More Conversations with Crazy Uncle Bob: Why Not Nuclear?

Uncle Bob may think that, if it weren’t for pesky hippy protesters, we’d be running the economy on nuclear power now, but Uncle Bob would be wrong.

“Old” “nuclear was hobbled by technical snafus and resulting dodgy economics.
“New” nuclear will be getting a chance to prove itself, but it will be subject to the demands of the market as well.

Wall Street Journal:

A new nuclear reactor reached commercial operation in Georgia on Monday, completing a project whose delays and sticker shock helped upend the near-term prospects for nuclear power in the U.S.

The first two reactors at Plant Vogtle, operated by Southern Co., opened in the 1980s. Adding two new reactors cost more than $30 billion, more than twice the initial estimates, and are a major reason no other large nuclear-power facilities are under development in the U.S. and the industry focus has shifted to smaller designs.

Still, Plant Vogtle is now the nation’s largest nuclear plant, as well as its largest generator of carbon-free electricity, and its arrival comes as public perceptions of nuclear power have been shifting. The two newest reactors can each deliver power to around 500,000 homes and businesses, according to Georgia Power, a unit of Southern Co. 

Chris Womack, chairman and chief executive of Southern Co., called the Vogtle expansion a “hallmark achievement.” “These new Vogtle units not only will support the economy within our communities now and in the future, they demonstrate our global nuclear leadership,” Womack said.

Southern also operates another nuclear plant in Georgia, and last year about a quarter of its generation in that state was nuclear. 

The project in Georgia was plagued by delays, design changes and turmoil. Cost overruns there and at a project in South Carolina, later abandoned, caused the original contractor, Westinghouse Electric, to declare bankruptcy in 2016. Southern later took over the project, only to be hit by pandemic-related disruptions to construction. 

The average Georgia Power residential customer has already paid around $1,000 for the plant’s construction, which lasted seven years longer than expected, said Liz Coyle, executive director of the nonprofit consumer group Georgia Watch.

“A cliché, but it’s about time,” Coyle said. “This is the most expensive form of electricity and we’ve long been concerned that Georgia Power’s customers, particularly their residential customers, are going to struggle to pay their power bills.”

Coyle added, “Bottom line, we don’t want Georgia Power’s residential customers to have to take a risk like this ever again.”

The industry has a long history of delays and soaring costs. That combination also doomed the only other new U.S. nuclear power plant begun this century. In 2017, Scana Corp. scrapped plans to finish the half-built nuclear-power plant in South Carolina.

The experience at Vogtle tamped down the enthusiasm of the utilities industry to pursue large nuclear projects. Instead, utilities across the U.S. have started to include the proposed next generation of nuclear projects into their long-term planning. The idea behind so-called small modular reactors, or SMRs, is that they are potentially cheaper alternatives because they could be built in a factory and shipped to sites, one after another, to achieve economies of scale. 

No one has delivered an SMR in the U.S., though, and that industry will also have to prove it can deliver with reasonable costs and timelines.

3 thoughts on “More Conversations with Crazy Uncle Bob: Why Not Nuclear?”


  1. This proposed SMR plant in Utah certainly wouldn’t have been cheap either.
    $9.3 billion for 462 MW generating capacity?

    Assessing a Small Reactor Failure

    “A plan to build a novel nuclear power plant comprising six small modular reactors (SMRs) fell apart this week when prospective customers for its electricity backed out. Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS), a coalition of community-owned power systems in seven western states, withdrew from a deal to build the plant, designed by NuScale Power, because too few members agreed to buy into it. The project, subsidized by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), sought to revive the moribund U.S. nuclear industry, but its cost had more than doubled to $9.3 billion.”

    https://climatecrocks.com/2023/11/21/assessing-a-small-reactor-failure/


  2. “New” nuclear will be getting a chance to prove itself, but it will be subject to the demands of the market as well.

    There’s an economic feedback effect that as non-nuclear renewables get cheaper, it’s making the cost-effective niche for nuclear get smaller. SMRs target for lower cost depends on volume, and well-designed alternatives are eating their potential market share.

    This is related to feedback on the PV/wind/storage front, too, since cheaper energy prices cut into margins, making new power plants (of any sort) have to compete head-to-head with the same technology and the same power generation profile (as opposed to the early days when new solar and wind could complement the existing power providers), and are less attractive to investors.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from This is Not Cool

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading