David Bradish’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Bob, you said further up in a comment thread that: By 1977 the US had started walking away from nuclear as a source of affordable energy. It had become obvious that nuclear was an idea that wasn't going to work. Not true. The main reason why utilities canceled many nuclear plants was because of a decline in electricity demand which was initially projected at around 10% per year in the '70s. Source is from an EIA document titled Costs, Causes and Consequences of Nuclear Plant Cancellations. Many coal plants were canceled as well. You also said: We abandoned something like 100 nuclear projects around then. Taxpayers got stuck for millions of dollars for defaulted loans that had been guaranteed by the government. You're either making this up or you're confusing taxpayers with ratepayers. Loans to build the first 100+ nuclear plants were NOT guaranteed by the government therefore taxpayers did not get "stuck for millions of dollars for defaulted loans." And then you said this: accepting risk has a cost. That's just basic Finance 101 Utilities will be paying for that cost in order to receive a loan guarantee, it's called the credit subsidy cost.On Do we need nuclear and coal plants for baseload power? posted 5 days, 12 hours ago 144 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  if you have read Lovins or Severance, can you point out significant factual errors? There are tons of significant factual errors with both of their analyses.On Do we need nuclear and coal plants for baseload power? posted 1 week, 3 days ago 144 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  KC Golden, thanks for bringing up an issue that obviously needs clarification here. The primary initiative NEI is proposing is to create a permanent financing platform (the Clean Energy Deployment Administration) to provide loans, loan guarantees and other credit support to all clean energy technologies, not just new nuclear plants. As well, loan guarantees aren't "lavish subsidies." A subsidy is when the federal government makes a payment to a private party. The energy loan guarantee program works the other way around. The private parties make payments to the federal government in order to receive the loan guarantees. That’s not a subsidy. A well-managed program shouldn't cost taxpayers anything. NEI doesn't take sides on which climate change proposals we should endorse because there are a number of them that could all work. Our policy goal is to have the federal government recognize that a credible program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will require a portfolio of technologies and approaches, and that nuclear energy is part of that portfolio. Here's the situation with the electric industry. Between now and 2030, the electric industry must invest between $1.5 trillion and $2 trillion in new generating capacity, new T&D, energy efficiency and demand response technologies. Electric power companies are fairly small companies that don't all have the strength to finance large, capital intensive projects like nuclear plants, while simultaneously building other projects like renewables and T&D. Thus the purpose of loan guarantees. Currently, the majority of loan guarantee volume goes to renewables which were provided in the Omnibus and ARRA bills that passed earlier this year which NEI added up. If you didn't already know, the solar, nuclear, wind, hydro and geothermal trade groups have been working together to get the loan guarantee program moving which has been slow in the federal bureaucracy. To me, I don't know how you get any more fair than proposing a platform to help finance all emission-free technologies or propose the same production tax credits that already exist with other clean technologies like wind and solar. David Bradish NEIOn New nukes? A fair shot, not a free ride posted 1 week, 3 days ago 3 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  I don't think that it's a silver bullet any more than PV is a silver bullet I'm not here claiming nuclear is a silver bullet either. It certainly isn't perfect. I'm just here to challenge the conventional thinking that nuclear is bad and renewables are oh so good. If our goal is to subsidize some technologies at the expense of others, then let us be absolutely clear about why that technology-specific subsidy is justified. The main subsidy the nuclear industry is asking for are loan guarantees. Much of the reasons why nuclear plant costs increased in the '80s was due to licensing delays and regulatory uncertainty from the NRC. Since much of the risk in building new plants lies with the federal regulator, it's not much to ask that the federal government bear some of the risk. Here's from our link that explains more: The loan guarantee program is self-funded through loan guarantee fees charged to participants. A well-managed loan guarantee program will cost the taxpayers nothing, but will create significant value by increasing the country's energy supply and reducing emissions. Renewables currently have more loan guarantee volume at their disposal than nuclear. NEI added it up.On Do we need nuclear and coal plants for baseload power? posted 1 week, 3 days ago 144 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  If you're opposed to nuke, take your victories where they lie: namely, no new nuclear construction in this country in 3 decades of any consequence; holding steady at ~100 GW of installed capacity, with additions just keeping pace with retirements. And in those three decades, nuclear's capacity factor increased from the mid-50s to over 90 percent today. More electricity per plant on average comes from nuclear than any other source. As well, US nuclear plants have been able to supply about 20% of the US' electricity since the late '80s by keeping up with electricity demand. You call it lobbying, I call it presenting the facts. No doubt the industry will be needing certain subsidies to grow again. Can anyone name one energy source that doesn't need subsidies but also thrive in competitive markets? I haven't found any.On Do we need nuclear and coal plants for baseload power? posted 1 week, 3 days ago 144 Responses