Platts - Friday, March 17, 2006 http://www.platts.com ------------ Duke, Southern considering joint plant project Washington (Platts)--16Mar2006 Duke Power and Southern Co. are jointly considering whether to build a new nuclear power plant in Cherokee County, South Carolina. Under a joint agreement announced today, the companies said they would work together to develop a combined construction permit-operating license (COL) and submit it to the NRC in late 2007 or early 2008. The COL would seek approval for construction of two Westinghouse AP1000s. Duke, the developer and licensed operator, would own 55% of the project and Southern the remainder. Southern's share would represent about 500 MW of output, said Southern Nuclear spokeswoman Sandi Robinson. The companies said they will decide later whether to actually build the units. During a telephone conference call today with reporters, Duke Chief Nuclear Officer Brew Barron said the units, if built, would cost $4 billion to $6 billion. Duke announced that it separately is considering preparing early site permit (ESP) applications for locations in Oconee County, South Carolina, and Davie County, North Carolina. ESPs would allow the company to "bank" those sites for 20 years in case it decided to build reactors there. ------------ Exelon says it hasn't had a chance to read Illinois AG suit yet Washington (Platts)--16Mar2006 Exelon Nuclear said Thursday it had not had a chance to study a lawsuit filed against its parent company by the Illinois Attorney General earlier Thursday, but was taking full responsibility for low-level tritium contamination near the Braidwood power plant in Will County, Illinois. Chicago-based Exelon said it was moving forward with remediation plans and work at the site and was continuing discussions with the AG's office on the matter. "We expected this announcement, and the positive aspect is that we can now focus on removing the tritiated groundwater and move on," said Thomas O'Neill, Exelon Nuclear's vice president of regulatory affairs. "We also know we have some bridge-rebuilding to do with our neighbors near the plant and regulators," O'Neill added. "We intend to do whatever it takes to strengthen our relationship with our neighbors." The eight-count complaint, filed Thursday in Will County Circuit Court, names as defendants Exelon Corp., Commonwealth Edison and Exelon Generation Corp. Exelon Generation and ComEd produce and distribute nuclear power for their parent, Exelon Corp. ComEd was the owner and operator of the Braidwood station until 2000, when Exelon assumed those duties. The suit accuses Exelon of releasing tritiated water at eight separate locations on its property. Three distinct releases occurred in 1996, 1998 and 2000, and three other releases occurred at unknown times, the suit alleges. An additional release occurred at an unknown time in the area near and to the west of the station and an eighth release occurred March 13 near the tritiated water temporary storage area at the plant, the suit alleges. For more information, take a trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at http://nucweek.platts.com. ------------ Southern, Duke to develop COL for possible South Carolina plant Washington (Platts)--16Mar2006 Southern Company said Thursday that it has entered into an agreement with Duke Power to evaluate the possible construction of a new nuclear plant at a site near Gaffney, South Carolina. Southern and Duke Power will work together to develop an application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a combined construction and operating license at the site, which is located in Cherokee County in the Cherokee Falls community, it said. Duke Power, in a separate release, said the COL would be for two Westinghouse AP1000 advanced passive reactors, capable of producing about 1,117 MW each. Duke and Southern anticipate submitting the NRC application in late 2007 or early 2008, Duke said. Submitting the COL application, however, does not commit either company will building the new units -- they will decide at a later date whether to proceed with construction. "This agreement is another step Southern Company is taking to explore economical and reliable generating options and to preserve the nuclear power option for meeting future energy needs," said Barnie Beasley, president and chief executive of Southern Nuclear, which operates Southern Company's nuclear assets. "This joint project between Southern Company and Duke Power is a good fit," Beasley said. "Duke Power's business model is compatible with Southern Company's, and Duke Power is well respected in the nuclear industry for its nuclear expertise and strong operating experience. The joint project maximizes benefits for both companies." Duke Power would develop and be the licensed operator of any plant built on the site. Southern Company would be the facility's co-owner. The deal is part of each company's long-term generation planning strategy for meeting growing customer needs. Duke said also that it is considering preparation of early-site permit applications for locations in Oconee County, South Carolina, and Davie County, North Carolina. Early site permits enable companies to complete environmental and site-suitability reviews and obtain approval from the NRC for potential nuclear plant sites in advance of requesting a license to build and operate a plant. For more information, take a trial to Platts Nucleonics Week at http://nucweek.platts.com. ------------ EC official questions nuclear as efficient, economic choice London (Platts)--16Mar2006 The costs for new nuclear power are "huge," and from an economic perspective it may not be the best choice for helping to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, a European Commission official told Platts March 14. "From a pure market perspective, you have to look at what is really economic and efficient," said Lars Mueller, a policy officer with the EC Environment directorate general. "There are huge costs for nuclear power, if you include the costs for waste, and the waste problem is not solved in any country. Neither is the problem of decommissioning." He did not give any cost figures. As a policy officer, Mueller ranks just below EC commissioners. He is involved with negotiations with European Union states about areas such as emissions trading and makes recommendations to the EC commissioners. Mueller