Duke Energy Should Be Denied Taxpayer Subsidies
to Build New Nuclear Reactors; Better Alternatives Exist
http://www.allamericanpatriots.com/m-news+article+storyid-14423.html
March 17, 2006 -- WASHINGTON, D.C. – Duke Energy’s
plan to apply for a construction and operation license to build
two new nuclear reactors at a site owned by Southern Co. in
Cherokee County, S.C., should not be permitted to come to
fruition, Public Citizen said today. Duke is angling to receive
billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies to defray the costs of
applying for a license as well as operating the plants; it should
not be given a government handout for the application, the
organization said. Nor should the government issue a license.
Not only does nuclear power pose a threat to public health
and safety, but Duke Energy has a track record that indicates
it has been dishonest with consumers.
No new reactors have been ordered in the United States for
30 years, and for good reason. Nuclear power is extremely
expensive and not economically viable in the marketplace –
no nuclear power plant has operated without taxpayer money
since the nuclear power industry was born. It also poses a
public safety and national security threat and creates
dangerous highly radioactive waste, for which no country in
the world has a solution, and will not be effective in addressing
climate change.
Further, Duke Energy has one of the worst track records of
energy companies in the United States when it comes to
manipulating markets and cheating consumers. Duke Energy
has been forced to pay $257 million to settle allegations of
market manipulation and other misdeeds in the past three
years. Consider:
* In September 2003, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading
Commission fined Duke Energy $28 million for manipulating
natural gas markets.
* In December 2003, the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission fined Duke Energy $2.5 million, resolving an
investigation into allegations that Duke engaged in market
gaming practices during the California energy crisis.
* In July 2004, the California attorney general announced a
$207.5 million “electricity price-gouging settlement” with Duke
Energy for the company’s role in ripping off the state’s
consumers during the energy crisis that led to forced blackouts
and almost bankrupted California, harming many small
businesses and consumers.
* The California Independent System Operator (CAISO) in
2001 rescinded $14.4 million in payments Duke Energy had
received after the company did not make its power plants
available for the California market. The CAISO then issued a
$4.5 million fine against Duke for failing to follow California
market rules during a declared system emergency.
* In July 2005, the Securities and Exchange Commission
imposed a cease-and-desist order on Duke Energy because
Duke’s internal accounting controls were insufficient to ensure
that its traders properly recorded their trading activities. As a
result, Duke Energy illegally classified $56.2 million of the
company’s speculative power and natural gas trading operations.
If Duke is permitted to proceed with its proposal, taxpayers
could be on the hook for cradle-to-grave subsidies, including:
* half the cost of applying for the license, estimated at as much
as $45 million per application for pre-approved reactor designs;
* “risk insurance” to pay the industry for delays in licensing,
which could be up to $500 million each for the first two plants;
* taxpayer-backed loan guarantees for up to 80 percent of the
cost of a project, potentially costing taxpayers more than $2
billion per plant; and
* production tax credits of 1.8-cents for each kilowatt-hour of
nuclear-generated electricity from new reactors during the first
eight years of operation, estimated at a total of $5.7 billion in
revenue losses to the U.S. Treasury through 2025.
For these reasons, we urge the government to deny Duke
Energy federal dollars to subsidize the exorbitant costs of
building new reactors and ultimately deny the company a license.
Renewable energy is a viable alternative to nuclear power and
conventional fuels, and can meet the country’s energy needs
without the burdens of carbon emissions or radioactive waste.
In addition to renewable technologies themselves, using energy
more efficiently is an important part of moving to a clean
energy future. The increase in energy demand Duke predicts
can be met much more safely and effectively by efficiency
measures than through building new nuclear plants.
________________________________________________________________
Biodiesel leads to market for the burning down of rainforests.
When the U.S. Energy Policy Act of 1992 (Bush Sr.) deregulated
the price of power, all hell broke loose. Power traders diverted
funds away from building up reserves and modernizing equipment
in order to "stay competitive".
In 2003 the U.S. and Canada experienced a major blackout
affecting 50 million people. Curiously that same year Italy, Chile,
and Sweden also had massive blackouts.
National infrastructure globalization and deregulation is for the birds.
.
|
