Group items tagged

Local officials and citizens from Goliad County got some encouragement Wednesday in their fight against uranium mining over a south Texas aquifer. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality voted to allow a contested case hearing on an application by Uranium Energy Corporation to mine uranium just north of the historic mission town of Goliad. No uranium mining has occurred before in this agricultural area. "This has been such a long, long haul and it's not over yet," said local landowner Lu Ann Duderstadt, who lives near the area targeted for uranium mining. "I feel like we have a chance here and we're still going to carry this out until the end."

CPS Energy announced its cost estimate for two more nuclear reactors at the South Texas Project near Bay City last week. The $13-billion price tag is the latest estimate in a sustained and systemic low-balling by utilities wishing to receive government subsidies. CPS' partner, NRG Energy, recently pegged the cost of units 3 and 4 at $10 billion, a figure that has jumped nearly 50 percent from its original estimate of $5.4 billion. Other analyses, however, have estimated the cost of two new reactors to be nearly 100 percent higher than the CPS estimate. Former Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel official Clarence Johnson recently estimated the cost of STP expansion to be $20 billion to $22 billion, while nuclear engineer and president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research Dr. Arjun Makhijani estimated a cost of up to $17.5 billion in 2008.

"CPS Energy's board of trustees has approved the proposed $1 billion settlement with Nuclear Innovation North America and NRG Energy Inc. The board's decision clears the way for the development of two nuclear reactors at the South Texas Project (STP) in Matagorda County, Texas. Nuclear Innovation North America (or NINA) is the nuclear development company jointly owned by NRG and Toshiba Corp. NINA is the developer of the expansion project. CPS Energy's management and NINA reached the proposed settlement back on Feb. 17. However, the utility's board of trustees still needed to sign off on the deal. "With this agreement NINA and CPS Energy can now go forward to develop nuclear energy for San Antonio's future energy needs," says CPS Energy Chairman Charles Foster. "This is a good and fair settlement for both parties.""

t appears Vermont Yankee is getting an out-of-state site to store its low-level nuclear waste. The nuclear power plant has been storing its low-level waste at the Vernon reactor since its long-time disposal site in South Carolina closed last year. But now a facility owned by Waste Control Specialists LLC in Andrews County, TX, has won final approval from regulators to build a disposal site. Construction documents still need approval and then the site will take about a year to build. Yankee's owner, Entergy Nuclear, says once the Texas site is built disposal costs will shrink. WCAX News

t appears Vermont Yankee is getting an out-of-state site to store its low-level nuclear waste. The nuclear power plant has been storing its low-level waste at the Vernon reactor since its long-time disposal site in South Carolina closed last year. But now a facility owned by Waste Control Specialists LLC in Andrews County, TX, has won final approval from regulators to build a disposal site. Construction documents still need approval and then the site will take about a year to build. Yankee's owner, Entergy Nuclear, says once the Texas site is built disposal costs will shrink. WCAX News

t appears Vermont Yankee is getting an out-of-state site to store its low-level nuclear waste. The nuclear power plant has been storing its low-level waste at the Vernon reactor since its long-time disposal site in South Carolina closed last year. But now a facility owned by Waste Control Specialists LLC in Andrews County, TX, has won final approval from regulators to build a disposal site. Construction documents still need approval and then the site will take about a year to build. Yankee's owner, Entergy Nuclear, says once the Texas site is built disposal costs will shrink. WCAX News

The groups fighting expansion of the nuclear South Texas Project want a detailed side-by-side comparison of how much it would cost to produce the same power with renewable resources such as wind and solar. They think such an analysis should be complete before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission considers granting a license for the multibillion-dollar plan to build two more reactors outside this community. This was among the arguments a consortium of environmental groups made to a panel of judges with the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board at the second and final day of hearings on the project's permit application.

In 2009, the local political sleeper was - drumroll, please - District 8 Councilman Reed Williams. Williams was anything but a brand name when he was elected. He'd worked 35 years in the oil industry but wasn't part of the small clique of local business leaders who regularly influence City Hall. At 62, Williams has an unassuming demeanor and zero political ambitions. Yet when it came to the debate over expansion of the South Texas Project, he played a critical behind-the-scenes role. He offered expertise and common sense that has made him a key voice in charting the city's energy future. He started out inclined to support the nuclear expansion. When he had an interview with the Sierra Club during the campaign, one of the leaders asked where he and the organization would differ.

