Group items tagged

Today, Energy Secretary Steven Chu announced the issue of a final rule amending the Department of Energy's regulations for its Loan Guarantee Program. The revised rule will allow for increased participation in the program by financial institutions and other investors and enable the support of more innovative energy technologies in the United States. "This much needed change will provide greater flexibility to the Loan Guarantee Program and help us to support more projects at a better value to taxpayers," said Secretary Chu. "This is part of our commitment to ensuring businesses are able to access the support they need to create jobs and contribute to a clean energy economy." Under the rule change, the Loan Guarantee Program will be able to consider financing projects together with other lenders and will be able to provide loan guarantees to projects with multiple participants (who may hold undivided interests in a project). As an example, export credit agencies and other financial institutions will now be able to provide financing to complement Title XVII loans and loan guarantees. This approach will result in lowered risk and potential costs to taxpayers.

Today, Energy Secretary Steven Chu announced the issue of a final rule amending the Department of Energy's regulations for its Loan Guarantee Program. The revised rule will allow for increased participation in the program by financial institutions and other investors and enable the support of more innovative energy technologies in the United States. "This much needed change will provide greater flexibility to the Loan Guarantee Program and help us to support more projects at a better value to taxpayers," said Secretary Chu. "This is part of our commitment to ensuring businesses are able to access the support they need to create jobs and contribute to a clean energy economy." Under the rule change, the Loan Guarantee Program will be able to consider financing projects together with other lenders and will be able to provide loan guarantees to projects with multiple participants (who may hold undivided interests in a project). As an example, export credit agencies and other financial institutions will now be able to provide financing to complement Title XVII loans and loan guarantees. This approach will result in lowered risk and potential costs to taxpayers.

Groups from Maryland Ally with 3 other States with Reactors Up for Loan Guarantees to Speak Out in Opposition; DOE Liberalization of Rules Would Expose Taxpayers to Billions of Dollars in New Defaults Taxpayers will be put at significant new risk for billions of dollars if the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) moves ahead in the coming days and weeks to issue its first set of controversial taxpayer-backed, conditional loan guarantees for new nuclear reactors, according to 18 national and state-level public interest groups from Maryland, Georgia, Texas and South Carolina. In a joint statement issued today, the groups called on DOE to put the issuance of loan guarantees on hold given the unacceptable financial risks placed on the taxpayer, the poor track record of the DOE with past loan guarantees and the lack of transparency in the loan guarantee decision-making process.

Groups from Maryland Ally with 3 other States with Reactors Up for Loan Guarantees to Speak Out in Opposition; DOE Liberalization of Rules Would Expose Taxpayers to Billions of Dollars in New Defaults Taxpayers will be put at significant new risk for billions of dollars if the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) moves ahead in the coming days and weeks to issue its first set of controversial taxpayer-backed, conditional loan guarantees for new nuclear reactors, according to 18 national and state-level public interest groups from Maryland, Georgia, Texas and South Carolina. In a joint statement issued today, the groups called on DOE to put the issuance of loan guarantees on hold given the unacceptable financial risks placed on the taxpayer, the poor track record of the DOE with past loan guarantees and the lack of transparency in the loan guarantee decision-making process.

"A planned uranium-enrichment plant in Idaho, not one in southern Ohio, is getting a $2 billion federal loan guarantee, the Department of Energy said today. But that doesn't mean USEC's $3.5 billion project in Piketon, which could bring hundreds of jobs to economically struggling southern Ohio, is out of the running for the federal loan guarantee. The Energy Department took pains to say, even as it was granting the $2 billion loan guarantee to the French-based Areva for its plant near Idaho Falls, that it planned to award an additional $2 billion loan guarantee. At this point, USEC is the only other company that has applied for a uranium-enrichment loan guarantee, the Energy Department confirmed. The Energy Department said the loan guarantee for Areva is contingent on the project obtaining a construction and operating license from the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The project must obtain a Combined Construction and Operating License (COL) from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission before the loan guarantee can be finalized."

