Latest news with #HouseBill25-1040
Yahoo
21-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
A tale of two bills in Colorado
(Ned Oliver/Virginia Mercury) This commentary originally appeared at Big Pivots. Matters of little consequence often get major time and attention. And vice versa. Two energy bills in the Colorado Legislature this year, one about nuclear energy and the second about electrical transmission, illustrate this. The first bill, House Bill 25-1040, which is now law, declared that nuclear energy is clean. It proclaims that utilities can meet clean-energy targets with nuclear. It also allows private projects access to financing restricted to clean energy development. The bill sailed through the Legislature. Gov. Jared Polis signed it into law March 31. For believers, those who want to believe that nuclear energy will be the answer, it was a big win. To what effect? Likely none. Forget about nuclear waste and safety concerns. Cost of energy from new nuclear plans remains exorbitant. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Some of this was sorted through in a four-hour committee hearing in March. Chuck Kutscher was among several dozen individuals given two-minute slots to testify. He deserved more time. A nuclear engineer by training, he subsequently moved into renewables, retiring from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory several years ago. At a later meeting in Jefferson County, Kutscher explained why he expects nuclear energy to play no role in Colorado's energy transition. It comes down to cost. 'I like to give credit where credit is due. And the fact is that nuclear power in this country has saved a heck of a lot of carbon dioxide and air pollution emissions,' he said. 'Nuclear provides almost half of U.S. carbon-free electricity, which is pretty impressive.' As for costs, Kutscher cited two metrics courtesy of Lazard, a financial company that monitors electrical generation. The cost of building new nuclear plants comes in at $8,000 to $13,000 per kilowatt of generating capacity. Solar comes in at $1,400, wind at $2,000. A broader metric, the levelized cost, includes capital, fuel and operating costs over the life of an energy plant. 'The longer a plant runs, the lower its life-cycle costs, because it's producing more energy,' Kutscher explained. By this measure, nuclear still comes up short: 18 cents a kilowatt-hour compared to solar and wind for 5 and 6 cents. Might costs drop with a new generation of small modular reactors? SMRs can generate 300 megawatts or less. One was planned in the West, but in 2023 the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems pulled out of its contract with nuclear company NuScale — because of cost. If nuclear costs make it a non-starter in Colorado, can renewables deliver us to an emission-free electrical system? The sun vanishes daily, and sometimes winds on our eastern plains die down, even for days. Kutscher sees possible solutions in improving storage technologies and expanded transmission. Transmission can enable electricity to be shared across multiple time zones and weather systems. Even moving electricity around Colorado more efficiently has value. The second bill, Senate Bill 24-127, proposes to do that. It would require investor-owned utilities to investigate tools called advanced transmission technologies. They will enable more use from existing transmission lines and associated infrastructure. Larry Milosevich, a Lafayette resident, decided six years ago to devote himself to fewer pursuits. He says he chose the role of advanced technologies for transmission because of its oversized impact. The transmission system developed during the last century has many inefficiencies. 'I would love to see advanced transmission technologies get a little more light,' he says. Why hasn't it happened? 'It doesn't have sex appeal.' This bill will not solve all problems. 'You need a lot of arrows in your quiver to get there. And it's not one technology that's going to save the day,' says Leah Rubin Shen, managing director of Advanced Energy United, an industry association that advocates for technologies and policies that advance decarbonization. More transmission will still be needed. Approvals take time. Using these tools can more rapidly expand capacity at lower cost. 'We characterize it as a no-regrets solution,' says Rubin Shen. State Sen. Cleave Simpson, a Republican from Alamosa, was the primary author of the bill. 'We can increase the capacity and resilience of our infrastructure without having to undertake expensive, large-scale construction projects,' he told committee members at a March meeting. The committee that day heard from fewer than a dozen witnesses. It passed an amended bill and moved on within 45 minutes. Several weeks before, the same committee heard nuclear testimony for hours. In a later interview, Simpson described the bill, slimmed greatly in ambition from its original iteration, as 'maybe a tiny step forward, but a doable one.' Unlike nuclear, not the answer, but a doable one. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
CBS News
20-04-2025
- Business
- CBS News
Coal-dependent communities in Colorado consider nuclear transition after new state law
