NRG pulls out of S.Texas Fission Reactor Project

[kristopher]

NRG: Bringing Texas Nuclear Project Back On Track Is Unlikely
20.04.11, 09:49 Uhr

NEW YORK--NRG Energy Corp. (NRG) won't make any additional capital investments to build two nuclear reactors in South Texas and will book a $481 million pretax charge for the project in the first quarter.
The Princeton-based company isn't withdrawing from the project altogether, but "this is financially the end of the line for us," Chief Executive David Crane said in a conference. He said it "impossible to justify" to shareholders investing more money on the project given the dramatic shift in the U.S. regulatory environment because of the ongoing nuclear crisis in Japan.

The announcement isn't a complete surprise. The project, estimated to cost $13.5 billion, has been on shaky ground because of weak power prices and demand. Texas is a competitive market and low natural-gas prices have made it difficult to justify expending billions of dollars on power plants. NRG began plans to develop the two reactors at an existing site in South Texas in 2006 when commodity prices were rallying and the a federal government committed support to build new nuclear generation.

In the past month, though, financial and regulatory challenges have heightened with the ongoing Japanese nuclear crisis. It may be months before officials can contain radiation at Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s (9501.TO) Fukushima Daiichi plant that was rattled by a magnitude-9.0 earthquake and subsequent tsunami last month. This crisis has dramatically reduced the probability that the South Texas project can be developed in a timely fashion, Crane said.

NRG has a 44% stake in the project...
http://www.dowjones.de/site/2011/04/nrg-bringing-texas-nuclear-project-back-on-track-is-unlikely.html


Another sample article: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/energy/7529058.html


The economics for this project haven't worked from day one. Just like the "protesters" were an excuse, and not a reason, so too is Fukushima an excuse, and not a reason: http://www.psr.org/nuclear-bailout/resources/south-texas-project-timeline.html

[madokie]

1. Now we're talking

We flat ass don't need to be building anymore of the Rube Goldberg monstrosities until they figure out what to do when something goes wrong and trust me something will go wrong at some point. For instance right now TEPCO is flying by the seat of the pants as they have no idea as to what to do next. Well lets try this and if that doesn't work we can try that isn't very reassuring to us 'simple folk' as the pronuker like to refer to us, if you get my drift. :hi:

rec to high heaven and I'm a none believer so this rec is some kind of something special

[Nihil]

2. "The announcement isn't a complete surprise."

Nice understatement ... goes along with this one:
> "Right now is not the time to be out marketing nuclear"

:eyes:

Isn't it amazing how perceptive these CEOs are?


> Texas is a competitive market and low natural-gas prices have made it
> difficult to justify expending billions of dollars on power plants.

Ah well, back to nice, safe, zero-risk coal topped up by nice, safe,
cheap natural gas and - if they find anyone prepared to do it - some
nice, safe, carbon-free low-volume solar and nice, safe, carbon-free,
T. Boone Pickens wind.

It's an ideal opportunity for renewables to mop up in Texas - go for it!


(ETA: K&R!)

[madokie]

3. I don't see it as a one or the other you name

We can get where we're going without adding to any of that mix. But and a big BUT, if we don't stop throwing money at that mix we'll never get there though. Nuclear is a big and I mean big money pit. To live with the danger that these old nuke plants pose for the 19 or so percent of our electrical energy mix is insane. Insane I tell ya.

[Nihil]

4. Wasn't intending to suggest that it was a "one or the other" option ...

> But and a big BUT, if we don't stop throwing money at that mix we'll never
> get there though. Nuclear is a big and I mean big money pit.

That's my point. This thread exists because the company has decided
to do exactly that - stop throwing money into the money pit - so that's
why I ended my post with the following:

>> It's an ideal opportunity for renewables to mop up in Texas - go for it!

What's the problem?
:shrug: