasoned nuclear personnel, engineers or project leaders this time around."
The report also finds that the current low cost of nuclear fuel in Texas does not tell the whole story of its real impact on ratepayers. Consumers continue to pay for cost overruns and budget shortfalls from STP's bungled and hugely expensive construction through charges on their utility bills. Customers in the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) continue to pay $3.4 billion for nuclear assets through these transition charges, as well as $45 million a year for nuclear decommissioning, the process of safely retiring, dismantling and storing the waste from a nuclear power plant.
"Consumers pick up the tab when these nuclear power plants go over budget," said Eric Lane, representative of the Consumer Energy Coalition. "We're still paying legacy costs for STP and are helping NRG save up for when that plant has to be decommissioned. When the time comes, if NRG hasn't collected enough money to pay for decommissioning costs, it will just keep charging ratepayers even after the plant ceases to produce electricity. We really need to be looking at what San Antonio is going to have to pay for its share of this $20 billion."
Another hidden cost for ratepayers exists in the form of nuclear subsidies. The nuclear industry has been very successful at securing federal subsidies for this new wave of nuclear projects in the form of loan guarantees, production tax credits, investment tax credits and insurance. Of these, loan guarantees impose the greatest risk on taxpayers. The Congressional Budget Office has stated that the likelihood of default on these loans is 50 percent or greater. In the last wave of nuclear power plant construction, at least 40 nuclear power plants were abandoned prior to completion - proof that the risk to taxpayers is real and substantial.
NRG also already holds a dominant market share of the ERCOT market. If STP is expanded as proposed, NRG will have the even greater potential to exercise market power and drive up generation prices to reduce the losses that will result from inevitable cost overruns and construction delays. The high cost of nuclear capacity could indirectly translate into higher power prices for all Texas consumers.
Finally, the report finds that nuclear energy is uneconomical when compared to other alternative sources of power generation. A new nuclear plant will be 50 percent more expensive over its life than the primary conventional alternative, combined cycle gas generation. This runs squarely against industry claims that nuclear power represents the cheapest energy source available.
"Even when compared with renewable energy sources such as wind and solar, nuclear power simply does not measure up," said David Foster, director of Clean Water Action. "But energy efficiency is by far our most cost effective resource. For just 15 percent of what we would spend on STP, Texas could save as much energy as would be provided by 14 new nuclear reactors. We don't need to generate massive amounts of new energy when we can use less for just a fraction of the cost."
To download the full report, a fact sheet of its major findings and a chronology of STP, visit https://www.citizen.org/texas.
Public Citizen is a nonprofit consumer advocacy organization that champions the public interest in the halls of power. We defend democracy, resist corporate power and work to ensure that government works for the people - not for big corporations. Founded in 1971, we now have 500,000 members and supporters throughout the country.
(202) 588-1000LATEST NEWS
'Unprecedented': Belgian Police Blast Climate Defenders With Water Cannon
"The fact that national governments are subsidizing fossil fuels is akin to a crime against humanity," said one Extinction Rebellion organizer.
May 05, 2024
The climate action group Extinction Rebellion Belgium on Saturday decried what it called "disproportionate police violence" against nonviolent demonstrators who were blasted with a water cannon during a protest in Brussels demanding an end to fossil fuel subsidies.
Hundreds of Extinction Rebellion-led climate defenders blocked Rue Belliard in the European Quarter, the de facto European Union capital, during EU Open Day, when agencies of the 27-nation bloc open their doors to the public. In what Extinction Rebellion called an "unprecedented police response," officers used a truck-mounted water cannon on the protesters, some of whom were also allegedly struck with batons.
Brussels police said 132 activists—some of whom glued themselves to the ground—were arrested.
"This police behavior toward nonviolent protesters exercising their freedom of assembly is illegal and authoritarian," Extinction Rebellion Belgium said in a statement Saturday.
"The use of water cannons against peaceful demonstrators is of great concern," the group added. "We call on the police to exercise restraint and respect the right to demonstrate peacefully and without violence."