was in Stockholm speaking at a public hearing on climate change organized by members of the Permanent Standing Committee on Environment and Agriculture in the Riksdag, or parliament. Mueller said he was doubtful of Finnish claims that the 1,600-MW EPR being built at Olkiluoto for Teollisuuden Voima Oy, or TVO, is the most economic way to get more baseload power. "I would be interested to hear how they justify the investment," he said. Finland has said that nuclear is economical since TVO is a cooperative that sells power at cost to its owners and that the owners would be willing to pay a small premium for security of supply. TVO also has said it can run the unit as least as efficiently as its existing reactors, so electricity from the new unit would not cost any more. Mueller added that the decision to build a new unit in Finland was made for "policy reasons, not economic reasons," noting Finland's desire to reduce its energy dependency on neighboring Russia. Finnish political and utility sources admit that they want to reduce dependence on Russian electricity and are willing to pay a premium for that. But they also say they believe that a new nuclear unit can be cost competitive for the cooperative shareholders in TVO, compared to their other choices for buying electricity. Mueller said, however, that given the lack of commercially viable renewable technology, nuclear cannot simply be ruled out. But countries that choose not to use it, and opt instead for renewables, must "seriously step up investment in these technologies." The market, he said, "should play a major role in giving the answer as to what type of energy we have in the future." He also called for "big money" to be put into programs for energy efficiency in countries such as China and India where economic growth is creating huge demand for more power. During his talk, Mueller said that European Union, or EU, states must do more to cut greenhouse gas emissions, as well as develop plans for adapting to a certain amount of climate change which he said is inevitable. While he said that one way to cut emissions may be with carbon capture and storage technology, he noted that it carries "many legal questions. There are liability issues that need to be sorted out." EU states also need to be thinking now about what kind of program should be set up to combat climate change after the second phase of the EU Emissions Trading System ends in 2012, Mueller said. Despite uncertainty over what will happen to the system after that date, and worries about whether the EU can sustain the system if countries such as the US don't participate, Mueller said he is convinced that "we will have emissions trading after 2012. The question is what kind of trading we will have. But the directive is there and this is one of our key measures." This story was originally published in Platts Nucleonics Week. Request a free trial at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/ ------------ Proposed law for nuclear trade with India sent to Capitol Hill London (Platts)--16Mar2006 The Bush administration last week sent draft legislation to Congress to allow nuclear exports to India, launching what could be a period of intense activity as the administration presses to have a package on Indian nuclear trade ready for a key international meeting in May. In initial signs of the effort, the administration, US businesses and other supporters prepared opinion pieces and letters to Congress touting the deal. But congressional staffers promised close scrutiny of the legislation and expressed some skepticism that they would wrap up their work as quickly as the administration would like. On March 2, US President George W. Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh announced agreement on a plan to separate India's military facilities from its civilian ones and place the latter under IAEA safeguards (NW, 9 March, 1). That step, announced during a trip to India by Bush, was one of several pledges Singh made in a joint statement with Bush when Singh visited the US last July. In the July 18 joint statement, Bush promised expanded nuclear trade with India in return for the nonproliferation steps. Current US law and Nuclear Suppliers Group guidelines prohibit exports of most nuclear goods to countries, such as India, that do not accept so-called "full-scope safeguards"?IAEA safeguards on all their nuclear facilities. In the July 18 statement, Bush pledged to "adjust" US law and the NSG guidelines to allow exports to India. Since then, administration officials have said they would wait to submit the proposed legislation until India completed the separation plan. The draft language was sent to Capitol Hill March 9. The next day, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs R. Nicholas Burns, the principal US negotiator with India, addressed the Coalition for Partnership with India, a project of the US Chamber of Commerce to push for approval of the deal. At the event, CPI released a letter to Congress by 25 former diplomats and other foreign-policy veterans urging Congress to support the deal. On March 12, Robert Kagan of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, one of the signers of the letter, used his monthly column on the Washington Post op-ed page to argue for the deal. A full version of this news sotry was published in Platts Nucleonics Week. Request a free trial at http://www.platts.com/Request%20More%20Information/ ------------ Two dozen states might be repository candidate, again Washington (Platts)--15Mar2006 More than two dozen states could be back on the hook for a repository as DOE looks at the need for a second disposal facility. Paul Golan, acting director of the department's nuclear waste program, told a House Appropriations subcommittee today that eastern and western candidate sites that DOE looked at in the 1980s would be considered again. The department is to report to Congress sometime between January 2007 and 2010 on the need for a second repository. Following the hearing, Golan sidestepped a media question on why DOE was considering sites when it hasn't decided yet whether a second facility would be needed. However, at least one observer of the DOE program said that action could generate more congressional support for the proposed facility at Yucca Mountain, Nevada as lawmakers try to keep a repository out of their states. ------------