UPDATE: Ameren nuclear plant bill likely dead for this session
UPDATE: The various interest groups on both sides of the Ameren bill are weighing in on the news that the bill is likely dead: From Gregg Keller of Fair Electricity Rates Action Fund: “From day one, FERAF has negotiated in good faith towards a compromise which allows nuclear energy to be part of Missouri’s energy future but doesn’t saddle working Missourians with Ameren’s potential 40% rate hike plan. If and when a true compromise plan is put forward which doesn’t raise rates by as much as 40% on Missourians and which keeps in place crucial consumer protections, we will remain honest brokers on this issue, as always.”
Also, Warren Wood, of the Missouri Energy Development Association, which has been pushing the bill, said that if the bill is indeed dead, it might close Ameren’s window for a nuclear plant, based on two factors: Ameren’s ability to obtain federal loan guarantees and the other possible investors in the plant moving on. The municipal utilities that are considering investing with Ameren for the plant, might have to make their own decisions about new plants, and will likely move on to natural gas options, Wood said.
JEFFERSON CITY – A bill that would pave the way for a new Ameren nuclear plant has hit a roadblock in the Missouri Senate and is likely dead for the session.
One of the Legislative session’s most controversial bills, the Ameren-backed proposal would repeal the state’s prohibition on utility companies charging customers for some costs of an electrical plant before the facility is up and running.
But consumer groups and large industrial companies in the state complained that the bill also rewrote utility regulations to the point where Ameren could reap too many rate increases during the process of building a $6 billion plus nuclear plant in Callaway County.
Today, Sen. Kurt Schaefer, R-Columbia, indicated the bill was unlikely to come up for debate again this session.
“We’ve hit a point where the parties involved simply aren’t willing to compromise and if that’s the case, there’s simply not much to resolve,” said Schaefer, who wrote the current version of the bill that was originally offered by Sen. Delbert Scott, R-Lowry City. “Until the parties are willing to show some compromise, I don’t know that any one of us who have put a lot of time in this issue see any reason to bring it back up.”
Lewis Mills, Missouri’s public counsel, said he’s heard from many sources that the bill is dead for this session.
“It’s either the greatest misdirection in history or it’s true,” said Mills, who represents consumers in utility matters.
Two weeks ago, the bill was the subject of a late-night filibuster led by Democrats and Republicans, but primarily Sen. Jason Crowell, R-Cape Girardeau.
Crowell and Schaefer got into a heated and personal discussion on the floor about the bill, exchanging insults about various Republican political consultants involved in the debate over the Ameren bill.
Last week, the major industrial companies opposing the bill met in Scott’s office and delivered the senator a list of possible compromise positions. The companies, led by Noranda Aluminum of New Madrid, said that they wouldn’t necessarily oppose a repeal of the construction work in progress (CWIP) law, but they were against the various changes to Public Service Commission regulations.
Also last week, Gov. Jay Nixon met with Senate president pro tem Charlie Shields, R-St. Joseph, and indicated that he would veto the bill in its current form if it came to his desk. Nixon has publicly said he believes Ameren should obtain a federal permit to build a nuclear plant before trying to change Missouri law to improve its ability to obtain financing for the facility.
Ameren has said the plant will not get built without a change to Missouri law, and it has said the opponents misstate the possible rate increases that would hit consumers as a result of the bill. But a letter from PSC staff to Sen. Joan Bray, D-University City, said the information Ameren is providing to senators, and the information the company provided to regulators, is different.
Over the last few weeks, Ameren and the opponents have been trading barbs in television ads that have been running in the St. Louis market and elsewhere.
Schaefer said that if Ameren doesn’t eventually build the nuclear plant, Missouri consumers will see their rates increase one way or another.
“No one is going to get a new coal-fired power plant approved,” Schaefer said, because of new EPA regulations about carbon emissions.
Mills doesn’t necessarily disagree with that, but he said the problem with this bill has been Ameren’s unwillingness to compromise from the beginning of the process.
“I think going into the session, AmerenUE thought they would get everything they wanted,” Mills said. “We were willing to give them everything they needed. There have never been any serious negotiations.”
Couldn’t have said it better if I tried DDM. I agree 100#, well done.
Whoops… I mean that I agree 100% not 100#.