The activists are calling on European governments to stop subsidizing fossil fuels amid a worsening planetary crisis. They're also demanding the declaration of a climate emergency.
"National and European governments are spending at least €405 billion each year subsidizing major fossil fuel corporations," protest spokesperson Bertina Maes toldThe Brussels Times. "That's ten times more than what's spent on climate policy."
Maes said the Belgian government alone spent as much as €20 billion ($21.5 billion) on fossil fuel subsidies in 2020, more than 2% of the country's gross domestic product.
"The fact that national governments are subsidizing fossil fuels is akin to a crime against humanity," she asserted.
This weekend's demonstration and arrests come a month before E.U. parliamentary elections. According to an April Eurobarometer survey conducted by the European Parliament, climate action is the fifth-most important issue to voters, after poverty and social exclusion, health, jobs, and defense and security.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Israel Bans Al Jazeera in 'Assault on Freedom of the Press'
"Rather than trying to silence reporting on its atrocities in Gaza, the Israeli government should stop committing them," said one observer.
May 05, 2024
The Jerusalem offices of Al Jazeera were raided Sunday after Israel's far-right Cabinet banned the Qatar-based satellite news network—the sole international media outlet providing 24/7 live coverage from Gaza—from operating in the country.
"If you're watching this… then Al Jazeera has been banned in Israel," correspondent Imran Khan said in a pre-recorded report from occupied East Jerusalem preempting the Israeli Cabinet's unanimous vote to shutter the network.
The order—which does not affect Al Jazeera's ability to operate in Gaza or the illegally occupied Palestinian territories—is believed to be the first of its kind targeting a foreign media outlet operating in Israel. It comes after the Knesset, Israel's parliament, recently voted 71-10 in favor of a law empowering the Israeli communications minister to ban foreign news organizations from working in Israel and to confiscate their equipment.
"The time has come to eject Hamas' mouthpiece from our country," Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a televised address.
Ofir Gendelman, Netanyahu's Arab media spokesperson, said Sunday that the closure would be "implemented immediately."
Gendelman said that the network's "broadcast equipment will be confiscated, the channel's correspondents will be prevented from working, the channel will be removed from cable and satellite television companies, and Al Jazeera's websites will be blocked on the internet."
In a statement, Al Jazeera vowed to "pursue all available legal channels through international legal institutions in its quest to protect both its rights and journalists, as well as the public's right to information."
"Israel's ongoing suppression of the free press, seen as an effort to conceal its actions in the Gaza Strip, stands in contravention of international and humanitarian law," the network added. "Israel's direct targeting and killing of journalists, arrests, intimidation, and threats will not deter Al Jazeera."
The New York-based Foreign Press Association issued a statement slamming the move and saying it "should be a cause for concern for all supporters of a free press."
"With this decision, Israel joins a dubious club of authoritarian governments to ban the station," the group said. "This is a dark day for the media. This is a dark day for democracy."
Human Rights Watch Israel and Palestine director Omar Shakir called the order "an assault on freedom of the press."
"Rather than trying to silence reporting on its atrocities in Gaza, the Israeli government should stop committing them," he added.
Al Jazeera is the only international news network providing nonstop on-the-ground coverage of Israel's war on Gaza, often being the first to report Israeli atrocities in what many experts worldwide say is a genocidal campaign in the besieged, starving strip.
Its correspondents and other media professionals work under constant risk to life and limb. More than 100 journalists, the vast majority of them Palestinians, have been killed by Israeli forces since October 7 in what the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) and others say are often intentional targetings of not only media workers but also their families.
In December, Israeli forces killedAl Jazeera cameraman Samer Abudaqa as he reported on the war in southern Gaza, an attack that also wounded Al Jazeera Gaza bureau chief Wael Dahdouh—whose wife, son, daughter, and grandson were killed in a separate Israeli strike.
Previous probes—like the investigation into Israeli troops' 2022 killing of renowned Palestinian American Al Jazeera reporter Shireen Abu Akleh—have confirmed that Israel has deliberately targeted journalists.