Economies in Colorado that have relied on coal for decades are now searching for another energy option as a new Colorado law pushes them away from coal energy production and mining. Craig, a city of about 10,000 people in the northwest corner of the state, is among those looking for an energy transition. City officials expect to lose around 700 jobs in the next few years, as coal mining and energy plants go offline. "First of the units closing by the end of 2025," Chris Nichols, mayor of Craig, said. "Units two and three will be closing in '28 and mid-year '28. So it'll be completely offline. One of the two coal mines that is closing at the end of this year as well." "What it really means- these are high-paying jobs for our community," Nichols said. "We have the heritage for the last 50 years or so in coal mining and power production, and a proud heritage of being able to supply power for the country. Now, we're evaluating anything we can, which will have a significant impact on the economy for the community." Alongside geothermal energy production, Nichols believes nuclear energy could be a solution too, but there's more to learn before the city simply says "yes." It's now a real possibility, thanks to a new Colorado law, which started as the bipartisan-sponsored House Bill 25-1040 , that adds nuclear energy to the definition of "clean energy" in Colorado, allowing it to qualify for retail utility to meet the 2050 clean energy target in the state. Democratic State Sen. Dylan Roberts, a co-sponsor of the bill that's now law and whose district includes Craig, believes nuclear energy is worth exploring if it's the right option for these kinds of communities facing a financial cliff in their future. "They want to be energy producers, they know that it can't be coal moving forward or it won't be coal because of those decisions that the companies have made, but it could be these modern nuclear generators that are very safe and smaller scale and but still do produce good jobs and produce a lot of energy that can be sent throughout the region," Roberts said. The small generators he's referencing are called small modular reactors, which have been used in Russia and China at this point. The smaller footprint of the processing of nuclear energy is only part of the sales pitch; the other being a new conversation about the reliability and environmental concerns that nuclear energy has brought into the equation in the past. "We're not talking about the giant smokestacks that we saw in Three Mile Island or Chernobyl," Roberts said. "These modern nuclear technologies are still being developed and being tested across the country and across the world. But we know that nuclear can be very safe, and it is used in 27 other states in our country. You have nuclear as part of their energy portfolio, and other countries like France get over 70% of their electricity from nuclear." Diversifying where Colorado gets its energy is a part of the process, Roberts explained, while trying to hold to the state's climate action goals. "We are not going to get to 100% carbon-free electricity with just solar and wind," Roberts said. "So we need to add something else to the mix or a few other things to the mix, and these produce really high-paying jobs. It is proven to be safe, and it can give us the electricity that we need. So that is the point, not to force this on anybody, but to let's let's have that conversation.' Nichols said it's not something the city is sold on right now, but absolutely something it wants to look into, considering the job growth, high-paying wages, and energy production that already runs in the natural fabric of the culture in Craig, with a new nuclear approach: "The new nuclear cycle is what we're looking at actually, everything from enrichment to generation, using the fuel to storing, to possibility recycling that fuel, re-enrichment. So it's a full cycle which does not exist today."
Yahoo
24-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Nuclear power will be the radioactive cousin of the fossil fuel industry
A doll dressed with a gas mask sits on a chair among hundreds of gas masks lying on the floor of abandoned School Number 3 in the ghost town of Pripyat not far from the Chernobyl nuclear power plant on Aug. 18, 2017 in Pripyat, Ukraine. () Corporate thirst for nuclear energy is growing to dangerous levels, and Colorado will take its first steps into that fire by passing the pro-nuclear bill, House Bill 25-1040, unless Gov. Jared Polis vetoes it. As we allow our civilization to become more dependent on electronic communication systems and press the boundaries of those systems, corporations are incentivized to produce and consume higher levels of energy every day. With the threat of human-caused climate change becoming a more widely acknowledged reality, lobbyists are persuading decision makers and the public that nuclear reactors are the solution we need to feed our needs and addictions while fending off climate disaster. Unfortunately, nuclear power will prove to be the radioactive cousin of the fossil fuel industry and continue to fuel the oligarchical social structure that eats at our humanity and resources. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX I spent eight years in the Navy operating nuclear reactors. The U.S. Navy provides a rigorous education and training program that includes many lessons about the history of nuclear energy and the Navy's immaculate operational record. But what does it take to maintain that record? Ask yourself why we thank veterans for their service. Military service comes with some inescapable horrors, including forfeiture of most of our rights. We are held to a standard of pursued perfection that can only be asked at gunpoint or under threat of imprisonment. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the Department of Labor don't allow the private sector to make you scream. We serve with the intention that civilians will not have to live that life, including ourselves once we have completed our duty. Can we trust civilians to operate nuclear reactors with the same dedication to perfection over their own well-being? Will power companies spend more than the minimum in order to hire enough engineers to ensure alert-attentive care of reactor systems? Most likely, at least 50% of the nuclear workforce will be former Navy operators like me. That sounds like a good idea, but these are people that have already served their time doing the hardest parts of power plant maintenance, and they are not as motivated as you might think to go back to it. Additionally, those same operators have pride that can become complacency in a civilian position. Educational corners will be cut and staff shortages abound across an industry wielding an extremely dangerous product. There are operating plants today that allow the same alarm to flash for months — the exact behavior that led to the Chernobyl and Three Mile Island nuclear accidents. Can we trust profit-driven corporations to hold a standard that will guarantee the safety of our communities? Oil companies cause spills that destroy entire regions. Plastics producers have lied about the recyclability of products that have infected almost all life on Earth with microplastics. Extraction industries around the world, including uranium mining, are responsible for ecological deformation and human rights abuses everywhere they exist. The Diné nation has generational scars specifically caused by the uranium industry that have driven them to ban even the transport of the substance through their territory. Even if we find relatively safe storage locations for fuel and waste, they will likely travel our highways and railroads, where accidents happen all the time. And I have yet to delve into the negative impacts on our water supplies. Our local and national elected officials have already been bought by industry owners and their own avarice, so convincing them to give up a potential cash cow seems futile. The only hope I have left is in the education we provide for each other. Do not fall victim to propaganda, but seek the lessons of history. The wealthy elite have always been willing to sacrifice others to realize their own gains and we would be fools to believe they will take any accountability for future harm caused by their business. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
22-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Colorado Utility Looking at Adding Nuclear Power to Fleet
A volunteer advisory group told the utility that serves Colorado's second-largest city that it should look at adding a small nuclear reactor for additional power generation. Colorado Springs Utilities (CSU) said it is reviewing the recommendation from the Utility Policy Advisory Committee (UPAC). That committee, which is not affiliated with the utility, in June of last year began researching the feasibility of nuclear energy for CSU. The volunteer group looked at current technology for small modular reactors (SMRs), along with regulatory, permitting, and environmental issues for a nuclear power project. The independent committee also looked at potential costs for CSU to add nuclear power to its portfolio. State lawmakers in the current legislative session have discussed whether nuclear power would qualify as "clean energy" in Colorado. A recently introduced bill, House Bill 25-1040—"Nuclear Energy as Clean Energy"—on Feb. 20 passed on second reading in the statehouse. Another site floated for a possible nuclear power plant is Pueblo in the southern part of the state. Xcel Energy, the state's largest electric utility, as part of its phase-out of coal-fired generation is expected to retire the 857-MWE Unit 3 of its Comanche Generating Station by 2031. The utility retired the 383-MW Unit 1 in 2022, and the similar Unit 2 is set to be closed this year. Xcel operates two nuclear power plants in its headquarters state of Minnesota. Kate Danner, chairperson for UPAC, told Colorado Springs television station KRDO, "We definitely think [adding nuclear] is something that needs to be on the radar of Colorado Springs Utilities. One of the advantages of those is that you can build onto [an SMR], so you can start with maybe like 50 megawatts [of output] and then add on different [SMRs] as your capacity needs increase." The utility has overhauled its power generation fleet in recent years. CSU brought the 175-MW Pike Solar project online in December 2023. The group permanently closed the long-running, coal-fired 208-MW Martin Drake power plant in 2022. CSU also plans to shutter its last coal-fired plant, the 207-MW Ray Nixon facility, by the end of the decade. The utility also has plans to add more wind, solar, and battery storage to its portfolio. [caption id="attachment_225888" align="alignnone" width="640"] NuScale's VOYGR small modular reactor was the first SMR to receive design approval from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Courtesy: NuScale[/caption] UPAC in its report to CSU listed examples of companies involved in the SMR sector, and estimated costs of such projects, including for construction. Those ranged from $12.9 billion for NuScale, an Oregon-based company considered among the leaders of U.S. companies in the SMR space; $10.7 billion for X-energy, a Maryland-based nuclear engineering group; and $7.4 billion for TerraPower, which broke ground last year on a nuclear power project in neighboring Wyoming. TerraPower, based in Washington state, was founded by investors including Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates. Danner noted that the timeline for an SMR project could be as along as decade. The UPAC group also noted that Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS) in 2023 canceled a $9 billion SMR project that had been discussed for several years. Investors backed away from the project as costs continued to rise. Danner said CSU could work on power purchase agreements or other partnerships with Colorado utilities such as Xcel, Black Hills Energy, the Tri-State Generation and Transmission membership cooperative, or Nebraska Public Power, which operates the 835-MW Cooper Nuclear Station. Mark Stutz, a spokesperson for Tri-State, recently told POWER, "Tri-State supports House Bill 25-1040. To meet Colorado's greenhouse gas reduction goals, adding this firm, baseload resource to the state's 'clean energy resource' definition encourages the continued develop of advanced nuclear generation technology as a viable resource option for utilities in the coming decade." Colorado has no operating nuclear power plants. The 330-MW Fort St. Vrain facility, which opened in 1979, was closed a decade later. It remains the state's first and only nuclear power station. Fort St. Vrain today is home to a 716-MW natural gas-fired power plant owned by Xcel. —Darrell Proctor is senior editor for POWER.