In 2009, the local political sleeper was - drumroll, please - District 8 Councilman Reed Williams. Williams was anything but a brand name when he was elected. He'd worked 35 years in the oil industry but wasn't part of the small clique of local business leaders who regularly influence City Hall. At 62, Williams has an unassuming demeanor and zero political ambitions. Yet when it came to the debate over expansion of the South Texas Project, he played a critical behind-the-scenes role. He offered expertise and common sense that has made him a key voice in charting the city's energy future. He started out inclined to support the nuclear expansion. When he had an interview with the Sierra Club during the campaign, one of the leaders asked where he and the organization would differ.

E-mails between Toshiba Inc. and CPS Energy and also among CPS executives make clear that the utility knowingly understated the costs of nuclear expansion to the public. Over a period of months during which CPS officials were telling the public the price for expansion at the South Texas Project was $13 billion, executives knew Toshiba was projecting the cost to be at least $4 billion higher. The same e-mails demonstrate anxiety among CPS officials that NRG Energy - a publicly held corporation that is CPS's partner in the project - intended to reveal the inflated cost estimates. "I think your discussion of incomplete cost estimates in public in November is a major problem," the CPS vice president of power plant construction wrote to an NRG official.

E-mails between Toshiba Inc. and CPS Energy and also among CPS executives make clear that the utility knowingly understated the costs of nuclear expansion to the public. Over a period of months during which CPS officials were telling the public the price for expansion at the South Texas Project was $13 billion, executives knew Toshiba was projecting the cost to be at least $4 billion higher. The same e-mails demonstrate anxiety among CPS officials that NRG Energy - a publicly held corporation that is CPS's partner in the project - intended to reveal the inflated cost estimates. "I think your discussion of incomplete cost estimates in public in November is a major problem," the CPS vice president of power plant construction wrote to an NRG official.

CPS Energy has received the contractually mandated cost estimate for proposed South Texas Project (STP) Units 3 and 4 from contractor Toshiba, however the utility will make no decisions on the project until rigorous analysis of price and methodology is completed. The cost estimate is structured in a range, and it will take CPS Energy staff several days to analyze the methodology behind the numbers and perform the necessary due diligence, said Jelynne LeBlanc-Burley, CPS Energy's acting general manager. "We are well aware of the confidentiality provision contained in our contract with Toshiba and NINA (Nuclear Innovation North America, a limited liability company comprised of Toshiba and NRG Energy)," said LeBlanc-Burley. "If the cost estimate is disclosed prematurely, it places our customers at risk. Our staff will evaluate the information from Toshiba, put it into context and brief our Board of Trustees as soon as possible. In turn, we will properly notify other key stakeholders including the San Antonio City Council."

CPS Energy has received the contractually mandated cost estimate for proposed South Texas Project (STP) Units 3 and 4 from contractor Toshiba, however the utility will make no decisions on the project until rigorous analysis of price and methodology is completed. The cost estimate is structured in a range, and it will take CPS Energy staff several days to analyze the methodology behind the numbers and perform the necessary due diligence, said Jelynne LeBlanc-Burley, CPS Energy's acting general manager. "We are well aware of the confidentiality provision contained in our contract with Toshiba and NINA (Nuclear Innovation North America, a limited liability company comprised of Toshiba and NRG Energy)," said LeBlanc-Burley. "If the cost estimate is disclosed prematurely, it places our customers at risk. Our staff will evaluate the information from Toshiba, put it into context and brief our Board of Trustees as soon as possible. In turn, we will properly notify other key stakeholders including the San Antonio City Council."

CPS Energy's longest-serving board trustee, Steve Hennigan, hasn't actually given me a copy of his nine-page "not so far-fetched theory document," but we spoke at length Friday night and Saturday afternoon about what's in it as he fights to keep his board seat and remain a major player at the municipal utility. "I'm not a conspiracy theorist," said Hennigan, a credit union executive by day and an unmistakably nice man. Conspiracy theory, nevertheless, is making the rounds these days in one of those "truth stranger than fiction" scenarios as business and civic leaders ask what went wrong with a multibillion-dollar plan to expand the South Texas Project nuclear facility, the source of 30 percent of the city's current energy usage.

CPS Energy's longest-serving board trustee, Steve Hennigan, hasn't actually given me a copy of his nine-page "not so far-fetched theory document," but we spoke at length Friday night and Saturday afternoon about what's in it as he fights to keep his board seat and remain a major player at the municipal utility. "I'm not a conspiracy theorist," said Hennigan, a credit union executive by day and an unmistakably nice man. Conspiracy theory, nevertheless, is making the rounds these days in one of those "truth stranger than fiction" scenarios as business and civic leaders ask what went wrong with a multibillion-dollar plan to expand the South Texas Project nuclear facility, the source of 30 percent of the city's current energy usage.

"A critical court ruling today rang the first chime in what could be the death knell of the so-called "nuclear renaissance," starting with the failed expansion of the South Texas Project (STP). This afternoon's ruling by 408th District Court Judge Larry Noll that CPS Energy can safely withdraw from the proposed STP expansion project without losing all its investment offers the utility and the city of San Antonio the cue they've been waiting for to exit the national nuclear stage. Combined with the NRG Energy CEO's announcement during a shareholder and press conference call this morning that NRG would "wind down the project as quickly and economically as possible" if CPS withdraws or STP does not receive federal loan guarantees, this news marks a major blow to those who claim nuclear power is a viable alternative to fossil fuel energy. The expansion project calls for two new nuclear reactors at a site with two existing reactors."

CPS Energy's board unanimously agreed Tuesday to look for buyers for about half the utility's stake in the expansion of the nuclear South Texas Project, while borrowing $400 million more to continue plans to build the new reactors. The change in strategy means the utility, which owns half of the project estimated to cost $13 billion, will cut its ownership to 20 percent to 25 percent. Now CPS must find buyers for the portion it wants to sell.

CPS Energy's board unanimously agreed Tuesday to look for buyers for about half the utility's stake in the expansion of the nuclear South Texas Project, while borrowing $400 million more to continue plans to build the new reactors. The change in strategy means the utility, which owns half of the project estimated to cost $13 billion, will cut its ownership to 20 percent to 25 percent. Now CPS must find buyers for the portion it wants to sell.

The banquet room inside the city's lavishly refurbished Pearl Brewery is filled with solar advocates, coal-power people, city decision makers and bureaucrats, geothermal enthusiasts, and a table of Express-News staffers. They dine on salmon and judge in quiet gestures the performance of the panel at the front of the room. As a tense but generally amenable exchange between the nuclear-energy proponents and the renewable-power disciples winds down, Matagorda County resident Susan Dancer steps from the shadows at the back of the room to steer the conversation, briefly, into dangerous waters. In a rapid-fire indictment of the entire course of the debate, Dancer drops the controversial "C" word. But cancer isn't on the menu at today's forum. In fact, the talk is almost entirely of money. For more than a year, the city has been drifting, in multi-million-dollar installments, into a second helping of nuclear power from the South Texas Project nuclear facility outside Bay City.

The banquet room inside the city's lavishly refurbished Pearl Brewery is filled with solar advocates, coal-power people, city decision makers and bureaucrats, geothermal enthusiasts, and a table of Express-News staffers. They dine on salmon and judge in quiet gestures the performance of the panel at the front of the room. As a tense but generally amenable exchange between the nuclear-energy proponents and the renewable-power disciples winds down, Matagorda County resident Susan Dancer steps from the shadows at the back of the room to steer the conversation, briefly, into dangerous waters. In a rapid-fire indictment of the entire course of the debate, Dancer drops the controversial "C" word. But cancer isn't on the menu at today's forum. In fact, the talk is almost entirely of money. For more than a year, the city has been drifting, in multi-million-dollar installments, into a second helping of nuclear power from the South Texas Project nuclear facility outside Bay City.

As a Thursday vote on two new nuclear reactors looms, cities around the state that purchase power from San Antonio's municipal utility, City Public Services (CPS), are balking at the prospect of buying pricey nuclear power from the reactors. Three problems exist with the planned expansion at the South Texas Nuclear Project (STP) facility. First, nuclear power creates dangerous radioactive waste that no one has figured out how to dispose of safely. Second, nuclear power is expensive - the nuclear industry requires taxpayer subsidies to prop it up. Third, no one knows for certain just how much the construction of the two reactors will cost ratepayers.

As a Thursday vote on two new nuclear reactors looms, cities around the state that purchase power from San Antonio's municipal utility, City Public Services (CPS), are balking at the prospect of buying pricey nuclear power from the reactors. Three problems exist with the planned expansion at the South Texas Nuclear Project (STP) facility. First, nuclear power creates dangerous radioactive waste that no one has figured out how to dispose of safely. Second, nuclear power is expensive - the nuclear industry requires taxpayer subsidies to prop it up. Third, no one knows for certain just how much the construction of the two reactors will cost ratepayers.

Two troubling issues emerged from news that the cost estimate for the proposed expansion of nuclear generation at the South Texas Project has suddenly gone up by as much as $4 billion. That's a 30 percent increase, and CPS Energy won't have a fixed-price contract for the two new reactors until at least 2012. Toshiba Corp., the main contractor for the expansion, may merely have thrown out the inflated cost as a negotiating tactic. That's what CPS Energy interim general manager Steve Bartley suggests it is. Another explanation could be that Toshiba is weak in producing estimates, with the initial figures being too low or the current ones being too high.

Two troubling issues emerged from news that the cost estimate for the proposed expansion of nuclear generation at the South Texas Project has suddenly gone up by as much as $4 billion. That's a 30 percent increase, and CPS Energy won't have a fixed-price contract for the two new reactors until at least 2012. Toshiba Corp., the main contractor for the expansion, may merely have thrown out the inflated cost as a negotiating tactic. That's what CPS Energy interim general manager Steve Bartley suggests it is. Another explanation could be that Toshiba is weak in producing estimates, with the initial figures being too low or the current ones being too high.

CPS Energy has made two critical errors in their dealings on the South Texas Project (STP) nuclear plant: assuming that nuclear energy will be cheap and that the cost of alternatives is too high. This month, just two days before the San Antonio City Council was to vote to approve $400 million in bonds to move forward with the STP expansion, CPS announced that the cost estimate for the project had risen as much as $4 billion. That brought the cost of expanding the nuclear power plant to $17 billion - a $12 billion increase from NRG Energy's original estimate just last year of $5.4 billion. Cheaper and safer ways exist to meet the city's need for power. With the bond vote now pushed back until January, the City Council should take the time to get bids on alternative energy scenarios for San Antonio's new electric generation. This input would present the council with the most cost-effective, least risky, most environmentally sustainable plan possible.

CPS Energy has made two critical errors in their dealings on the South Texas Project (STP) nuclear plant: assuming that nuclear energy will be cheap and that the cost of alternatives is too high. This month, just two days before the San Antonio City Council was to vote to approve $400 million in bonds to move forward with the STP expansion, CPS announced that the cost estimate for the project had risen as much as $4 billion. That brought the cost of expanding the nuclear power plant to $17 billion - a $12 billion increase from NRG Energy's original estimate just last year of $5.4 billion. Cheaper and safer ways exist to meet the city's need for power. With the bond vote now pushed back until January, the City Council should take the time to get bids on alternative energy scenarios for San Antonio's new electric generation. This input would present the council with the most cost-effective, least risky, most environmentally sustainable plan possible.

CPS Energy knew a year ago that contractor Toshiba Inc. wanted at least $4 billion more than San Antonio was willing to pay for the nuclear expansion, according to several sources close to the deal. Despite this, utility officials used a much lower figure as they pitched the project at public meetings during the summer, arguing that nuclear was the most cost-effective way for San Antonio to meet its future energy needs. They took the same message to elected officials who were to vote on a $400 million bond issue and rate increases to finance the multibillion-dollar expansion of the South Texas Project near Bay City. The response of City Council members and CPS Energy trustees to the 2008 estimate was muted Saturday. "Nothing can surprise me anymore," Councilwoman Elisa Chan said. But several officials said the revelation only deepens their mistrust of the city-owned utility's leadership. "It concerns me greatly that neither the council nor the board was informed," said Mayor Julián Castro, who acknowledged he, too, recently learned of the existence of the 2008 high estimate.

CPS Energy knew a year ago that contractor Toshiba Inc. wanted at least $4 billion more than San Antonio was willing to pay for the nuclear expansion, according to several sources close to the deal. Despite this, utility officials used a much lower figure as they pitched the project at public meetings during the summer, arguing that nuclear was the most cost-effective way for San Antonio to meet its future energy needs. They took the same message to elected officials who were to vote on a $400 million bond issue and rate increases to finance the multibillion-dollar expansion of the South Texas Project near Bay City. The response of City Council members and CPS Energy trustees to the 2008 estimate was muted Saturday. "Nothing can surprise me anymore," Councilwoman Elisa Chan said. But several officials said the revelation only deepens their mistrust of the city-owned utility's leadership. "It concerns me greatly that neither the council nor the board was informed," said Mayor Julián Castro, who acknowledged he, too, recently learned of the existence of the 2008 high estimate.

It's come to this: The simple truth withheld from the community by CPS Energy was revealed last week by NRG Energy executives to a Houston gathering of financial analysts: San Antonio can't afford the high price of expanding the South Texas Project nuclear facility. Not that we need another example, but once again Wall Street enjoys the advantage over Main Street. Ratepayers don't have a need to know, but let's not deny institutional investors a little inside information. The project will cost billions more than CPS estimated, even after interim General Manager Steve Bartley went to Japan to seek concessions. Utility executives want until January to bring a new number to Mayor Julián Castro and the City Council. Why wait? What CPS once promised was a good deal for the city is now, clearly, a bad deal. It's a bad deal made worse by utility executives who deliberately withheld critical financial data, thus misleading elected city leaders, the Express-News and the public. Even as we were told the project would cost CPS and NRG a total of $13 billion, utility executives knew Toshiba Inc. was estimating $4 billion more.

It's come to this: The simple truth withheld from the community by CPS Energy was revealed last week by NRG Energy executives to a Houston gathering of financial analysts: San Antonio can't afford the high price of expanding the South Texas Project nuclear facility. Not that we need another example, but once again Wall Street enjoys the advantage over Main Street. Ratepayers don't have a need to know, but let's not deny institutional investors a little inside information. The project will cost billions more than CPS estimated, even after interim General Manager Steve Bartley went to Japan to seek concessions. Utility executives want until January to bring a new number to Mayor Julián Castro and the City Council. Why wait? What CPS once promised was a good deal for the city is now, clearly, a bad deal. It's a bad deal made worse by utility executives who deliberately withheld critical financial data, thus misleading elected city leaders, the Express-News and the public. Even as we were told the project would cost CPS and NRG a total of $13 billion, utility executives knew Toshiba Inc. was estimating $4 billion more.

"The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has accepted for review the Early Site Permit (ESP) application for the Victoria County site near Victoria, Texas. The applicant, Exelon Nuclear Texas Holdings, submitted the application and associated information on March 25. The application, minus proprietary and security-related details, is available on the NRC Web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/esp/victoria.html. Exelon's ESP application seeks resolution of safety and environmental issues for the site, approximately 13 miles south of Victoria. Docketing the Victoria County application does not indicate whether the Commission will approve or reject the request. The NRC has established docket number 52-042 for this application, and the agency will subsequently publish a notice of opportunity to intervene in the required adjudicatory hearing. Petitions to intervene in a hearing may be filed within 60 days of the notice, by anyone whose interest may be affected by the proposed license and who wishes to participate as a party in the proceeding. More information on the hearing process is available on the NRC Web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/adjudicatory/hearing.html. "

A Texas company is signaling its intent to turn a rural county near New Mexico into the home of the only dump in the United States that disposes of all classes of low-level radioactive waste from around the country. South Carolina shut its doors to nearly all the nation's low-level radioactive waste in July, leaving 36 states with no place to dispose of certain waste from nuclear power plants, hospitals and universities. Dallas-based Waste Control Specialists LLC received a license from state regulators earlier this year to begin accepting commercial waste from Texas and Vermont. But the company wrote in an April 6 letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that it wants to dispose of waste from other states too.

Two additional nuclear reactors being considered by San Antonio's public utility will cost up to $13 billion, according to new cost estimates. CPS Energy officials want to build the $10 billion to $13 billion reactors at the South Texas Project outside Bay City, saying its the most cost effective way to get additional power. CPS Energy owns 40 percent of the project. New Jersey-based NRG Energy owns the remaining portion, and the utilities would split the cost. San Antonio ratepayers would be hit with a 5 percent rate increase every other year for the next decade to pay for the expansion, officials said Monday. But that rate projection assumes CPS can sell excess power to other utilities, something critics are wary of.