Last May, CPJ published Deadly Pattern, a report that found Israeli troops had killed at least 20 journalists over the past 22 years with utter impunity. While some of the slain journalists have been foreigners—including Italian Associated Press reporter Simone Camilli and British cameraman and filmmaker James Miller—the vast majority of victims have been Palestinian.
Israeli forces have also attacked newsrooms in every major assault on Gaza, including in May 2021 when the 11-story al-Jalaa Tower, which housed offices of Al Jazeera, The Associated Press, and other media outlets, was completely destroyed in an airstrike.
On Friday—World Press Freedom Day—Palestinian journalists covering the war on Gaza were awarded this year's UNESCO/Guillermo Cano World Press Freedom Prize after being recommended by an international jury of media professionals.
Keep ReadingShow Less
On Kent State Massacre Anniversary, Progressives Decry Repression of Student Protests
"The militarized repression of young people speaking out against a terrible war was shameful then and it's shameful now," said one state lawmaker.
May 04, 2024
As U.S. Republicans push for the deployment of National Guard troops to quell nationwide student demonstrations against the Gaza genocide, progressive lawmakers marked the anniversary of the 1970 Kent State Massacre by condemning police repression of peaceful protesters and reaffirming the power of dissent.
"On the 54th anniversary of the Kent State Massacre, students across our country are being brutalized for standing up to endless war," Congresswoman Cori Bush (D-Mo.) said on social media. "Our country must learn to actually uphold the rights of free speech and assembly upon which it was founded."
Fellow "Squad" member Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) said that "54 years ago, the Ohio National Guard opened fire on unarmed students at Kent State."
"Students have a right to speak out, organize, and protest systemic wrongs," she added. "We can't silence those expressing dissent, no matter how uncomfortable their protests may be to those in power."
On May 4, 1970, 28 Ohio National Guard troops fired 67 live rounds into a crowd of unarmed Kent State students rallying against the expansion of the U.S.-led war in Vietnam into Cambodia. They murdered students Allison Krause, Jeffrey Glenn Miller, Sandra Lee Scheuer, and William Knox Schroeder—all aged 19 or 20. Nine other students were wounded, including one who was permanently paralyzed.
"The militarized repression of young people speaking out against a terrible war was shameful then and it's shameful now," New York state Assemblywoman Emily Gallagher (D-50) said on Saturday.
Protests against Israel's assault on Gaza—which according to Palestinian and international officials has killed, maimed, or left missing more than 123,000 Gazans—have spread to dozens of campuses across the U.S. and around the world. Police have been called in to break up protest encampments at numerous schools. Hundreds of students, faculty, and journalists have been arrested, sometimes violently.
At the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), police stood by this week as a pro-Israel mob attacked a campus protest encampment before officers arrested peaceful protesters and supporters.
As law enforcement officials have tried to justify the crackdown by claiming "outside agitators" are behind the protests, some observers noted historical parallels.
"Watching what is happening at UCLA," Virginia state Sen. Mamie Locke (D-2) said on social media. "Old enough to remember Kent State, Jackson State, South Carolina State, and the dog whistles of 'law and order,' 'outside agitators.' So reminiscent of 1968."
On February 8, 1968, police shot 31 students—most of them in the back—at a protest against Jim Crow segregation at South Carolina State University in Orangeburg, murdering three young Black men: Samuel Hammond Jr., Delano Middleton, and Henry Smith.
Eleven days after Kent State, police opened fire on a crowd of Black students protesting the bombing of Cambodia at Jackson State College in Jackson, Mississippi, killing Phillip Lafayette Gibbs and James Earl Green and injuring 12 others.
"Our institutions must learn from these past mistakes to not use militarized responses against unarmed, peaceful student protesters by calling in the National Guard, bringing in state troopers, or deploying police in riot gear," Laurel Krause, the sister of slain Kent State protester Allison Krause, said in a statement marking the ignominious anniversary.
"We must not repeat the horrors of Kent State 54 years later," she added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular