Was this decision - pre-Buffet or post-Buffet?
----- Original Message -----
From: "gerald neff" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2013 4:10:43 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: Re: MidAmerican Energy Pulls the Plug on a new Iowa Nuke!!!!!
Mike, Great News! Thanks for working so hard on this. Jerry N
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Carberry <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 21:32:11 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: MidAmerican Energy Pulls the Plug on a new Iowa Nuke!!!!!
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20130603/NEWS/306030045/MidAmerican-decides-against-Iowa-nuclear-plant?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7CFrontpage&nclick_check=1
Utility decides against nuclear plantMidAmerican Energy says design plan
isn't approved; environmentalists celebrate
MidAmerican Energy has scrapped plans for Iowa’s second nuclear plant and
will refund $8.8 million ratepayers paid for a now-finished feasibility
study, utility officials said Monday.
The utility has decided against building any major power plant. That’s
because there is no approved design for the modular nuclear plant it
envisioned, and there are too many questions about limits on carbon
emissions from a natural gas plant, the company said.
“We opted for what was in the best interest of our customers,” MidAmerican
vice president for regulatory affairs Dean Crist told The Des Moines
Register.
The decision ends, for now, a three-year controversy over the future of
nuclear energy in Iowa and how to pay for a possible nuclear plant. Iowa
has one nuclear power plant, the Duane Arnold plant near Palo.
Crist said a feasibility study started in 2010 found that two 700-acre
sites near Thurman in southwest Iowa and Wilton in southeast Iowa would
work for a modular nuclear plant, which was expected to cost around $1
billion and to be built in phases.
The MidAmerican study, finished several months early, also noted that the
type of modular nuclear plant envisioned could be cost-effective, would be
safer than earlier plants and would be a $135 million annual boon to the
Iowa economy for 40 to 60 years.
In addition, the 11-year construction would bring another $1.2 billion in
spending, a peak of $75 million in payroll, and 1,880 jobs.
But MidAmerican said those modular plants have not been designed and
approved yet. And carbon regulations continue to make fossil-fuel plants a
tougher proposition, Crist said.
Muscatine County Supervisor Scott Sauer said he had opposed any power plant
at the Wilton-area site, preferring that the utility build on the sites of
decommissioned coal plants instead.
James Larew, an Iowa City lawyer, had been critical of MidAmerican’s
financial proposal for the plant because ratepayers, rather than investors,
would have borne the risk. He credited AARP and other organizations for
killing the legislation.
MidAmerican became part of a national wave of nuclear plant proposals in
the United States, which last year approved its first new reactors since
1978. More than 100 proposals turned up as utilities looked for ways to
sidestep almost certain limits on carbon emissions linked to climate change
and largely from coal and natural gas.
Plans softened after earthquakes and tsunamis caused the Fukushima nuclear
disaster in Japan in March 2011. Now, with natural gas cheaper and
plentiful, there is more talk about gas plants, and less about nuclear.
Mike Crecelius, Fremont County emergency management director, said he
wasn’t surprised by MidAmerican’s move. One of the sites was in the county,
and there has been widespread, unfounded concerns about groundwater
contamination, he said.
The Japan disaster didn’t help MidAmerican’s plan, said Crecelius, but he
noted that the Iowa plant would have used modular designs that would use
far more modern technology.
Iowa environmental groups that had objected to MidAmerican’s attempt to
charge ratepayers in advance for the nuclear plant praised the move to
scrap the project.
“Yay!” exclaimed Neila Seaman, director of the Iowa Chapter of Sierra Club.
“We are glad to hear that they are planning to expand their wind power. We
think that is a better option than nuclear power,” Seaman said.
“Nuclear power is dangerous and then there is the waste issue,” Seaman
added. “It is expensive and we just think there are better options.”
Others saw it as a victory for clean energy.
“I think our perspective is that the right mix of clean energy, whether
wind energy, or conservation, or both, can meet Iowa’s demand for energy,”
said Nathaniel Baer, who follows energy issues for the nonprofit Iowa
Environmental Council. “This is welcome news.”
The lack of an approved design for the new plants is another major reason
few reactors are expected to be built in the next decade.
MidAmerican will ask the Iowa Utilities Board to approve a refund and
cancel on July 1 the special charge ratepayers paid for the study. The
utility collected $14.2 million over several years, and it will return the
$8.8 million it didn’t spend on the site and market analysis, tests, and
the like.
The money would be refunded over a year, beginning in August.
MidAmerican plans to let its land options expire, and will sell a couple of
Muscatine County properties it bought for soil tests.
Crist said it probably will be toward the end of this decade before the
utility takes another hard look at a major power plant project.
In the meantime, MidAmerican will focus on its plan to build up to 656
wind turbines in a $1.9 billion project across Iowa, which also will trim
power bills by saving fuel costs.
Ratepayers will see a slight dip in bills because of the nuclear-study
refund, Crist noted.
MidAmerican President William Fehrman has a background in nuclear energy.
Over several years, he suggested the nuclear facility was the best choice
for a major plant needed for Iowa’s economic growth, as well as to replace
power from coal plants that would be mothballed as federal regulations
limiting carbon emissions ramp up.
But a controversial bill MidAmerican backed in the Iowa Legislature led to
a political brouhaha. On Monday, Crist said that fight didn’t doom the
plant, noting that MidAmerican could have petitioned the utilities board
to allow the financing.
The legislation would have allowed MidAmerican to charge customers for
planning and construction of the plant before it was built, and even if it
wasn’t, to a point.
In February 2012, an Iowa Poll found that 77 percent of Iowans polled
opposed the arrangement allowing the utility to charge customers up front
for the planning and construction. Eighteen percent favored the approach.
Mike Carberry
Green State Solutions-Director
Friends of the Earth-Iowa Nuclear Campaign Coordinator
Sierra Club-Nuclear Free Campaign Core Team
319-594-6453
[log in to unmask]
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]
Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]
Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp
To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]
Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp
To view the Sierra Club List Terms & Conditions, see:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/terms.asp
|