"When President Obama rolled out his proposed budget to Congress for the coming year, he said it would build "on the largest investment in clean energy in history." But Obama's definition of "clean energy" includes a commitment to help companies garner billions of dollars in loans for nuclear reactor construction. And, unfortunately, nuclear energy isn't safe or clean and it's too costly for the nation. The government's role in the energy marketplace is clear in its loan-guarantee programs. This year, the Energy Department proposes to provide $166 billion in federal energy loan guarantees to aid the ailing auto industry and help finance nuclear, coal, and renewable energy projects. Sadly, the nuclear industry is slated to get the largest and riskiest share of that support. Wall Street has refused to finance nuclear power for more than 30 years, rendering new construction impossible. The Obama administration, in a move to placate Senate Republicans, proposes to fund new power reactors with some $54.5 billion in federal loan guarantees. Because of the way the guarantees are structured, the actual loans will be made by the Federal Financing Bank out of the U.S. Treasury. Last year, the Government Accountability Office estimated that these loans have more than a 50-50 chance of failing. Because of skyrocketing costs, these loans might pay for five reactors and merely expand the nation's electrical supply by less than 1 percent. "

"Published reports indicate that the Obama Administration will announce on Tuesday, February 16, approval of a "conditional" taxpayer loan guarantee to the Southern Company for construction of two new nuclear reactors at its Vogtle site in Georgia. "If the reports are correct, this would be a repudiation of Obama's own campaign statements against subsidies for nuclear power, and the implementation of the worst energy policy excesses of the Bush Administration and failed presidential candidate Sen. John McCain," said Michael Mariotte, executive director of Nuclear Information and Resource Service, a national organization based in Takoma Park, Maryland. NIRS pointed to a video of then-candidate Obama telling voters on December 30, 2007 that he opposed taxpayer subsidies for nuclear power: www.youtube.com/watch?v=-R52J2D5QQU. During the election campaign, McCain called for construction of 45 new reactors in the U.S. by 2030. "Last time I checked," Mariotte said, "McCain lost the election. It's astonishing that his misguided and rejected energy policies live on. It is safe to say that no one voted for Obama in order to give taxpayer money to wealthy nuclear corporations." The Department of Energy's loan guarantee program for reactor construction was established by Congress at the urging of the Bush administration in 2005. In 2007, Congress authorized the program to provide $18.5 Billion in loan guarantees for new reactors. In late January, President Obama proposed nearly tripling the program to $54 Billion. "Few realize that the DOE's program extends beyond simple guarantees. In some cases at least, the loans will come directly from the taxpayers through the little-known Federal Financing Bank (FFB). Thus the taxpayers will be put in the awkward and highly risky position of both providing billions of dollars in loans to giant nuclear corporations and promising to repay the loans if the companies default," explained Mariotte. "With the Congressional Budget Office pre

"The debate over nuclear power in recent months has revolved around taxpayer backed loan guarantees for new nuclear projects. Not only has the President announced $8.3 billion in federal loan guarantees for a two-reactor project in Burke County, Georgia, his budget proposal includes tripling the nuclear loan guarantee program from $18.5 billion to over $54 billion. Unfortunately, some groups have used this debate to disguise their anti-nuclear agenda in anti-loan guarantee rhetoric. The basic construct of their argument is that nuclear energy is so risky and so expensive that using government backed financing subjects the taxpayer to unreasonable risk. The problem is that they often not only misrepresent facts about loan guarantees and what risks they pose, but also about nuclear energy broadly to make their case. Misrepresenting the facts not only undermines the legitimacy of their argument but takes away from a very important debate over whether or not loan guarantees are an appropriate tool for financing new nuclear (or any other energy source) projects."

"Energy Secretary Chris Huhne has denied allegations that his "prejudices" against nuclear energy contributed to the cancellation of the £80 million loan to Sheffield Forgemasters to build power plant components. Labour leadership contender Ed Miliband said the coalition's decision was based on the "short-sightedness" of a Tory party which was against state intervention and Mr Huhne's opposition to nuclear. But at Commons question time Mr Huhne said the decision was made because the loan was "simply unaffordable". Shadow energy secretary Mr Miliband said the "commercial loan" to Forgemasters would have resulted in at least £110 million returning to the Exchequer. Mr Huhne told him: "The loan to Sheffield Forgemasters was not a commercial loan. If it was a commercial loan it would have been arranged through the banks and not by the Government."

"The Obama Administration is attempting to get $9 billion more in loans for new nuclear reactor construction. They're trying to sneak this money on to an emergency supplemental funding bill intended to provide funds for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and to provide additional disaster relief money. But there is no emergency requiring new nuclear loans! The Department of Energy is playing sleazy politics by asking for this money on an emergency basis. To try to appease clean energy advocates, the administration is tying the nuclear loans to an equal amount of loans for renewable energy projects--but renewable energy projects have barely begun to tap their existing loan authority. Unlike for nuclear projects, which are extraordinarily expensive, there is currently plenty of money available for renewables loans. The House Appropriations Committee was scheduled to meet on May 27 to consider this bill but postponed the meeting at the last moment. It now isn't clear when or if the meeting will be rescheduled. One possibility is that the House will simply take up a similar Senate emergency funding bill--one that does not include taxpayer loans for dirty new nuclear reactors. Your actions can stop this unnecessary nuclear bailout: Tell your Representative to pass a "clean" emergency funding bill--one that provides funding only for actual emergencies, not for unnecessary and polluting nuclear reactors."

About three years ago, the U.S. Enrichment Corp. in Piketon contracted with Honeywell to set up a team of skilled professionals to assist with the American Centrifuge process. There is a large worldwide market for fuel grade uranium, and the demand is expected to increase as new nuclear plants come on line. It was anticipated that the Department of Energy would give USEC a $2 billion loan guarantee, so it could secure private financing to continue the program. Our politicians indicated they were in favor the loan guarantee. Then, last month, DOE decided it would put off the loan guarantee for six months. This caused the skilled team of more than 100 people at Honeywell to lose their jobs. All this was bad enough, but then the media indicated our government had given a $2 billion loan to General Electric (this was not a guarantee, but an actual loan). Then the media announced our government has encouraged a $2 billion loan guarantee to Brazil's Petrobras oil company, so it can drill for oil off that coast.

"Congress could provide funds in supplemental budget votes WASHINGTON, April 28 (Reuters) - U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu said on Wednesday that the Energy Department would need an additional $13 billion in authority from Congress to provide loan guarantees for building three new nuclear plants. The department in February awarded $8.3 billion in loan guarantees to help build the first U.S. nuclear power plant in nearly three decades. Chu told a Senate subcommittee that the $12 billion the department had left in loan guarantee authority would be enough to cover one more nuclear plant project that is seeking government help. He said an additional $4 billion would allow a loan guarantee for a second nuclear plant project and a third reactor may be ready to seek a loan guarantee this year, but the department would another $9 billion in authority for that project. Senator Byron Dorgan said Congress will likely vote on several supplemental budget bills this year and those measures might provide an opportunity to add funding for additional nuclear loan guarantees."

Department of Energy loan guarantee programs created to nurture innovative power projects have birthed a boon for lobbyists, with many of the companies that are seeking the federal money hiring well-connected advocates to shepherd loan applications. At least 47 companies since 2008 have hired lobbyists to help access the $50 billion DOE loan programs. Other companies vying for the loan funding are working with lobbyists they've had on the payroll for many years. Because the Energy Department won't release the names of more than 175 loan guarantee applicants, it's difficult to know precisely what proportion are working with lobbyists.

Not only does the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) objection last week to major problems in the AP1000 reactor design call into serious question the future of over half of proposed new reactors in the United States (14 of 25), it also means that it would be "grossly imprudent" for the Department of Energy (DOE) to proceed with its plans for loan guarantees for new reactors that are not finalized and licensed. Four experts delivered that stern warning during a news conference today urging the DOE to halt controversial plans to issue nuclear loan guarantees "soon," according to Energy Secretary Chu. These guarantees are part of the DOE's Title XVII Loan Guarantee Program. Two of the four new nuclear projects that the DOE is reported to be considering for taxpayer-backed loan guarantees are AP1000 designs proposed by the Southern Company at the Vogtle site in Georgia and the South Carolina Electric & Gas (SCE&G) V.C. Summer site.

Not only does the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) objection last week to major problems in the AP1000 reactor design call into serious question the future of over half of proposed new reactors in the United States (14 of 25), it also means that it would be "grossly imprudent" for the Department of Energy (DOE) to proceed with its plans for loan guarantees for new reactors that are not finalized and licensed. Four experts delivered that stern warning during a news conference today urging the DOE to halt controversial plans to issue nuclear loan guarantees "soon," according to Energy Secretary Chu. These guarantees are part of the DOE's Title XVII Loan Guarantee Program. Two of the four new nuclear projects that the DOE is reported to be considering for taxpayer-backed loan guarantees are AP1000 designs proposed by the Southern Company at the Vogtle site in Georgia and the South Carolina Electric & Gas (SCE&G) V.C. Summer site.

The awards of $18.5 billion in federal loan guarantees for new nuclear plant projects remain held up by an ongoing dispute within the Obama administration over the financial risk the new reactors pose for the government and taxpayers, according to industry and government officials. The struggle pits the Energy Department against the Office of Management and Budget, agencies that have been at odds since the loan guarantee program was approved in 2005. DOE will make the final decision on nuclear project loan guarantee requests. OMB has a pivotal say in determining the risk of loan defaults if the projects suffer cost overruns or cannot be completed.

The awards of $18.5 billion in federal loan guarantees for new nuclear plant projects remain held up by an ongoing dispute within the Obama administration over the financial risk the new reactors pose for the government and taxpayers, according to industry and government officials. The struggle pits the Energy Department against the Office of Management and Budget, agencies that have been at odds since the loan guarantee program was approved in 2005. DOE will make the final decision on nuclear project loan guarantee requests. OMB has a pivotal say in determining the risk of loan defaults if the projects suffer cost overruns or cannot be completed.

The Department of Energy has narrowed the list of proposed new nuclear power plants it is considering for $18.5 billion in federal loan guarantees down to four from five, a spokeswoman said. "We have proceeded to due diligence with four applications for nuclear loan guarantees that are farthest along in the [Nuclear Regulatory Commission] application process," the spokeswoman said. "We have not made any final decisions and have not eliminated any of the applicants." New reactors at Southern Co.'s (SO) Vogtle plant in Georgia, Scana Corp.'s ( SCG) Summer plant in South Carolina, Constellation Energy Group's (CEG) Calvert Cliffs plant in Maryland and NRG Energy Inc.'s (NRG) South Texas plant are among the projects still in the running for federal loan backing. Under the loan guarantee program, the government promises to assume the companies' debt obligations if they default on loans for the nuclear projects.

"Loan guarantees may be enough for only 2 new reactors * Chu says reactors can store spent fuel on site 50 years * Utilities should not complain about waste storage costs By Tom Doggett WASHINGTON, Jan 15 (Reuters) - U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu said on Friday that the process for approving federal loan guarantees for new nuclear power plants has become "complicated," but the department still expects to issue its first loan deals very soon. "It was more complicated than I thought...these are multibillion dollar loans," Chu told reporters at a lunch briefing at Energy Department headquarters, when he was asked why it was taking so long for the department to make a decision on the loan guarantees."

"The recent acceptance of $8.3 billion in taxpayer-backed loan guarantees by the builders of the Vogtle nuclear reactors seems like good news for Georgia electric customers. The taxpayers of the entire country will now share in the costs and risks that had been on the shoulders of the customers of the utilities building the two reactors. But don't celebrate too soon. There are more loan guarantees in the pipeline - a total of $54.5 billion, none for Georgia reactors. These guarantees mean that you and I will repay the lender if the project cannot. The $54.5 billion would amount to an exposure of more than $500 for every American family. Some in Congress want unlimited nuclear loan guarantees, which translate to unlimited taxpayer exposure. For each of these loan guarantees, Georgia taxpayers will be exposed to the risks of new nuclear construction in such places as Texas, Maryland and South Carolina. Before long, the costs Georgians have passed on to taxpayers elsewhere through the Vogtle loan guarantees may be outweighed by the economic exposure that they will take on to help build reactors elsewhere."

"Constellation Energy Group's joint venture with a French company to build a nuclear reactor at Calvert Cliffs is now "first in line" for a federal loan guarantee, according to an influential lawmaker from Maryland. Democratic Rep. Steny H. Hoyer, the House majority leader, said in an interview Thursday that he has been informed by senior administration officials that the Calvert Cliffs project is further along in the loan-guarantee process than competing projects in Texas and South Carolina. That's potentially significant because, at the moment, the Department of Energy has only enough loan authority to offer one project a federal guarantee. Advertisement Hoyer, whose Southern Maryland district includes Calvert Cliffs, site of two existing reactors on the western shore of the Chesapeake Bay, said company officials were informed about two weeks ago that their application is nearly ready to be reviewed by the credit board that makes loan guarantee recommendations to the energy secretary."

Bailout estimates for failed projects could range from hundreds of billions to more than a trillion The nuclear power industry is pressuring Congress to dramatically expand federal loan guarantees for building new plants, which would put taxpayers and ratepayers at significant financial risk, according to a report released today by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). Congress already has authorized $60 billion for loan guarantees in which the federal government would shield utilities and private investment firms from the risk of default on loans for building new electricity generation plants. The Department of Energy (DOE) has allocated $18.5 billion of that money for new nuclear plants over the next few years. Given the average projected cost of building one reactor is currently $9 billion, the industry is clamoring for considerably more. To date, the DOE has received $122 billion in applications for loan guarantees for new nuclear power plants.

The nuclear power industry is pressuring Congress to dramatically expand federal loan guarantees for building new plants, which would put taxpayers and ratepayers at significant financial risk, according to a report released today by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). view counter Congress already has authorized $60 billion for loan guarantees in which the federal government would shield utilities and private investment firms from the risk of default on loans for building new electricity generation plants. The Department of Energy (DOE) has allocated $18.5 billion of that money for new nuclear plants over the next few years. Given the average projected cost of building one reactor is currently $9 billion, the industry is clamoring for considerably more. To date, the DOE has received $122 billion in applications for loan guarantees for new nuclear power plants.

Thanks to everyone who contacted the U.S. Dept. of Energy (DOE) and their Members of Congress two weeks ago, urging an extension of DOE's public comment period on its proposed weakening of taxpayer protections in its nuclear loan guarantee program. Under pressure from concerned citizens and U.S. Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO), DOE extended the comment deadline from Sept. 8th to Sept. 22nd. Now we must take advantage of this extension to get our comments in! DOE's most clearly outrageous proposal is to give up its "first lien" in the event of a new reactor loan repayment default. This would mean that taxpayers would be placed behind other lenders, such as foreign export-import banks, in terms of receiving compensation. Thus, taxpayers likely would not be compensated at all, but rather left holding the bag for billions when a new reactor or uranium enrichment facility goes belly up. The Congressional Budget Office has predicted, based on the nuclear industry's history, that well over half of all new reactors could default on their loans. Taxpayers' liability for dozens of new reactor loan guarantees could reach into the hundreds of billions of dollars. DOE's rule change would increase, not decrease, taxpayer risk.