<Modeling Oil Depletion Using EIA Data - The Tiger Chasing its Tail?The Oil DrumDrumBeat: June 14, 2006>
<Indian Point Nuclear or LNGThe Oil Drum: LocalPeak Oil Financial Questions?>

40 comments on Goldman Likes Wind. The Kennedys and DoD Don't?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Whitehall on June 14, 2006 - 12:08pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Getting the government permits has been a major contributor to long construction cycles.  The Japanese have built plants in ~5 years in a favorable political environment.

Look for an announcement before the end of June for a 6 year licensing and construction period for a new nuke(s) in the US albeit on an existing site.  Criticality in 2012 and commercial operation in 2014.  I will admit that this schedule looks ambitious.

There will be many more new US nuke orders to follow as utilities and energy hedge funds race to get early placement in the hardware procurement queues.  The critical bottlenecks  are usually the special steel ingots required for the reactor vessels and the forging thereof. This is a global constraint that could take two or three years to mitigate and additional capacity to come on-line.

Getting a place in the NRC license queue can also be a critical path issue domestically since they are short of nuclear experienced engineers.

In fact, can you spell N-U-C-L-E-A-R and pass a pre-employment drug screen?  If so, there may be career opportunities awaiting you!  

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
AlanfromBigEasy on June 14, 2006 - 4:57pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Congress recently passed a massive subsidy for the next 6,000 MW of new US nuclear power.  What you are seeing is a queueing to get that subsidy.

Will any nukes be built beyond 5 or 6 to use up that subsidy ?

IMHO, none going commerical before 2020 and perhaps 2025.  The subsidy losers will wait and see how things develop fro the pioneers (whilst lobbying for more subsidies).

Meanwhile, existing wind farms have been expanded within 12 months of a financial deciaions, and 30 months is "standard" for green field wind farms.

Nuclear has a place, but it FAR behind wind (with some pumped storage at a later stage).

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Whitehall on June 14, 2006 - 7:17pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I am truly embarressed by the nuclear production tax credit and can not offer a justification for it.  The credit was originally for the FIRST 6,000 MW of capacity to come on line but last I read it was to be split prorata amongst all units operational before a certain date.  This may have not made it into the final IRS rule.

The nuclear schedule insurance is something that is justifiable as it compensates for government incompetencies only.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.