Can’t wait for the personal household wind generators to come out. Saw a show about these. you just mount a small windmill on top of your house and it provides all the energy your household needs. You keep wired into the electric grid and can still use electric in case your demand exceeds your supply, and you can sell your own electric back if you have excess. The show was claiming that they could be viable for consumers in 4-5 years as the technology improves and becomes cheaper.
Thank you DDM, new Ameren spokesman.
Why doesn’t Ameren — unlike almost every other electric utility in the state — offer efficiency incentives to cut usage by 30%? Why the mid-20th century mindset of more, more, more generation without any tact or intelligence whatsoever on effciency, net metering, or any other measure that is far more taxpayer friendly than another subsidized nuclear facility? Who no exploration of adding power incrementally, or picking the “low hanging fruit” of efficiency? There is a LOT of ground to be made up in Missouri; in fact far more is waiting to be picked than a new power plant could provide.
>>Ameren UE has shareholders, they should eat the cost of building a new plant, not the consumers<<
If shareholders are to take the hit - then as an investor, I’ll take my money elsewhere to get a better return for the same risk. Thus, the intent of the commission to create a fair enough playing field (return) to attract investors, but not overburden the rate payer due to the monopolistic position essentially - no longer exists.
Does anyone even understand basic economics anymore? They should teach it in grade school.
The chances of EVER getting that permit to build a nuclear plant go from slim to nill with every special interest nut filing lawsuit after lawsuit to stop the building of these things. So why not wait until they get the permit before changing the laws.
Scott, do you mean economics like “it will cost us X if we pay for it all now now, or Y total if we pay for it in increments” without taking the time value of money into account? The kind of argument Ameren is pushing?
If acquiring tens of billions of dollars of capital equipment is too risky for investors, may it’s just too risky, period?
The anti-Ameren crowd should take a look at what the utilities in other states charge their customers. Ameren is near the bottom. Stop crybabying and learn all the facts or move to another state and pay higher rates.
So…if I am reading this right…
Ameren has lower rates than some other utilities. So therefore, the natural conclusion is to allow them to build a wildly expensive, unneeded nuclear power plant and have ratepayers shoulder the risk?
Karen,
Ameren does offer incentives( go to their web page) as well as the lowest rate for five local states, I do not think you really understand as most do not; Amerens Union Electric plants are ALL dated, the newest is Rush Island(Coal) and Callaway with both constructed around the same time 25+ years ago, the other plants Labadie (built 1970’s), Sioux (built 1960’s) and Meramec(built 1950’s) are destined to come off line and be torn down. The design life of a coal plant is 40 years, stretched that may make 50-60 years but machines deteriorate and become inefficient in more ways than just fuel use. Your own car has a given life then it is just scrap metal, same with these machines and as they get to the point of too expensive to repair or run they are also scrap.
As to the CWIP, it is not just on the nuke, it is also on coal, wind, hydro, & gas so the net result is build the cheapest, fastest completed and maybe not the most cost effective units for the money as WE will pay for them. A clean coal plant is currently stalled in Mattoon Illinois due to escalating costs(over 10 BILLION) for a 250 megawatt plant that is untried, wind turbines only work in safe but continuous winds as they are secured in too high winds and to build enough to replace just one of Amerens’ old plants will require hundreds of them at 2-4 megawatts each, then you will need hundreds more to add new power, where will they go as the corridor for best performance is the states NW corner. The nuke was a reasonably fast alternative to more coal units which to build cost close to the same but are filthy and destructive to the local environment. For a cost example look to Prairie State Energy Campus, a 1500 megawatt unit going up in Marissa Illinois, at more than 5 BILLION dollars, 8b for a 1600 mw nuke is not unreasonable. When that unit goes on line the power it will make will not be available for us in Missouri, it is already allotted to Indiana and S. Illinois even at figured twice the rate we now pay per kwh.
Dan, you need to look at the specs on these small wind turbines and the personal costs to go with them, it takes 4-6 of these to power an AVERAGE home unless the wind stops then you are at the mercy of the grid, and as to selling back power, that is questionable at best as to the deliverable energy from them. The better single units are over 10,000 dollars Plus the inverter, PLUS the batteries, PLUS the poles to mount them and maintenance to go along with that. I have done research on these for the last few years trying to cost accept them and it isn’t there unless you don’t use power from them and sell it all back.