Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Exelon CEO John Rowe on Friday said his company won't be building new nuclear plants

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
bananas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-25-09 08:20 PM
Original message
Exelon CEO John Rowe on Friday said his company won't be building new nuclear plants
Exelon CEO says company will focus on nuke upgrades, transmission

Washington (Platts)--24Jul2009

Exelon CEO John Rowe on Friday said his company won't be building new
nuclear plants, believing that increasing the capacity of units in its
existing fleet is a much better value.

Rowe's statement comes after the company on June 30 said it was
postponing indefinitely plans to build a new nuclear plant in Victoria County,
Texas, after it was not selected as a finalist for the US Department of
Energy's first round of loan guarantees.

Rowe has consistently said that, given the high capital cost of the
project, DOE loan guarantees would be "imperative" for Exelon to move ahead
with new nuclear build.

On Friday, in the company's second-quarter earnings conference call, Rowe
said uprates for nuclear plants cost about half as much as it would to build a
new plant and that the execution risk was "substantially lower." He said the
company had added the equivalent of a new plant through uprates over the past
decade.

<snip>


Amory Lovins is proven right again: efficiency improvements are much cheaper than building new reactors.
When Rowe says the execution risk is "substantially lower", he's not kidding.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, the risk of default on new reactors is "very high - well above 50 percent."
Hard to find investors when they'd get better odds playing the roulette wheel in Vegas.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Arctic Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-25-09 08:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. This why nnadir is back, he's out of a job. I'm sorry nnadir.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-25-09 11:44 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Where, exactly, do you think I went?
To dumb fundie school?

In fact, if I were out of a job, I could certainly count on dumb fundie bourgeois brats to cheer for that fact, or suggest that I get a minimum wage job wiping dust covered solar thermal plants in Arizona.

But in fact, I work. I have worked my whole life, since I was sixteen both for fun and for profit.

I do, however, understand the mentality of people who consume without producing a single thing. I've been watching that type my whole life too.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arctic Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-25-09 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. I've missed your colorful personality. I guess we are on different time zones. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-26-09 12:07 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Actually, I have been writing far less on websites.
I spend way too much time fighting ignorance and the same stupid assholes who come year after year after year announcing that solar has saved us, and "BREAKTHROUGH!!!!!!! For Saving My Consumer Car" for free and not enough developing my ideas for my own profit.

Most days I scan quite a bit of material, and read a fair amount on a deeper level. I would say that I have learned more in the last three years than I have learned in my entire life before that. God Bless the electronic scientific literature.

I still hold anti-science in contempt of course, and I still despise ignorance, but it's not like I can make ignorance go away. It's here to stay, I've decided, and one must merely do the best one can in little ways.

I mean it's not like you can really teach a dumb fundie who insists that um, for, um, instance that http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/table1_1.html">3,353,487 > 4,048,969 that maybe that, um, simple inequality is um, wrong, any more than one could have taught Jerry Fawell genetics. It's not like years and years and years and years and years and years of addressing these points has enabled EVEN ONE fundie anti-nuke to learn how to compare numbers.

Anyway, as for our relationship, I have to be honest here: I have no idea who you are.

I should really go to bed. I don't need this shit anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Javaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-27-09 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. LOL you never ever fail to entertain!
You just gave me the biggest laugh today, thanks!!!

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-25-09 11:37 PM
Response to Original message
2. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
bananas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-26-09 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #2
8. Reagan followed the hard energy path, not the soft energy path
Lovins 1976 article compared two scenarios, which he called the hard energy path and the soft energy path.
Reagan sent us down the road of the hard energy path, with his cheap oil and pro-nuclear policies.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dogmudgeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-26-09 01:30 AM
Response to Original message
6. It's interesting what gets snipped
"Cornew said price pressures and the weakness of the credit markets would put a damper on new transmission build. This in turn would lead to generators in the PJM Interconnection to consider reconnecting older coal-fired generation that have been taken offline or continuing to operate plants that may have been scheduled for retirement, Cornew said."

--d!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-26-09 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
7. Uprating existing nuke plants -- sounds good to me.
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bananas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-26-09 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. No new nuke plants -- sounds good to me.
It's a win-win!
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 09:41 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC