Latest news with #VCSummer
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
South Carolina considers reviving failed $9B nuclear project
With growing demand for carbon-free, around-the-clock energy, more and more utilities, politicians and developers are looking toward nuclear power as a potential solution. The trouble is, for decades, U.S. nuclear development has been rare, slow and exceedingly expensive And the list of failed projects greatly outnumbers the completed nuclear reactors in the past 30 years. In South Carolina, Virgil C. Summer is the most recent and dramatic of such failures. Efforts to build two new nuclear reactors at the site, about an hour and a half south of Charlotte, were canceled in 2017 after massive cost overruns and a series of construction delays. In the end, the reactors were left less than half complete, the developer, Westinghouse, declared bankruptcy, executives from South Carolina Gas and Electric, as well as Westinghouse, were indicted on fraud charges and ratepayers were stuck with a $9 billion bill. They're still paying on their energy bills today. Now, the Governor's Nuclear Advisory Council is advocating for the project to get a second look, potentially becoming the first and second nuclear reactors to come online since the completion of Georgia's Vogtle 3 and 4 reactors. Why try again? While some may see V.C. Summer as a lost cause, Jim Little sees a site ripe for a second chance. As the industry representative of the Governor's Nuclear Advisory Council, he and Chairman Rick Lee visited the plant last fall to get a better understanding of where things left off when the project was canceled seven years ago. Instead of seeing the decaying ruins of a failed project, Little said he was pleasantly surprised to see most of the construction well-preserved. 'It looked like work had stopped a few months ago, not seven years ago,' he said. READ: Federal funding restored for air quality monitoring after nonprofit sues Trump administration According to Little, any new effort to build the two new reactors still had a chance of picking up where the last efforts left off. In a report to the governor, the council endorsed an inspection and analysis of the cost and construction schedule to complete VC Summer once and for all. Optimistically, Little believes a VC Summer project that gets permitted and off the ground quickly could be operational in the next five years, which would be impossible for any nuclear reactor construction starting from scratch. 'If this can be done successfully, everything's upside,' Little said. For Tom Ervin, a former Public Service Commissioner, who regulates South Carolina's utilities and works to set energy rates, that's a big 'if.' 'It's a big mistake,' he said. 'It's going to cost time, delays and much higher utility rates for all utility customers, small businesses, residents and even large manufacturers are going to struggle with these new rates.' Ervin points to the recent commissioning of Vogtle 3 and 4, which have led to massive rate increases in Georgia to cover the project's more than $35 billion budget, a far cry from the $14 billion initially proposed in 2009. With South Carolina ratepayers already stuck with a $9 billion bill from the failed VC project, Ervin believes they shouldn't be on the hook for another cent. 'Nuclear construction is so expensive and so complex,' he said. 'It's not a good option for us.' Would things be different this time? The nuclear picture in the United States has changed since 2017. While Vogtle 3 and 4 faced numerous delays and massive budget overruns, the reactors were eventually completed and are providing 1.1 GW of around-the-clock clean energy each. The reactors at V.C. Summer are the exact same design, the AP 1000, so Little said it stands to reason that what's been done once can be done again. 'You can take advantage of all the lessons learned, the experience, the talent and the solutions on Vogtle and simply apply them to Virgil Summer,' he said. READ: Solarize Charlotte-Mecklenburg to launch in June According to Sola Talabi, president of Pittsburgh Technical and a former risk manager with Westinghouse's AP 1000 projects, the best way to avoid the same costly mistakes is to plan for them from the beginning. 'When projects are being executed, it's almost like driving a car, and the driver has to be fully engaged, with their hands on the steering wheel, with their eyes on the road,' he said. 'That's not the time to learn about how the car works or, you know, trying to figure out where you're going, right?' When Vogtle and V.C. Summer were under construction, they were first-of-a-kind projects in the United States, Talabi explained. Their construction teams had to face and adjust to first-of-a-kind challenges in real time without the benefit of a road map. For any new AP 1000 construction, crews should be informed of potential delays and challenges up front so they know how to recognize and respond to them as quickly as possible, rather than relearning the lessons of the first crews in real time. Talabi also believes time is of the essence. With the Vogtle project complete in 2024, every year that projects like V.C. Summer wait, the harder it will be to put the practical knowledge base of the Vogtle team to use. 'There's attrition of that knowledge. You have people retiring every day,' he said. 'Then you have potentially more competition for the available resources, because we expect that there would be, in the coming years, a significant increase in nuclear power plant construction, and there'll be competition for these resources.' Talabi expects there will be more risk for the 'first mover' after Vogtle, but with so many other utilities across the country eyeing potential nuclear projects, he said late movers may suffer delays due to a shortage of qualified workers already busy on other projects. 'A little bit of activity [in nuclear] has started, but again, in a few years, in about two years, I'd expect there'd be significantly more,' he said. If not nuclear, then what? Nuclear is not the only way to provide large amounts of around-the-clock power or decarbonize the energy grid. Ervin advocates for more investment in solar plus battery storage to balance out the intermittency inherent in renewable energy. He said that's the fastest way to get new power online, and for those skeptical of the limitations of renewable energy, he said the answer is natural gas, not nuclear. 'If you want to have power generation in the next decade or so, what we need to do is look at alternatives that are much less costly,' he said. 'Natural gas plants are also cheaper to build and take less time to build, and so most utilities around the country are turning to gas plants for short-term solution, not nuclear.' Little argues, while there are other options, none are going to give you the output and reliability that nuclear can, especially given South Carolina's historic reliance on nuclear power. What's next? Santee Cooper, which owns part of the V.C. Summer site, put out a request for proposals to complete construction on the two new nuclear reactors and in a release, the utility announced it got a 'strong response.' A spokesperson would not clarify how many bids Santee Cooper received. The utility will spend the next nine to 18 months reviewing those bids. Santee Cooper has said it does not want to own or operate the new V.C. Summer reactors should they come online. READ: Duke medical students research fungal growth in the aftermath of Helene Should a company come in to get the project restarted, they would need to obtain new federal permits and licensing through the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, as the project's former permits were terminated at the time of cancellation. Inspectors with the NRC would also have to come out to the site and determine how much of the former project is build-ready and what work would need to be redone. Little sees these hurdles as minor obstacles any responsible project manager could overcome. He believes that with enough interest from large customers like data centers, there should be enough capital investment to shield South Carolina ratepayers from the financial burden they faced last time. More importantly, Little believes this project could prove the United States can build nuclear again. 'Can America lead? Everybody's saying, 'has America lost its leadership in nuclear power?'' He said. 'This isn't just about a project. It's about a second chance.' Should the project fail again, however, Ervin believes that should be the final nail in the coffin for the industry. 'We had a really horrific experience in South Carolina, which I hope will never be repeated anywhere else,' he said. 'To start from scratch in this kind of environment is just not it's not a wise decision at all.' WATCH: Duke medical students research fungal growth in the aftermath of Helene
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
NC utilities legislation threatens regulatory integrity and consumer protections
(IStock photo courtesy of JPM Strategies) Two of the country's largest investor-owned utilities are waging a multi-state strategy to get more generating plants built at great expense to customers in the Carolinas. Duke Energy and Dominion, who operate in North Carolina are pushing utility-friendly legislation in Senate Bill 261 — now pending in the North Carolina General Assembly — which would fundamentally change the regulatory approval process. If it passes, North Carolina ratepayers will be required to pay much higher utility bills for decades to come. If adopted, SB 261 would allow these utility companies to charge their electric customers upfront for the costs of building new plants. You might remember that this practice resulted in dire consequences in South Carolina where ratepayers are still paying for the failed VC Summer nuclear plant. Here's how it worked: To pay for VC Summer, the utility company SCANA was allowed to charge its ratepayers using something known as 'Construction Work in Progress' (CWIP). That's what they call the setup where customers pay all the upfront costs to build a new power plant. The entire financial burden and the risks were placed entirely on customers and none of it on utility shareholders. When the VC Summer plant finally went belly-up, SCANA and Westinghouse both declared bankruptcy, SCANA executives were prosecuted and a few even went to jail. Guess who was left holding the bag for the $9 billion failed power plant that never was completed? If you guessed 'ratepayers' then you'd be right! Is this the path North Carolina wants to take? As a former member of the South Carolina Public Service Commission, I fear that history will repeat itself in North Carolina. These utilities should not be allowed to circumvent the normal regulatory process. My hope is that the North Carolina legislature will keep its longstanding regulatory process in place. It's worked well for years for North Carolina's large manufacturers, small businesses and residential ratepayers. The North Carolina Utilities Commission and the commissioners who serve on it are currently required by law to look out for the best interests of everyone in the state who pays a power bill. Legislative changes that would undermine their ability to do their job should be soundly rejected. Our existing regulatory process was put in place to protect consumers from utility monopolies who are motivated to increase profits for their shareholders. That is why the North Carolina legislature should continue to rely on the state's utility commissioners who possess the integrity and impartiality to be fair to all parties. Don't make the mistakes that the South Carolina legislature made years ago by passing a law known as the Base Load Review Act. Our South Carolina ratepayers are still paying for those mistakes every month when those utility bills arrive in the mail. Sadly, our ratepayers are now stuck with those high rates for decades to come. Neighbors are supposed to look out for each other. Your neighbor to the south is warning you that trouble is on the way in Raleigh unless North Carolina senators and House members say 'no' to the approach spelled out in Senate Bill 261. Fortunately, it's not too late for North Carolina senators and representatives to rethink and reject this approach. You can learn more about the bill and how to communicate with your legislators by clicking here and here.
![[Kim Jong-hoon] Nuclear power can reenergize US, Korea](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwimg.heraldcorp.com%2Fnews%2Fcms%2F2025%2F02%2F19%2Fnews-p.v1.20250218.699b75338ade499296ab00930ab52f88_T1.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
![[Kim Jong-hoon] Nuclear power can reenergize US, Korea](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fall-logos-bucket.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fkoreaherald.com.png&w=48&q=75){kind=small}
Korea Herald
19-02-2025
- Business
- Korea Herald
[Kim Jong-hoon] Nuclear power can reenergize US, Korea
The age of the AI transformation is upon us, driven by profound breakthroughs in AI technology. Entire industries and societies are poised for disruption by innovations such as ChatGPT, with the United States standing at the forefront of this transformation. Yet these extraordinary strides come with a formidable challenge: the explosive demand for energy to power the AI data centers that enable such growth. According to Reuters, energy consumption by AI data centers in the US is expected to triple by 2028, accounting for as much as 12 percent of the nation's total electricity supply. Given this significant strain on the power grid, nuclear energy is becoming more critical as a key energy source to address this challenge. Unlike intermittent renewables such as wind and solar, nuclear power offers a stable, continuous supply capable of satisfying the demand of energy-intensive infrastructures such as AI data centers. Despite this potential, however, nuclear power plant construction in the US is progressing much more slowly than expected. Plant Vogtle in Georgia, for instance, was delayed by over seven years with excess costs ballooning to about $20 billion, while the VC Summer expansion project in South Carolina was abandoned at 40 percent completion after drawing investments worth $10 billion. Similar setbacks have plagued nuclear projects in other nations. Electricite de France's Flamanville 3 in France and Finland's Olkiluoto 3 suffered delays extending over a decade and costs exceeding the tens of billions. These cases highlight the complexity and unpredictability of nuclear projects, underscoring the need for more efficient and cost-effective alternatives. On the other hand, South Korea is globally recognized for its competitive nuclear power plant construction. What the nation brings to the table is its unparalleled ability to deliver projects on time and on budget. The successful completion of four APR-1400 reactors for the Barakah Nuclear Power Plant in the UAE within the agreed timeframe and budget stands as a testament to South Korea's efficient supply chain management and robust project execution. By working together, South Korea and the US can alleviate uncertainties in construction and execute stable, cost-effective nuclear projects. Moreover, strengthening nuclear cooperation between the US and South Korea is essential for energy security. The US currently relies on Russia for 25 percent of its enriched uranium -- a clear vulnerability in its nuclear supply chain that can be readily addressed through Korea-US cooperation. Resuming the High-Level Bilateral Commission on nuclear energy would be a critical step in that direction. The HLBC serves as the official platform for coordinating bilateral nuclear policies, engaging in far-reaching discussions on technological cooperation, supply chain stabilization and nonproliferation. Jumpstarting these talks will enable our two nations to successfully complete nuclear projects on the basis of our close cooperation while solidifying our leadership in the future nuclear market. If the US and South Korea cooperate, the two nations could not only secure leadership in nuclear construction within the US but also in the global market. With the US providing the technological expertise and funding, and South Korea demonstrating its proven capabilities in engineering, procurement and construction, we can ensure the effective rollout of large-scale light-water reactors and small modular reactors. Not only will this partnership guarantee reliable energy that is so crucial in the era of AI but it will also help respond to the growing global demand for nuclear power. US-South Korea nuclear cooperation will be a strategic alliance that goes beyond mere industrial collaboration, helping to design the energy security and economic future of both nations. The revival of the HLBC will be a vital step toward advancing this collaboration and resolving the energy demand in the Age of AI while positioning both nations as leaders in the global nuclear energy industry.
